back to article Rise Of The Machines: What will become of box-watchers, delivery drivers?

In the world of storage tech, progress is a holy grail, never questioned, never doubted. Anything that adds data access capacity, data access speed and data access security is a good thing. Who can doubt it? The world has a seemingly insatiable appetite for storing and accessing data and as we feed the ravening beast, so our …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Bumpy Cat
    Terminator

    Just the tip of the iceberg

    Consider retail - there are already shelf-stacking robots in use in some warehouses, and we've all used self-checkout at the supermarket. With current robotic tech you could reduce the staff in a supermarket by 90%, leaving just a few people for troubleshooting and intervening when the machine gets into trouble.

    Fast food? Everything from cooking to packing to delivery to payment can be automated, again needing just some people to troubleshoot.

    When the cost of one of these service robots drops below the annual wage of a basic worker, that's when we need to worry. Also, the robots can work 24/7 all year with no holiday or sick leave. We need to think about this now rather than later.

    1. LarsG
      Meh

      But How

      But how will a driverless delivery truck knock on your door to tell you the delivery has arrived?

      1. hplasm
        Happy

        Re: But How

        It won't knock. Or indeed arrive- you will get an email saying "You were out..."

        1. AceRimmer

          @hplasm

          Beat me to it :)

      2. S4qFBxkFFg
        Terminator

        Re: But How

        No need, the truck transmits its company's cryptographic signature to your (physical) drop box which opens to receive the package. When you get home, unlock the box (hoping it's secure enough to defeat the local delinquents and ex-drivers who make a living following the Googazon trucks).

        Flip a coin to decide whether the boxes or the trucks ends up getting the robot arms to transfer the package.

      3. Josco

        Re: But How

        SMS message just before delivery.... Be there or miss it. Then go in your driverless car to pick it up from the depot.

        1. James Micallef Silver badge
          Devil

          Re: But How

          "SMS message just before delivery.... Be there or miss it. Then go in your driverless car to pick it up from the depot."

          in theory, yes. in practice:

          "SMS message 2 nanoseconds before delivery (no doubt in the exact instant that you went to the john).... You were there but still missed it. Then go in your driverless car to pick it up from the depot."

        2. monkeyfish

          Re: But How

          Or just send your driverless car to the depot while your at work (or at home unemployed). The truck only needs to take it to the depot. It could almost be rails instead of using the over-use road system. Or maybe even use a system of inter-connected waterways... oh wait.

      4. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: But How

        @larsg - You have experienced this ? Truly ? Pray tell where were you when this divine event occured. Immust go there and pray to be blessed with similar grace.

      5. This post has been deleted by its author

      6. Steve 13

        Re: But How

        It won't, that bit can't be automated (at our current technological level), but the backhaul, from warehouse to warehouse all over the country can, there are warehouse staff (or automated systems) at either end to load and unload and the lorry goes from A to B, not A to Z via every delivery address on the way.

        Even though automation causes short term pain, I can't see how it's anything other than a positive thing in the long run.

      7. Alfred
        Terminator

        Re: But How

        It's OK, we can have the package receiving robot wait outside to take delivery :)

      8. Red Bren
        Unhappy

        Re: But How

        In my experience, the driver of the delivery truck doesn't bother to knock on the door to tell you the delivery has arrived either. He just shoves a badly scrawled note through your letter box telling you to collect your parcel from their distribution hub in Sink-Estate-on-the-Dole between the hours of inconvenience and may as well take a day off work.

      9. Phil E Succour
        Unhappy

        Re: But How

        If they model the robot behaviour on HDN drivers in the UK, all they need to do is dump the parcel on your doorstep and bugger off.

      10. jubtastic1
        Megaphone

        Re: But How

        Either It will phone you and tell you to come outside and pick up your parcel from the clearly marked opening on the side of the truck, or some minimum wage van monkey will be employed to dribble it to your door.

        Automated Royal Mail trucks will of course be miniaturised as they will only be carrying "sorry we missed you" cards anyway.

      11. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: But How

        "But how will a driverless delivery truck push a 'We called but you were out' note though the letterbox then run away before you can get to the door?"

        There, fixed that for you.

      12. DavCrav
        Joke

        Re: But How

        "But how will a driverless delivery truck knock on your door to tell you the delivery has arrived?"

        Text message? Phone call? Or just drive through the window, if it's using Apple maps.

    2. xenny

      Re: Just the tip of the iceberg

      Note also that low interest rates, typically used to stimulate an economy, make the purchase cost of automation systems more affordable, increasing the no of roles they can be bought to fulfil.

      A nasty conundrum.

