What would happen if robots started taking over the workforce?

[Aix]

We'd try to deport them for stealing our jobs right?

 

Realtalk though, in the future when robots become cheap and effective enough to replace human labor in a large number of jobs, what do you think will be the world's reaction?

[Kyng]

I am certain that before this would take place, the replaced would have some sort of system planned for them by the bodies who are replacing them. i.e. people won't be made homeless by robots, they'd be shifted somewhere else.

 

idk tho

[Aix]

I am certain that before this would take place, the replaced would have some sort of system planned for them by the bodies who are replacing them. i.e. people won't be made homeless by robots, they'd be shifted somewhere else.

 

idk tho

I don't know much about protocols or how things work, but couldn't companies just mass lay-off their staff, give them their lay-off reimbursement money or whatever and send them packing?

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

Seeing as we develop said robots I think we'd have more than enough time to plan for this. It's not like it'd be a sudden uprising of robots. So there would be plans in place. Other jobs. Cause not everything can be done by robots, or not everything should be. That's how I feel.

[Kyng]

I don't know much about protocols or how things work, but couldn't companies just mass lay-off their staff, give them their lay-off reimbursement money or whatever and send them packing?

Its more that I'm not sure how the governments would regard it, in relation to Employment Law. Plus, its all well and good saying Robots replace people, what happens - but societies couldn't do that, there'd be outrage and a crisis at least.

[Shalltear Bloodfallen]

This is actually a pretty interesting question that my uni teachers brought up when I was studying software development, because as it stands right now it's incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to code for complex tasks. The language at this point in time lends itself very well to simple tasks (like, say, assembly work), but if you want someone to help nurse you back to health, yeah odds are a machine is not gonna be able to do it for quite some time, nor do alot of people in the industry even think we should create the potential. Some jobs need the "human" touch, or in the words of SOMA "Intuition doesnt grow on motherboards"

 

As for the worlds reaction, it's already a wormhole for those developing it, so I can only imagine it will be phased in slow enough, and I hope limited enough, for people to not mind it once we get there. There's still time for the world to plan for when it's phased in, and there's certainley still time needed to develop the software and hardware necessary to truly start phasing it in to the regular workforce, but we humans are, by nature resistant to change unless it's done slowly.

"Toss a frog into a boiling pot and it will jump out. But if you drop it in the pot and slowly turn up the temperature it'll stay in and boil to death"

 

 

 

Hopefully this made sense XD Kinda went off on a nonsensical thought train just like when they asked us this stuff in uni :P

[epicmemesbro]

Once they have a noticeable impact, the government will have to balance it out because most jobs that machines do are done by blue collar workers which tend to be in a Union. The unions will not yield for these mechanical constructs.

[Miror B]

We'll need to shift schools over to a more technology driven education due to all the machines that need maintenance.

[Aix]

Seeing as we develop said robots I think we'd have more than enough time to plan for this. It's not like it'd be a sudden uprising of robots. So there would be plans in place. Other jobs. Cause not everything can be done by robots, or not everything should be. That's how I feel.

I think we'd still develop the technology faster than society can react to it, no small part because society can be pretty slow in addressing big issues.

 

There is a point where presumably AI and robots will be superior to humans in every way, they also make far less mistakes.

Its more that I'm not sure how the governments would regard it, in relation to Employment Law. Plus, its all well and good saying Robots replace people, what happens - but societies couldn't do that, there'd be outrage and a crisis at least.

Yup outrage and crisis is what I personally expect.

This is actually a pretty interesting question that my uni teachers brought up when I was studying software development, because as it stands right now it's incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to code for complex tasks. The language at this point in time lends itself very well to simple tasks (like, say, assembly work), but if you want someone to help nurse you back to health, yeah odds are a machine is not gonna be able to do it for quite some time, nor do alot of people in the industry even think we should create the potential. Some jobs need the "human" touch, or in the words of SOMA "Intuition doesnt grow on motherboards"

 

As for the worlds reaction, it's already a wormhole for those developing it, so I can only imagine it will be phased in slow enough, and I hope limited enough, for people to not mind it once we get there. There's still time for the world to plan for when it's phased in, and there's certainley still time needed to develop the software and hardware necessary to truly start phasing it in to the regular workforce, but we humans are, by nature resistant to change unless it's done slowly.

