What Jobs will be dead in the future? Trucking, Taxis, fastfoot workers are fucked. I think marketers, solicitors, will be safe.
>>72534069
Bull prepper will be fine, they don't like robots to do that.
mechanics
pretty much all retail store workers (people will just buy shit online)
authors (people don't read anymore)
translators
>>72534069
Potato farming
>>72534260
Begorrah' don't that.
>>72534069
Trucking and taxis not because what will a driverless taxi do if I refuse to pay.... ok pay first hmm but trucking really not because it would be really easy to stop the truck and steal all the shit
>>72534251
>translators
seriously?
>>72534069
Basically, any job that does not require socialization/interaction with humans will see a decrease. But, at the same time, more IT positions will continually open.
I wonder if women will survive the lack of need for sex.
>>72534069
No lawyer wants to talk about it, but the market for lawyers is dying about as fast as we're adding to it with intellectual property and international trade concerns. Things like Westlaw and Lexis are killing legal jobs as search costs go down exponentially.
It won't be long before AI like that one doctor one that was on jeapoardy will be adapted for legal services, and even lawyers will end up fucked.
Amazon warehouse is good. You have to work for U.S. companies that peddle other countries' shit.
Online retail is where it is at for safe bets.
>>72534069
The future is anyway a time where everyone get a basic income and for the many jobs that will run with robot power they still needs a lot of engineers but this is a white countries future and white countries are non existing in the future.
>>72534069
>Trucking, Taxis
ALL jobs with the exception of "jobs" in the arts and humanities (and some sciences) are going to be obsolete if humanity continues to go down the path of automation. It's literally only a matter of time until we begin to manufacture computers that are smarter, more intuitive, and better, than humans at literally any job.
AI makes us all obsolete.
dont worry i dont think they will invent a scrap metal thieving robot so you'll always be employed
>>72535160
automatic cars, anon.
>>72534567
And why is not easy to stop the truck and steal shit now?
everyone will be on neetbux in 20 years.
>>72534567
>easy
Drone with a gun starts following you
>>72534069
Steve.
>>72534069
Literally everything. Eventually humans will be able to do nothing better than a robot will be able to, and keeping humans working would be pointless.
>>72535527
>filename consumer quadcopter
>is not a quadcopter
>>72534069
I predict automatic cars will have to have human "operators" in them to oversee them, even if they drive themselves.
>>72534641
Machine translation was a fantasy 20 years ago.
Now we have working models that need tweaking.
>>72535313
>tfw in 50 years time we really will be laughing at faggots who fell for the STEM meme
>>72535388
You really think self driving cars will be a thing in your lifetime?
I mean, let's assume the technology gets there in ten years. The federal legislation will never get there for another 50 years, and the state level legislation (at least in my rural state) will never get there for another 60 years.
I know I will never trust the life of me and my family to some machine.
>>72534882
I saw a sudden jump in law libraries closing.
Whole buildings full of people and books are now empty.
>>72536156
>I know I will never trust the life of me and my family to some machine.
I'll take machines going at a steady 30 mph than driving down the road with assholes going at 60 in a 25 zone.
>>72536156
>You really think self driving cars will be a thing in your lifetime?
Self driving cars are a fact NOW, TODAY.
Mercedes has a working prototype for a self driving semi-truck.
Details have to be worked out, but you can't deny the benefit of a car that will always follow traffic laws and safety, never get tired or distracted, and will always be on time.
Insurance for such vehicles will plummet. It may even end much of the insurance "industry" as we know it as claims will fall as well as revenue.
>The federal legislation will never get there for another 50 years, and the state level legislation (at least in my rural state) will never get there for another 60 years.
Money talks and shit walks. We will have that legislation written for and given to our government officials by these companies who want the tech.
>>72536245
No need for them. We spent 2 days in my Research skills class on actual book research, and it was more a "hey, look at what we had to do to find an answer" thing.
It's straight up inferior. Law librarians are all scrambling right now. It won't be a long time before paralegals, legal secretaries, and even lawyers are feeling the heat.