      1. Suricou Raven

        Re: Just the tip of the iceberg

        Text or phone you. Give warnings at half-hour/20min/20min/5min/arrived. Come the arrival time you just go out to the truck, enter your security code or insert bank card to verify identity, and the robotics inside will move your parcel to the collection window. Once the parcel is removed the truck resumes, towards the next customer.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Just the tip of the iceberg

      Interestingly the economy by that point could almost be completely self perpetuating, meaning you could levy high taxes on the operating corporations and then feed that directly into the "welfare" (which would no longer be called welfare, as most people would be on it), people would be expected of course to do social deeds, inspired to be creative and inventive. There'd still be a number of people with jobs, novelty roles could take off for that little human touch(micro brewers, confectionery, gardening services, clothing, etc, etc) , the technical and engineering fields would boom, a new era of philosophy and science could be heralded.

      You also need to be aware that the population is dropping and give it a few generations and we wont have anyone to do low level jobs. The bill for keeping old people alive will be massive and the number of young people shall be small.

      What would probably happen though? Everyone would probably sit around, get fat while being serviced by their sexroid and butlerbot and watch x-that-factors-got-something or another. At least if we don't re-position our whole culture when it comes to self motivation.

      So yeah, it's defiantly something we need to start thinking about and planning for now.

      1. James Micallef Silver badge
        Terminator

        Re: Self-perpetuating economy

        That's a future dystopia if I ever saw one. Robots produce and take care of all the food, accommodation, power, water, transport, energy, cleaning and sanitation, AND of maintaining and controlling themselves. People would be taken care of but would effectively be living in a giant prison since the machines of course also take care of security and policing.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          @James Micallef

          But the only difference there is that robots do all the heavy lifting as opposed to people with the IQ of a Rottweiler

          Seen as Transcendental/Sentient AI is likely an impossibility everything requiring thought, invention or leaps of logic would require people, and if Transcendental/Sentient AI were possible, it would probably do a far better job of running the world then human beings.

      2. Tom 13

        Re: a new era of philosophy and science could be heralded.

        and then you'd inadvertently take the red pill and ....

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Just the tip of the iceberg

      First driverless cars

      Then technology designing technology

      Then machines with self awareness

      Then Skynet

      Then Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo

      1. James Micallef Silver badge
        Devil

        Re: Just the tip of the iceberg

        "technology designing technology"

        don't need machines with self-awareness to screw humanity up, the "technology designing technology" stage will already screw humanity. What will happen when some machines (inevitably) begin to break down, and the machines aren't yet smart enough to debug the issues while humans simply have no understanding of the design processes that went into the machine? What happens when there are no longer any jobs for engineers for a generation and the skills are lost? The whole shebang starts breaking down and we're back to subsistence farming.

        1. Tom 13

          Re: we're back to subsistence farming.

          If you're lucky it stops at subsistence farming. Most people these days couldn't even engage in subsistence farming. I mean I know some gardening, but with that kind of societal collapse, I don't know that I could support myself.

    5. MrXavia
      FAIL

      Re: Just the tip of the iceberg

      I doubt it...

      The driver is more than a driver, he is security, he is customer facing, he is the representative of the industry...

      and really, if you KNOW there is no one in a van full of goodies, it will be a perfect target for criminals.. more so than lorries already are...

      I know if I was criminally minded, I would rather steal from an un-manned vehicle than a manned one...

      It would be easy to disrupt the tech externally so it has to stop to be safe... .then break it open, take the goodies & leave.....

    6. Oninoshiko
      Megaphone

      Re: Self check out

      Actually, I refuse to self check. I have actually stood in a line, with empty self-check kiosks. When I buy something in a brick-and-mortar store, one of the things I'm paying for is the salary of the checker. I'll be damned if that money goes to the business' profits.

      Join me in boycotting self-check.

      1. Steven Roper
        Thumb Up

        @Oninoshiko re: no self-check

        I'm the same. I also have stood in line while self-service kiosks stood empty. Part of my shopping experience is talking to the checkout chick (or sometimes guy), catching up on what the yoof of today are into (as I have no kids of my own, talking to the young people in shops is pretty much the only chance I get to catch up with the doings of the young). Even when I've been asked to use the kiosks, I've refused, saying I would rather be served by a person, thank you. The day they remove the choice and force me to use a kiosk will be the last day I ever shop there.

        One thing I've also noticed is that my local greengrocers, butchers, bakers and the like are doing a roaring trade. It's not unusual of a Saturday morning to see a crowd spilling out the doorways of the local strip-shops. More and more people are shunning the dehumanising impersonality of the supermarkets, even if the prices are cheaper, because there's nothing like good old-fashioned friendly service from your local butcher, baker or greengrocer. The meat, bread, and fruit & veg is much fresher and better quality, too.