"Toss a frog into a boiling pot and it will jump out. But if you drop it in the pot and slowly turn up the temperature it'll stay in and boil to death"

 

 

 

Hopefully this made sense XD Kinda went off on a nonsensical thought train just like when they asked us this stuff in uni :P

IBM recently developed a microprocessor based on human neurons. Their selling point was that it required a lot less energy to run, but what drew my attention was that it was apparently better at spacial thinking and other stuff rather than logic compared to our binary systems. Take that as you will.

We'll need to shift schools over to a more technology driven education due to all the machines that need maintenance.

Machines can take those jobs, too.

[Maeriberii Haan]

Issue is, this scenario is presented as if this would happen in a relative instant (not literally instaneous, but it's presented as if the development would make the entire process happen in a short time span).

 

Which is unrealistic.

 

There's a lot of points to be passed to get to the "robots are cheap enough to mass produce to replace human workforce" especially if it gets to the point of them being capable of self-maintenance in a level that would make any human supervision obsolete. Mechanization is one thing, but a sweeping change that affects every scale of industry like this is another. It'll be a staged development to that point, and with each stage, the government and society will make their adaptation to this scenario.

 

Though, let's see if this happens in the implied time span that the OP said.

 

 

I don't know much about protocols or how things work, but couldn't companies just mass lay-off their staff, give them their lay-off reimbursement money or whatever and send them packing?

 

This would pretty much kill the company though. Mass lay-off already is a measure they'd only do in crises to prevent loss of profit, but in this case they're replacing the workforce with something else too (something which, even in an ideal scenario, will have a big initial cost compared to human labor). In a scenario where this kind of event happen in a short span of years, the initial blow if they take this step would be too hard for them to be able to recover from it.

 

Also don't forget a big thing. Outrages and similar things aside, something happening of this scale would reduce the market's capability of actually buying stuff. Coupled with the above, most middle and small scale industries would be driven to bankruptcy either due to taking the jump, or simply due to the market and environment not being able to support them anymore. I'm not sure whether this would be right or not since I'm not an Econ peep, but in an environment where the market's ability to buy things have been greatly reduced especially with the rampant unemployment, the bigger companies would then try cannibalizing each other simply since there's not much room for them to survive together, and this will lead to monopoly in the end.

 

Society outrages and crisis will definitely be a big thing if such thing happens too. it'll be more than that, though. Smaller countries will collapse with the big increase of unemployment and multinational companies not actually helping their growth now, and it will affect other countries too.

 

...Though honestly at this point I'll just go out on a limb and say that if an industrial revolution of such kind and scale happens, it'll lead to a world governed by big companies that survives the crises. And this is not entering the possibility that the robots are sentient. The society of that time would be a lot different than now, either way.

 

And hey, if human really are obsolete by then, there's no points in humans anymore, and our species will die out at one point afterwards. Really just one step from it.

 

man this sounds like your usual dystopian sci-fi scenario

[Miror B]

Machines can take those jobs, too.

But then we would need people to maintain the machines that maintain the worker machines.

Not to mention we'd need people who built the machines in the first place (or to maintain the machines that build the machines).

[Aix]

But then we would need people to maintain the machines that maintain the worker machines.

Not to mention we'd need people who built the machines in the first place (or to maintain the machines that build the machines).

The technological singularity is a supposed point where robots have achieved human intelligence and can do anything humans can do.

[Miror B]

The technological singularity is a supposed point where robots have achieved human intelligence and can do anything humans can do.