>>72536563
Every time I see those particular assholes they are texting.
I use hands free bluetooth tech in my car to make a call, but others fucking don't.
>>72536156
You already do, and you don't even realize it.
/pol/ is on a server somewhere, connected to giant topological network compromised of many various other networks, both terrestrial and otherwise, that enables you to do what you're doing right now.
You have lights. All vehicles made during the mid-80s and onwards have microprocessors in them. Your fridge has microprocessors in it. Your stove has microprocessors in it. Even your Microwave has microprocessors in it. Your phone can be used to call emergency services. If you have a home security system, it goes off if someone attempts to fuck your home up proper. Systems installed on commercial aircraft ensure that American Airlines doesn't land in your backyard. Agriculture now depends on technology like you don't even realize; combines sure are fantastic. Weather forecasting helps determine if a storm is on it's way to fuck your shit up, too. If you end up with some sort of injury, syndrome, or other health complication, technology will allow the medical professionals (or the local medical student) to figure out what's wrong with you without slicing you open needlessly.
You could even end up with a pacemaker.
Your life is constantly improved, or just maintained by, a ton of machines.
>>72536664
>No need for them.
I understand. That's becoming the reality for many things.
In a way, we have to learn to "survive" the rise of technology.
There is no sense of a fully automated society where no one has a job to buy shit and services.
Where would any economy be if no one has an income?
This is one of the puzzles of automation.
>>72536156
The technology literally already exists. It just needs to be refined and have appropriate legislation passed.
For the record, I am NOT in favor of self-driving cars.
>>72534251
>authors (people don't read anymore)
Nonsense.
Publishers perhaps, but there is still demand for good writers.
>>72536563
>30 mph than driving down the road
Cityfag detected
>>72536662
>Self driving cars are a fact NOW, TODAY.
>prototype
Yeah okay faggot. Let's mass produce prototypes.
>We will have that legislation written for and given to our government officials by these companies who want the tech.
Top kek. It's like you have no idea where the money is.
>>72537056
>The technology literally already exists. It just needs to be refined
So it doesn't fucking exist.
>>72537032
It's not that hard. You detach the economy from necessities, giving a basic income. Luxuries are still put under market forces, and you have to work for them. Thus, you only have to work if you want those luxuries. Slowly, luxuries will be considered necessities as more and more automation happens. Once we can create more than anyone will ever need (post-scarcity), there's no need for an economy.
>>72536156
>I know I will never trust the life of me and my family to some machine.
You want to trust a lazy, uncaring and malicious human?
Machines only operate for singular purposes. They don't have malice or any other human emotions. You turn on a blender it makes a smoothie- it's not like the teenager employee who spit in it because they're having a bad day and they don't like your face.
>>72536156
>You really think self driving cars will be a thing in your lifetime?
https://youtu.be/UNAa5-uCowY?t=14m52s
>>72534251
Authors and translators can be argued for, some languages require(until a suitably intelligent AI is developed) human knowledge to properly translate since some words have weird meanings depending on context. And for authors because there will always be a market for a well written story until all the readers are dead.
My guess is that good bi-pedal worker robots are already a reality. The cutting edge tech is military though.
Soilders will be the FIRST job to go.
>>72537214
>You detach the economy from necessities, giving a basic income.
lol. So a welfare state where people have no purpose or reason to live.
It's amazing how people aim for a StarTrek paradise but we're really heading towards a "Judge Dredd" style world.
You can't have people "just sit around".
>>72537142
>So it doesn't fucking exist
>Improving on a technology means that the technology in of itself doesn't exist yet
Hey.
Did you know that you could be firing lasers that burn wood with your phone? But, your phone isn't currently equipped with the proper hardware. I guess that technology doesn't exist.