        I do sometimes order my groceries online and get it delivered, but this is actually becoming rarer. I'd much rather take the time to go into my local butcher and have him fresh-cut a decent steak for me, with the rind of fat still on, rather than accept whatever stripped, fat-free, processed crap the warehouse-picker grabs off the shelf and shoves into a foam box to drop on my doorstep.

        And I agree, like you, that I'd far rather my money went to gainfully employing someone who is willing to work, rather than filling the coffers of wealthy shareholders who do no work for a living and wax fat on the labour of others.

        As would a lot of other people. Remember, the fact that there's a line for the manned checkout while self-service kiosks are empty means that all those people in line would also rather be served by a human being than by a computer. And they want it badly enough that they're prepared to spend time waiting to get that service. We're far from alone alone, friend.

    7. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Just the tip of the iceberg

      Already happening, the cost benefits have been weighed (theft v staffing costs).

      You are going to start to see all self scans stores opening soon.

    8. Tom 13

      Re: Just the tip of the iceberg

      I've used the self-checkout lane at the supermarket. If the tech is only that good there's no way in hell you're replacing 90% of staff. The humans are still faster because they're more flexible. Even the really unskilled ones.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    A driverless car, I could play SimCity on my commute!

    1. AndrueC Silver badge
      Joke

      Only if the servers are up :)

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        I call you

        The anonymous straight man - setting yourself up for your own joke.

        A bit low that.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: I call you

          Then putting you down for settings yourself up for your own joke.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: I call you

            Nurse! It's happening again!

  3. graeme leggett Silver badge

    I for one welcome our new driverless cars

    If it can pilot me to work by the swiftest back road route and - on a winters' day - negotiate the icy slope up to our company car park spaces.

    I fear though that this is a solution that only works with 100% uptake. The strategies involved in trying to ascertain if a car coming in the opposite direction as the road narrows is going to

    a) overtake the cyclist and then race through the gap before you reach it

    b) hang back behind the cyclist and allow you to get through the gap first

    c) b) then change their mind and achieve a)

    d) do something else

    are still I fear beyond human let alone machine comprehension.

    1. hplasm
      Devil

      Re: I for one welcome our new driverless cars

      d) is the answer- driverless bicycles.

    2. Alfred
      Terminator

      Re: I for one welcome our new driverless cars

      Presumably that's what we have a the moment, though. Adding robot drivers can only improve things; every so often you get a situation like this with a primitive meatbag driver operating the other vehicle and you're momentarily as badly off as everybody was all the time five years earlier.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    And if we hadn't designed those damn mule/cattle/horse drawn plows we could all still be gainfully employed in the fields! In fact, if we hadn't developed agriculture at all we could still wear furs and hunt wild animals with chiseled spears.

    If we hadn't designed better industrial machinery more people would be employed in dangerous factory jobs, if we hadn't automated large amounts of the mining industry hundreds would still die down coal shafts (like in China)

    It's inevitable that as technology progresses it will put people out of jobs, there the best that can be hoped for is that they get reskilled in a new field, take off on their own or in the worst case society can provide for their loss. The advantages accumulate over time with proper management and direction, as you no longer need to worry about finding drivers people will no longer see it as a useful skill set, that skill set will eventually end up as another novelty skill set (like blacksmiths.)

    In this case the immediate advantages are, increased safety, ability to transport massive loads automatically all night and day, companies no longer need to aquire drivers, no more need to test drivers for alcohol or drug abuse, no more need to test if drivers are working too long hours, there are likely more advantages.

    Also it wouldn't happen over night, so it's alarmist, foolish and, misleading to talk about 15 million jobs. In the end it may mean 15 million jobs, but over what kind of time frame?

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Just because you can, doesn't mean you should

    Science and Technology companies have soon start thinking about social impacts for sure, but i cant see 10m being put on the scrap heap straight away, i would see these being sidelined into roles supporting the new master of the road, yes the bus will drive itself, but the bags may not load/unload themselves, same with couriers, unless we fee paying customers start having to take on more responsibility, "doing more for less". The other important role is to be ready to hit the big red STOP button, when things start going bendy

    Automated warehouses already exist with humans supporting the machines doing the put away and picking, leaving us sacks of meat to feed the put away and consolidate the picking processes and being ready to hit the big red STOP button , with white collar staff still pushing paper in the office mezzanines for now.