Artificial Intelligence will still always be artificial. A robot can theoretically only mimic human intelligence, not achieve it.

 

Even then, a robot that breaks down can't repair itself reliably. Even making robots that repair other robots, those robots would break down eventually and need some sort of maintenence. And if the cycle keeps going it'll end up more cost effective to use humans instead anyway.

[Aix]

It is usually speculated that robots will achieve and surpass human intelligence. At that point, robots will become inventors and invent better robots which will invent better robots.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

 

 

1) Will Smith would have been right

 

2) I'm honestly worried about this happening because humans might become naturally lazy, it really doesn't suit how we're built, as an ideal human tends to degenerate fairly fast. We become more greedy, capable of doing less, sluggish, obese, talent-less, selfish, which leads to 

 

3) Human extinction. We become the unnecessary part of an equation that based on efficiency. The logical out at this point is to cut out the clog slowing down the gears. 

 

So, I'm terrified of it, but I've accepted our eventual demise

[Aix]

Not to get philosophical, but when has any of this (society, people, etc.) been "necessary"?

 

Unlike what many fearmongering movies have to say, I don't believe robots would be human-like, rather they would be entities created solely for a certain task and would not be entertaining thoughts of world domination or feeling humans should be gotten rid of. It would be a waste of time and effort to program human emotions into a machine; if there were any emotions to be programmed into a thinking robot it would be a deep-rooted love for humanity despite all its flaws.

[Darj]

Artificial Intelligence will still always be artificial. A robot can theoretically only mimic human intelligence, not achieve it.

 

Even then, a robot that breaks down can't repair itself reliably. Even making robots that repair other robots, those robots would break down eventually and need some sort of maintenence. And if the cycle keeps going it'll end up more cost effective to use humans instead anyway.

 

As far as I know, the technological singularity would have that problematic covered as well: at that point, machines would no longer need humans for anything, as Aix  mentioned in the reply before the one above.

 

 

OT: I have not thought too deeply about this, but my initial ideas are related to a line Nai mentioned:

 

And hey, if human really are obsolete by then, there's no points in humans anymore, and our species will die out at one point afterwards. Really just one step from it.

 

If machines are doing all the work, providing all the resources and satisfying all the needs the human species have, then the latter would no longer have to worry about work, money, etc. and enjoy a life of luxury with the machines as servants. I mean, money would practically lose its purpose: you need money to buy food or pay for water and electricity services, or health care? it would be free since machines generate it for free. Money to pay the companies that build and repair the robots doing the work? why? the machines can already take care of themselves because of the singularity, and they have no reason to charge for their services.

 

Basically, I guess the whole humanity would turn into NEETs  until the machines become aware of this and begin to eliminate us from the picture for being unproductive.

Now, is this realistic? I dare to say no, since I feel humanity wouldn't allow themselves to be fully replaced by machines in the first place, as that would compromise that sense of purpose and existence, as Nai also mentioned, or at least implied, in its comment.

That, and there is also the possibility for humanity taking a different evolutionary route down the line, such as relocating minds and consciences to artificial bodies, and thus removing the needs biological bodies have. But this is a different topic.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Not to get philosophical, but when has any of this (society, people, etc.) been "necessary"?

 

Unlike what many fearmongering movies have to say, I don't believe robots would be human-like, rather they would be entities created solely for a certain task and would not be entertaining thoughts of world domination or feeling humans should be gotten rid of. It would be a waste of time and effort to program human emotions into a machine; if there were any emotions to be programmed into a thinking robot it would be a deep-rooted love for humanity despite all its flaws.

Then we would kill ourselfs. They would do our jobs for us, and the lazy etc portion would kick in. We would become talent-less and waste away. A slower and more painful death if anything

[Aix]

Then we would kill ourselfs. They would do our jobs for us, and the lazy etc portion would kick in. We would become talent-less and waste away. A slower and more painful death if anything

I'm sure plenty of us would be happy to just play video games and engage in hobbies and luxuries all day. Many others would feel redundant and bored, but that's how it goes. Thing is, you really don't know what possibilities exist. Perhaps instead of letting robots do things, we get technology that makes us capable of being on-par with robots. Maybe we decide to live in utopian virtual worlds. Etc. etc.