Quasi-Autonomous Vehicles isn't time travel or Cold Fusion. The means definitely exist. I think, just maybe, you need to take a step back from all of this, and re-learn what the word "technology" means. You might be confusing it with "consumer-ready product".
all jobs being obsolete is a good thing. we don't work because it's inherently good, we work because we need to in order to earn out keep in society that doesn't yet have enough automation
when AI do everything we can finally be free to do whatever we want.
>>72537465
Where does the technology exist, fucking leaf? In shitty cities where everything is mapped? What about outside those hellholes?
It doesn't fucking exist on an actual scale worth observing.
>>72537433
>You can't have people "just sit around".
Why not?
I mean, lets leave behind your 1960-80s scifi that didn't even get cell phones right.
>>72537142
The tech exists but it "needs to be refined" by Luddite faggots like you who are full of doubt.
The "refinement" here is much closer to a PR campaign to make people like you happy and find solutions to your doubts.
They are refining based on speculations and complaints at this point.
>>72534069
I'm guessing you could throw bus drivers in that category, as well as airline pilots, cargo ship's crews, restaurant waiters, warehouse workers, assembly line workers and so forth.
I think automation will be a gradual process, with jobs that are done by humans becoming more and more scarce.
>>72534069
Doctors are safe I think.
Marketers will be gone because you now have those A.Is who advertize.
>>72537791
>You can't have people "just sit around".
>Why not?
If you want to see what it looks like to give people money to simply "exist" where they have no reason for living or drive, I suggest finding the closest MLK Jr. Boulevard, find the government project housing and just ask people "how their day is going".
You'll be offered drugs, beaten and robbed then offered drugs again then beaten and robbed to get the drugs back.
>>72538078
why would doctors be safe though? it's an extremely memory-based profession
>measure the patient properly
>search massive memory bank for solution
>give patient reassurance by being a cute robot model
>>72538172
>>72537973
>>72537951
>>72537791
>>72537722
>>72537494
>>72537465
>>72537433
So what I got from this thread is every job in the future is fucked. I would go into Medicine but I didn't take biology in highschool so I'm fucked. Well guess we need Trump to save us.
>>72538172
they just have the bare minimum, they don't have their needs provided for. on the whole people will be much happier when the only work they do is out of self-interest and self-fulfillment
AI should be able to provide surplus for everyone. there would be no need to do the kinds of things they do
your robbing point is especially stupid. what would they need to rob?
>>72538201
Because people want to interact with a human. To examine them and a robot can't really interact the same way with a human in an office.
>>72538078
Doctors will be supplemented more and more by computers and machines.
At the moment it is too complex to be completely automated.
>>72537951
So basically "fall in line, sheep!"
Na, fuck off. I still won't entrust my family's lives to some machine.
>>72538378
Well then we're all fucked. What job isn't going to be automated?
>>72537722
Yes, in shitty cities where everything is mapped.
Do you know how easy it is to drive in a straight line? You don't need to map out a freeway that goes between two states beyond using an already-extant GPS system and image recognition.
Take note, Image Recognition and GPS are two forms of technology that exist on an actual scale worth observing. You know, because America itself is worth observing in it's entirety. So are roads, because humans still need to know about them, and what's going on with them.
Suggesting that a self-driving car, a combination of several technological innovations that very well serve us, doesn't exist on a scale worth observing means you probably live in an area that doesn't have to deal with cars being wrapped around poles- or cars embedding themselves into other people. Maybe you don't drive, anyways. Maybe you just don't observe America (or human lives) in that fashion- and that's nice and all, but I'm sure that no one cares about how insignificant you think America is (or how insignificant other people are).
You need to face reality, or else you'd better move further into butt-fuck nowhere. Trust me, as a leaf, I know about butt-fuck nowhere. I'll say it again, straight lines aren't hard.
>>72538280
>So what I got from this thread is every job in the future is fucked.
No, jobs are changing. You still need creative and customer service jobs- people like ideas and ass kissing.
But I'm not sure if you can create a whole sustainable economy off of that.