    The more worrying item will be living longer, with all the great advances in medicine, not enough housing stock, not enough networks to transport, nor enough land to feed them is the quality of life worth hanging on for a few more grim years.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Just because you can, doesn't mean you should

      The food thing isn't really true even if you don't take into account the potential of genetically modified crops managed by vast automated agri-farming systems. Anyone remember the mountains of food that are left to rot in Europe in order to balance the books. The old milk lakes and grain mountains. Also if we stopped wasting good crop land for biofuels - that'd be a start.

      Housing is an easy enough technical issue to solve if anyone could be bothered as are transport networks.

      Also on transport networks, if you have 3 main pillars, transport networks are of less use, vast telecoms arrays, vast power supplies(fusion/geothermal/whatever), and a mostly automated work force. You could live in your little idyllic village running your hand made name plate business and only ever really need to leave when visiting relatives or going on holiday. Those employed by other people could happily telework from anywhere on the face of the planet (except the active warzones and places that haven't been dragged out of poverty)

      Of course entire nations could collapse at the same time, anywhere reliant on oil production for instance... but as with the bus drivers, adapt or die. Of course that would have a side benefit as terrorists wouldn't get their hands on lucrative oil money anymore. After a period of unpleasant turmoil of course.

      It's exciting imagining good scenarios!

  6. Pen-y-gors

    Driverless to the door?

    So if we have driverless delivery vehicles, who's going to take the package out of the van and leave it on the doorstep in the rain for a passer-by to nick, or put a postcard through the door saying 'we called but couldn't be arsed to ring the bell you were out'

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Driverless to the door?

      City Link are clearly unknown leaders in the driver-less field. They just drive up, fire a notice of attempted delivery at your door and drive off. I've long held the theory that there is actually only one City Link van per region. Years ago at uni my friends and I thought they must have some form of automated machine, filling out the cards... little did we realise the system was even more autonomous than we thought.

  7. Ragequit
    Pint

    I'd be more worried..

    ... about the rush to automate huge amounts of infrastructure/logistics when we can't even secure what we have already. Think about it. Do we really want to suffer huge amounts of economic damage because the most popular vehicle kits have been hacked?

    Still I think it's a little alarmist to think this would happen rapidly. Retrofitting or replacing vehicles would take a lot of time and money. Not to mention that there will probably be a tax grab that will slow adoption. I mean the government would look at that as a loss of income tax and would try to make up for the shortfall. Never mind voters being up in arms.

    I don't see a problem with automated solutions being used to bring back manufacturing from overseas. But the problem is coming up with a solution that is cheaper.

  8. Dan 55 Silver badge
    Terminator

    I'm worried about the driverless white vans

    If they try and sell me some speakers they've got in the back they might not take no for an answer.

    1. Vic
      Joke

      Re: I'm worried about the driverless white vans

      > they might not take no for an answer.

      "Please buy some speakers. You have twenty seconds to comply"

      Vic.

  9. Uncle Slacky Silver badge
    Stop

    Need to rethink whole economy

    A good dystopian description of where this could lead is described here: http://www.marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm

    Ideally, however, there would be some kind of basic income guarantee for everyone, so that nobody would *need* to work (though they could choose to, and thus supplement their income, if they wanted to): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_guarantee

    But this is unlikely to happen in the plutocracy/neofeudalism currently in favour, and would be rejected by the PTB as filthy pinko socialist talk.

    1. AceRimmer

      Re: Need to rethink whole economy

      Personally, I don't think that the majority of people both individually or as a group are capable of sitting around doing nothing with their lives.

      1. Brewster's Angle Grinder Silver badge

        Re: Need to rethink whole economy

        "Personally, I don't think that the majority of people both individually or as a group are capable of sitting around doing nothing with their lives."

        Well then instead of blaming welfare "scroungers", we should be looking at them to discover how you can live a meaningful life on "handouts".

    2. MrXavia
      WTF?

      Re: Need to rethink whole economy

      Basic Income Guarantee?

      Like we already have, where families get housed and have to do nothing? where others work their butts off just trying to pay the bills???

      I am all for welfare, but make the blighters work for it!

      You want welfare? fine... here is a list of jobs we need doing.... choose one, do it, and you get paid... it should be something minor like 1 day a week...

      think about it about 2.5Million unemployed on benefits last time I looked.... that is 20 Million man hours a week with JUST one day a week required for each person on benefits... that is 1.04 Billion man hours to contribute to our economy with almost no extra costs! (simply find people who are on this benefit to run the system, surely there are un-employed managers who would love to keep busy!

  10. FunkyEric
    Happy

    Won't somebody think of

    The taxi drivers

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Won't somebody think of

      Will the driverless taxis smell of B.O and vomit, talk a load of non-PC drivel and take the slowest/most profitable route?