 

Also, not everyone is someone who would be lazy just because they can.

 

And what's wrong with being talentless and hedonistic if there's no practical problems with being so?

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I'm sure plenty of us would be happy to just play video games and engage in hobbies and luxuries all day. Many others would feel redundant and bored, but that's how it goes. Thing is, you really don't know what possibilities exist. Perhaps instead of letting robots do things, we get technology that makes us capable of being on-par with robots. Maybe we decide to live in utopian virtual worlds. Etc. etc.

 

Also, not everyone is someone who would be lazy just because they can.

 

And what's wrong with being talentless and hedonistic if there's no practical problems with being so?

That is the ideal and what I would be quite happy if happened. Humans are inherently lazy (or as I see it, efficient) creatures, we seek the path of least resistance like most other things in life. While this is a good thing to have as it gives is potential to grow and shorten our own workload, going down the path of robotics is eventually going to make us talent-less and hedonistic as you noted.

 

What's wrong with this? Instead of the Ex Machina/Terminator/I - Robot world we get something akin to Wall-E or Mad Max. Machines can fail, then what? We no longer have the talent to survive, and ie, signed our own death warrants. Call me xenophobic, but trusting my live more and more to machines either sentient or not troubles me greatly

[Aerion Brightflame]

Arguably you could look at the effects industrialisation had on societies in order to predict what this would do; Because it's essentially just industrialisation undertaken at a massive scale. 

 

You will get riots, protests, and general unrest that will eventually fold in the path of progress. Society will adapt and evolve around the robotics, probably creating new jobs in new aspects to allow the economy to cope with sudden mass unemployment. Things will change, but human society will continue I imagine in a manner that resembles current society. 

 

Or you know life as we know it collapses. And then governments place sanctions of the usage of Robotics to stop this, the older jobs return, and things become kinda static. Which is also a little bad, but better than societal collapse.  

 

The idea of this causing a fully dystopian future would require it be a very gradual process that everyone on Earth managed to ignore. 

[Raine]

Brave New World

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Arguably you could look at the effects industrialisation had on societies in order to predict what this would do; Because it's essentially just industrialisation undertaken at a massive scale. 

 

You will get riots, protests, and general unrest that will eventually fold in the path of progress. Society will adapt and evolve around the robotics, probably creating new jobs in new aspects to allow the economy to cope with sudden mass unemployment. Things will change, but human society will continue I imagine in a manner that resembles current society. 

 

Or you know life as we know it collapses. And then governments place sanctions of the usage of Robotics to stop this, the older jobs return, and things become kinda static. Which is also a little bad, but better than societal collapse.  

 

The idea of this causing a fully dystopian future would require it be a very gradual process that everyone on Earth managed to ignore.

 

What about when the robots start evolving Tom? I Robot Senario instead of Wall E then. Either way we get funked

[Aerion Brightflame]

What about when the robots start evolving Tom? I Robot Senario instead of Wall E then. Either way we get f***ed

 

This thread wasn't about Artificial Intelligence, this was about robotising the work-force. Designing specific robots to perform specific tasks, basically the same as industrialisation. Hell, nowadays industry is already using robots on production lines.

 

So essentially there's no reason to fear monger over something really improbable. Hell, even the idea of us getting Wall-E'd is improbable, since humans have contribution to society as essentially an instinct at this stage. As a whole, we want to be productive, functioning members of society. As such, the idea of industrialisation hitting that kind of scale is really unlikely. 

 

So yeah, fictional scenario's are probably going to be nothing like the reality, given the reality has to some extent already happened. No need to be paranoid. 

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

The thing is, we choose how advanced to make them. We choose if they get to the point they can make themselves.