Further, consider how machines changed agriculture and horses. We have huge machines that can harvest cotton for example that pull the seeds out and bale it, so there is almost zero need for human labor. People switched from horses to trains and cars and that practically wiped out the need for many other industries (and horses) yet provided for more economic activity.
It's complex. Like playing Jenga, it might fall down or you can keep building.
>>72538337
they will be able to eventually. and who are these "people", really? I for one would be happy with an extremely affective machine even if it doesn't provide muh human feels
if you you could go on to say this about any service position because it needs the mystical "human touch"
most jobs are fucked.
>AI is going to get better.
>Robots will be able to perform maintenance on themselves.
All we will need are people to design better robots really.
>>72538383
and you'll instead trust your life to extremely fallible humans, who do corrupt and evil shit on a regular basis because of their self interest?
you watch too much terminator
>>72538305
>your robbing point is especially stupid. what would they need to rob?
The same reason people on welfare or "basic income" would rob. They do it for fun.
They do drugs for fun, they act tough and hurt people for fun, they have 20 children because fucking is fun.
You are the one ignoring human nature.
>>72538684
>>72538659
Well I don't know what the jobs are and neither are you so why not go on welfare?
Accountants ? i think its very easy to program this job and give it completely to computers
>>72538807
they don't do it for fun. they do it to get money. and if they do, you'll never stop that ever.
you're basically like a feminist who claims rape is done for power rather than sexual pleasure
>we need to have humans work 9 to 5 every day because otherwise they'll kill each other
>>72538822
because that's morally irresponsible. if you go on welfare now you're living as a parasite on humans. if you go on it in the inevitable future then you'll be a parasite on machines, which is fine
I'm excited for this line of robotics to be developed further.
>>72538448
Jobs that need creativity, like any kind engineering, research fields, and jobs that need a "human touch".
We're not going to need human ditch diggers, human drivers, and humans doing menial or hard labor jobs anymore. Farming is already an example of this.
>>72539003
But what job should I go into? I'm 18 and the choices are very little since I didn't take biology or computer science in highschool.
There is only one answer... all of them. The jobs that pay more have more incentive to be automated and the jobs that pay less are easier to automate.
>>72539104
I don't know. find out for yourself. don't decide that since you can't find the perfect job, you should just be a parasite
if you're smart enough you'll be able to work out something
>>72534069
Some middle managers, most executives.
Everyone else will be either:
>temporary workers
>unemployed because of automation or other factors
>>72537433
People need to realize that Star Trek's 'post-scarcity' economy cannot actually exist, but this is not due to technological limitations. Even if energy were so cheap and plentiful that everyone could just replicate all of their needs from the comfort of their living room, there are still some resources that cannot be replicated. Time is the biggest one. Land is another. If your every material need was provided for, then maybe some people would be interested in self-improvement and join Starfleet or something. But if the current welfare state has shown us anything, when people don't have to work for a living they fall into laziness and degeneracy
>>72537142
New Tesla models already have lane-changing autopilot for freeway driving. There are experimental prototypes that are even more autonomous already.
The biggest limit to self-driving cars at this point is processing power and camera resolution, both of which get better every year.
Within 5-10 years they will be consumer ready, but it will be 2030 or so before they become common on the road, as not everyone will get rid of their existing cars and buy a self-driving car overnight.
>>72538929
>we need to have humans work 9 to 5 every day because otherwise they'll kill each other
human beings kill each other anyway. Human need purpose or they flip out.
Look at BLM or SJW if you want an example of people who have too much fucking time on their hands they are spreading misery and their ideology just because they have no other real problems.
So they destroy monuments they deem "racist" and censor and intimidate people.
You ignore human nature and the need to inflict pain.
>>72539212
Well I can't really figure that out for myself because whenever I ask people say "just look at what jobs will be automated".
>>72539104
Do you like making $50-150k a year? Like the idea of being your own boss? How about retiring by 45? get into trades....electrician, plumber, millwright, pipefitter etc. Start with trades school then get hired out.
accountants are eternally fucked
>>72538569
You do realize roads aren't made in absolutely straight lines on purpose so truck drivers don't fall asleep right, right? God damn you're retarded.