      1. Steven Roper
        Thumb Down

        Re: Won't somebody think of

        >talk a load of non-PC drivel

        I'd far rather listen to a taxi driver express his honest opinion about how fucked up things are, than listen to some sanctimonous PC bigot spouting off about how everyone is still racist/sexist/X-ist like he's some kind of guardian angel of everyone's morals.

  11. a well wisher

    Horizon of 35+ years ago

    Wasn't this the very same question posed by the BBC tv program "Horizon" ( when it used to a science based program) some 35 + years ago on the rise of the microprocessor , that was going to see us all sitting in deck chairs twiddling our thumbs too while the micros took over all the admin functions etc, but it didn't happen. in fact more clerical jobs were created (only later to be destroyed by the bankers, rather than the micro)

    Aren't pilots 'drivers' too - the only reason they are still sitting up front is to install confidence in the passengers if it all goes tits up - so in a similar manner they are machine minders

    I imagine the same will happen with lorries and trucks - the driver will 'mind' the truck rather than drive it and only be called into play when the **** is about to hit the fan

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Horizon of 35+ years ago

      Yeah, I'm still waiting for the "paperless office" they promised us! It's worse than ever. People don't seem capable of taking the shortest note, or cut-n-pasting a small bit of information into a text file for safekeeping, no... it has to be printed out. Gah!!!

      1. mmeier

        Re: Horizon of 35+ years ago

        More due to the lack of useful devices than anything else. Paperless gets more and more doable with devices like Samsungs Note series or the Atom based penables.

    2. Vic

      Re: Horizon of 35+ years ago

      > the only reason they are still sitting up front is to install confidence in the passengers

      There's an old joke about the Cockpit of the Future. It will have two occupants - one pilot and one dog.

      The pilot's job is to feed the dog.

      The dog's job is to bite the pilot if he goes anywhere near the contriols.

      Vic.

    3. Paul Crawford Silver badge

      Re: Horizon of 35+ years ago

      The other thing is aircraft are hugely expensive and have very strict regulations on servicing schedules, etc, due to the safety impact of anything going wrong.

      Will these driverless cars turn out to be too expensive to achieve an acceptable degree of fail-safe hardware, software, and maintenance? How will insurance companies deal with the risk, will it then be based on your model & firmware revision due to its history of crashing?

  12. Chris Mellor 1

    What is the real problem here?

    Sent anonymously to me:-

    A Reg reader has the following comments to make on the story Rise Of The Machines: What will become of box-watchers, delivery drivers?. The request to send this message came from the IP address 94.211.113.82.

    This is more or less a transitory problem. Even if this now causes 10M people extra on welfare, the problem will go away in wotsit 55-odd years. Of course, maybe there'll be no state in 55 years.

    And that's assuming there really are no alternatives. With the screaming about needing more foreign workers, well, maybe this pool of labour can fill that need, who knows.

    That there's little manufacturing on US soil left, I can't really be arsed to care. Partially their own fault for letting that happen. Then again, as cheap becomes popular it becomes more expensive, making manufacturing elsewhere interesting again. There's plenty of room for innovation here.

    I don't think we should frame it as an insurmountable problem. There'll be change, and it'll be painful, to be sure. But with a little looking forward for opportunities instead of problems, a lot can be done.

    Also, google has already lost all credibility as "doing no evil". But I still don't think I'm going to be enamoured of the idea of holding back true technical invention for the sake of the incompetence of the representatives failing to care for their large pool of workers.

    Besides, it's a wider problem, much wider. Both in geographical sense -- foxconn building factories run entirely with robots, nary a human in sight -- and the technology sense. You already pointed out the Luddides (and they did have a point), and we've been doing nothing but putting people out of work.

    Alright, not entirely true. We've also created a lot of cubicle potato jobs, both as "knowledge worker" (arguably positive) and as what looks like machine minders but really are minded-by-machine drones, barely thought capable of clicking an icon.

    And that, that is much worse, for it makes us string puppets of our own technology. The same is happening in a lot of security applications, but the redmondian desktop is perhaps the most widespread insultingly patronizing string puppeteering of human workers available today.

    But anyway. We've automated the shit out of many a thing, putting ever more people out of work, and in the meantime the population has done nothing but grow.

    What, now, is the real problem here?

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. Brewster's Angle Grinder Silver badge
      Joke

      Re: What is the real problem here?

      Yeah, right. The real Chris Mellor would have a vulture icon. You're some imposter trying to pass off your misanthropic views as those of an anonymous "reader".

    3. Vic

      Re: What is the real problem here?

      > "knowledge worker" (arguably positive)

      "Morlock"

      > minded-by-machine drones, barely thought capable of clicking an icon.

      "Eloi"

      Vic.

  13. Tim Parker

    Evil

    Also, could putting millions of people out of work be considered to be "do[ing] no evil?"

    You know, just for a moment there, I thought you might be becoming every so slightly melodramatic.... close one.

  14. mmeier

    Having been a commuter for almost 15 years on german "autobahns" I would happily support automated drivers programmed to follow german traffic and traffic security laws. No more "Polish death trap" coming down a highway cross, loosing the breaks and running straight into the divider blocking all lanes, no more "Dutch Formular 1 team" trying to re-enact the latest Schumacher-Senna duel with 38to trucks. And since the trucks will hopefully not require crew rest no more "we deliver one sack of onions and 37.999kg of other stuff" saturday/sunday "emergency/perishable" Kraut truckers.

    Well, putting the whole stuff on trains or channel barges would be even better but unless someone stuffs a JATO rocket in there it is unlikely that our "politicians" get their behinds in motion to fix the necessary laws and build permits.

  15. All names Taken
    Paris Hilton

    It is difficult?

    Take, for instance, a newish motor car with batteries and electric motor supplemented by a diesel motor and doing a reported 300 mile trip for, say 4 GBP.

    It assumes that electricity costs and fuel costs remain at the present levels.

    Methinks if oil producers need to reduce output then the price consumer oil products will go up (the distribution network costs and non-productive costs and ... )

    That is why mathematics is so lovely :-)

    1. Vic

      > doing a reported 300 mile trip for, say 4 GBP

      Won't happen in any meaningful way.

      If a substantial number of vehicles could do that, the revenu from fuel sales would fall dramatically. That means the government has a reduced revenue stream.

      So they'll find another way to tax those vehicles to restore their cashflow.

      Vic.

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Imagine a world run by semi-autonomous machines

    With no Alt-Ctrl-Del option.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: With no Alt-Ctrl-Del option.

      Stick a bent paper clip in the little hole.

  17. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

    FFS .... Humans are just so pathetic, aren't they.

    So technology advances and provides more opportunities for leisure and/or pleasure and you have both either a limited and/or limiting imagination and seriously impaired brain function which would find fault with it and process the information to deliver it problematical. No wonder you're all taken for an austere ride by money maker systems and puppet politicos.

    But fear not, for all and nothing is lost, and there are strange changes afoot and stranger chances for adventuring capitalists to pilot as if their own, and both and all readily available and virtually free today, and for every other day and zeroday to exploit with vulnerabilities in attack and defence, henceforth ..... for the Genie are out of their bottles and silos, with secrets outed as being for fools perpetrating the maintenance and sustenance of follies.

    I Kid U Not , and now you cannot say, without the making of yourself into a useless fool and useful tool, that you were not informed and advised ....... for El Reg so advises from here as equally well as from there.

    And urIncredulous and Incredible Disbelief is just all that be simply needed by ICT for free rein and free reign in the Field and Live Operational Virtual Environments. Thanks for that Treasure. :-)

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    None of this will happen overnight

    Much the same arguments were put forward when computers started to arrive on everyone's desktop, when industrial robots started to arrive etc

    Panic not...

  19. PyLETS
    Stop

    Luddites misrepresented

    "The Luddites, who opposed early industrial revolution mechanisation because it put people out of work, were ultimately wrong in the long term ""

    I for one am not lapping up the history of this defeated movement which was written by their victorious Victorian mill owner opponents because it doesn't square with the facts. The Luddites were very evidently the highest tech workers of the time - the Lancashire cotton weavers. It seems to me that what they were opposed to wasn't the automation of weaving, it was the loss of control over their working lives - effectively a form of slavery - which came with the mill-owners' system of clocking in and massively long working hours and industrial discipline, regardless of season. These had previously been individuals working from their own cottages able to choose work hours which suited them based upon the season.

    I'd recommend a visit to Quarry Bank Mill near Manchester for anyone interested in a great day out and visit to one of the best surviving examples of the technology and industrial system concerned with the loss of liberty the Luddites contended.

    http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/quarry-bank-mill/

    With a growing proportion of technology, media and administration workers able to work from home in our own best suited hours, and this wheel turning full circle, I'm sure the Luddites would have loved personal computers and the Internet.

  20. Blankslate
    Alert

    They can't retrain as storage technology engineers.

    You've based your entire argument on the above bullshit premise.

    Yes 15 million people being overtaken by technology is a problem. What society needs to do is recognise this and to retrain them to do something else constructive before this becomes an issue.

    That way driverless cars aren't putting people on the street they are releasing them to do something more useful in our economy. Everybody wins.

    1. SoaG

      Re: They can't retrain as storage technology engineers.

      I've had a few employers go out of business in recent years. In between, rather than collect unemployment, I've opted to do temp work, mostly industrial labour. Believe me, the bulk of people I've worked with doing these kinds of jobs cannot be trained for jobs that require a capacity to think, never mind work with technology.

      Good people mind you, but they're operating on a whole different level that I've never seen even among those I work with in telecom who have no responsibility beyond stringing cables.

    2. Suricou Raven

      Re: They can't retrain as storage technology engineers.

      Like what? Once the drivers, cleaners, assembly-line operators, street sweepers, fast-food servers, lower-cost restraunt chefs and shelf-stackers are all out of work, there may just not be enough skilled work to go around even if you could somehow come up with enough money to pay for a few years of training for all.

  21. Ragequit
    Mushroom

    Wait...

    Why are some of you blaming google in all of this? I'm not saying google can do no wrong but beware the trolls. Sure google has one of the only examples of a working commercial driverless car, but darpa has had a few autonomous vehicle challenges over the years. Plus many of you are ignoring the fact that they still require a human ride-a-long as backup. The first hurdle in this proposed scenario is that the safety types give the thumbs up to truly autonomous vehicles. That, to a lesser extent, is probably going to go the way of the flying car. There's a lot of FUD surrounding that after 9/11. In some cases autonomous trucks are scarier. Load it up with heavy explosives and drive it into your target of choice?

    1. Vic

      Re: Wait...

      > darpa has had a few autonomous vehicle challenges over the years

      TRRL had a self-driving car running in 1967. Build out of a Citroen DS.

      Probably not much use for widespread passenger vehicles - ISTR it took some road modifications to make it work - but interesting nonetheless.

      Vic.

      1. mmeier

        Re: Wait...

        Basically building a self-driving vehicle is easy if you choose the right hardware platform. So instead of Volkswagen or MAN choose Kraus-Maffai (well, older MAN products should also work nicely). That way the occasionall overlooked biker/Mini/kiosk will no longer be a problem...

  22. mark 63 Silver badge
    Flame

    Luddites

    "Ten million, give or take, drivers will then lose their jobs in the USA and another five million enter unemployment in Europe. Still a good thing?"

    What kind of Luddite statement is that? - of course its a good thing - thats tem million more people available to do something useful.

    People never seem to see it that way though.

  23. Don Jefe

    Telegraphs & Switch Boards

    And secretarial pools and wainwrights and the list goes on. Technology will always displace some people but as a civilization we can't (or shouldn't) let financial concerns keep us from advancing.

    The problem is going to be retraining the displaced drivers with skills that let them earn us much as they do now. That's impossible. I say let the driverless cars take over the roads & we just pay the drivers not to work. Attrition will take care of the problem and paying them for nothing is still cheaper than setting up complex training schemes which won't teach them anything (sort of like colleges nowadays).

  24. IHateWearingATie
    Mushroom

    What is all this rubbish?!?!?!

    Will someone please give the author of this article Tim Worstall's phone number and ask him to provide a basic lesson in economics?

    Could be any half decent economist really - I only mention Tim as he writes for El Reg. I don't usually criticise El Reg authors, but honestly this is just reactionary ill informed rubbish.

  25. Dave 62

    I can see how these driverless delivery vans will emulate braking far too late for a light that's been red for five minutes and not indicating when changing lanes and being incapable of reading the 3ft letters informing them which lane goes where but will they be able to talk on the phone while driving?

  26. chris lively

    The answer is both simple and callous: they will adapt or die.

    This is how it's gone for the whole of human history when life changing technology has been introduced. Whether it was the wheel or today's full automated large combine harvesters, essentially unskilled workers get "displaced" and must figure out a new way to live.

    For this reason alone higher education has become an absolutely critical necessity. I am rarely on the side of having government interfere with our daily lives, preferring it to be some hidden thing that stays out of my way. However, in this case the right answer would be for higher education to be paid for entirely through taxes and available to anyone that wants to show up.

    Technology has been moving pretty fast for the past 100 years or so and each decade sees it take another giant step forward. Some jobs I did 20 or 30 years ago are simply no longer available today. Allowed to continue, it is entirely possible that the vast majority of unskilled jobs in western countries will be fully automated in another 30 years. Although I recognize the social upheaval this will inevitably cause, I believe it will ultimately be for the betterment of all.

    Of course, if the guys at the top want to avoid various civil unrest then they need to work out the exit plans for the people at the bottom. Of which Education to raise them up would be the preferable answer.

  27. ecofeco Silver badge
    Meh

    Automation = Oxymoron

    I've worked around a lot of automaton all my life. If there is one thing you can count on with automation, it's that it will break.

    When it works, it works great. When it doesn't, everything comes to a screeching halt.

    But automation is and always will be, the path to the future. There is no going back without the 4 Horsemen riding.

    1. Suricou Raven

      Re: Automation = Oxymoron

      But the number of workers displaced is less than the number of new workers needed to maintain the equipment. You've replaced a large number of low-skill positions with a small number of medium-skill positions*. That's where the cost-savings come from. The total number of jobs created has still gone down.

      *And a tiny number of high-skill positions to design the things, but that number is tiny indeed.

  28. All names Taken
    Paris Hilton

    :-) replies to all :-)

    Yes, the revenues ... ah, the revenues.

    Basically what that means has threefold implications:

    a - the host nation

    a sizeable reduction in some revenue streams will result in a sizeable increase in other revenue streams (eee-ewewew-oooooo doncha know our uncivil servantry require 3 trillion a year just (a in J-U-S-T) for their pensions maaan? I mean like get real dood - wake up n smell the coffee)

    b - the source nations

    a sizeable reduction in customer demand will result in a sizeable increase in price to those nations (eee-ewewew-oooo dood - we don't care how much yeeooo buy but we need 3 trillion plus a bit more for the wife's hair dryer)

    c - interim nations

    like guys, we let you ship stuff across our borders. We ain't really too fussy what you ship be it cloned warez, (BAR 3 - 0 ACM !!!), sex slaves, human beings, greasy-oily-sticky stuff but it will cost yeeooo 3 trillion of your shekels whatever and however you move it. OK?

    Interim conclusion

    An oil free, high energy using nation is not going to have its monetary problems solved by a thank of metal and bits that does 300 miles per gallon. Dream on dudes?

  29. James 100

    People move on...

    The 15 m won't all become unemployed overnight, it'll happen over the course of years. The 50 year old drivers will just work on and retire, the 20 year old would-be drivers won't get hired as drivers in the first place so they'll train for and find other jobs.

    It won't mean 15m unemployed, any more than cars meant millions of unemployed horse riders/breeders/farriers etc - just a drop in hiring with the number doing that job gradually declining.

    Of course, if the delivery robots are ParcelForce-based, they'll just fire the parcel at your house as they drive past at 20. CityLink will do less damage to your house, since they'll just fire a piece of card saying "come and collect the parcel from a sink estate three cities away, because we're the only outfit without a depot in your city".

    I wonder if unmanned vehicles could usefully use the rail network for faster inter-city travel? Easy enough to form up batches of 20-100 small cars/vans into a "train", no issues with other traffic getting in the way since the rail network's already fully monitored/controlled...

  30. Perry Munger

    Um, stop worrying...

    Three things will likely mitigate any changes that may happen.

    The first is that the changes will be far more gradual than intimated here. There won't be ten million suddenly unemployed drivers. Over time, as new systems are created and the value proposition changes, more and more drivers will lose their jobs.

    The second is that we are actually facing a massive labor shortage in the coming years due to the retiring of the so-called 'baby boomers'. While the words used here are US-centric, the demographic shift is pretty much worldwide. The unemployed drivers can fairly easily be retrained to do the sorts of support jobs, primarily medical, that will be necessary in the new economy.

    The third is, of course, that this argument is not at all new. They argued about the textile mills. They argued about factories. They argued about robotics in factories. Every time, there has been a period of disruption and then everybody had a better time...

  31. ian 22

    All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace

    Carried to logical conclusions ( or reductio ad absurdum - you decide), mankind will at last be freed of daily toil to do... what?

    But that's freedom innit. Each of us will work out our own answer.

    1. Paul Crawford Silver badge

      Re: All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace

      The Devil makes work for idle hands - or was that glands?

  32. Tom 13

    Why do allegedly knowledgeable people always pick on hairdressers?

    I'm not one myself but I understand these days you pretty much need to be licensed to be one, and getting that license requires the equivalent of a minor in chemistry. Not exactly a low skill position.

    1. Vic

      Re: Why do allegedly knowledgeable people always pick on hairdressers?

      > I understand these days you pretty much need to be licensed to be one

      You understand incorrectly. There is no such licensing requirement[1].

      > Not exactly a low skill position.

      That depends. Some are especially skilled. Some are not.

      Vic.

      [1] From http://www.haircouncil.org.uk/pages/cfaq.html :-

      "But surely everyone must be qualified before being allowed to practise?

      Alas, not so; in fact, quite the opposite. Here in Britain, anyone is free to practise as a hairdresser without registration, without qualification, even without proper training. In short, hairdressing is totally unregulated."

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like