This shit will never take hold in our lifetime, I fucking guarantee it. Laws aside, there is a culture in America about driving. When you turn 16 (14 here), you get your driver's license and there's a whole culture around being able to drive. This shit will simply not hold.
>>72538777
>and you'll instead trust your life to extremely fallible humans
Yes, because I'm the one driving the vehicle you dumb fucking abbo. What is so god damn hard for you to grasp here? This reminds me of a conversation I had with my mother when I was young.
>anon, put on your seatbelt
>why? I trust Dad's driving
>I do, too. I don't trust the other driver's abilities.
tl;dr fuck you faggot I'll keep my freedom over dominance by my benevolent overlords, thanks.
>>72539364
>it will be 2030 or so before they become common on the road
Wishful thinking, friend. You really think those shitters will be widely approved by the government in that time? No, m8.
>>72539427
Those will be the first jobs automated. And I have no practical skills.
>>72539399
Is she aboard the Deathstar?
All of you faggots are thinking of Narrow Intelligence, not General Intelligence.
The literal moment that General Intelligence hits, you're going to wake up and check the news, and shit is going to be way different.
There will be governmental meetings on the logistics of manipulating GIs. The UN and various human rights commissions will lose their shit.
At some point, some retard with way too many morals will dump the software required to run the thing. A few other people will jump in and make it distributed. People will start running servers, and the governments will be completely overloaded if they try to stop anyone from doing it.
Once the second GI starts up, people will quickly become scared. Some people will start running more, and more, and more.
Within a few weeks your life will be completely different.
The idea of a "human" has been completely muddied. This little black box with a terminal has just as many feelings and experiences as you. The more romantic people (most people but primarily lefties) will begin to demand these things have the same rights as you.
These laws will be etched out. AIs will no longer be the domain of property, they will be their own sentient beings. They will have legal protection, and shutting one down will in some places be seen akin to murder.
They will begin having interests, ideas. Some of them will become romantic, others will take a more hardline approach to what they seek. You will get AIs making art, music. Some will start blogs and TV shows.
They will make products, companies. This will continue on for a while. You haven't accounted for one thing though, progress is exponential.
This AI will be made out of a neural network, and it will operate on refined unsupervised learning techniques. The only thing stopping them from becoming more advanced is someone preventing them.
At some point, super intelligence is going to hit. That's the singularity. At the current stage of things, that will hit between 2030 and 2080
>>72539554
>Laws aside, there is a culture in America about driving.
Every culture on Earth had strong traditions about women knitting, sewing etc.. Didn't stop anyone from replacing them with spinning frames, and knitting machines
>>72539412
they can inflict pain on robots.
and if they get out of hand, the robots can take care of them more effectively than humans do
most people don't even believe they have "purpose". that's for upper class silicon valley fucks who ironically never had to worry about not having enough money. most people just try to find something that will earn them a living.
BLM and SJW do have real problems, though their problems are mostly caused by themselves and their belief that everyone else is to blame. automation can solve their problems. how can they claim whites are controlling everything when everyone gets what they want because robots produce a surplus of everything?
>>72539554
>Laws aside, there is a culture in America about driving.
It used to be about horseback riding.
lol, things change. No one here has to prove anything to you. You're just some asshole.
>>72539713
thanks ray
>>72539554
You realize that... most of those roads were created before trucking was a thing... right?
They made those roads to get across places. I could find you about 400 straight lines on a map, in terms of human-scale distance. I also don't see cross-country renovations going on, so there's that as well. You have the right to be a Luddite, don't get me wrong. But, if you haven't noticed, culture tends to die easy in the face of progress. If it doesn't die, it undergoes some drastic changes. Look at the industrial revolution.
Do all the beautiful people still ride horses into town? Do all the beautiful people still have 17 children on average?
Look at the Information Age. Do we own wound-up pocket-watches, or revel in our coal-powered steam engines? I see you're not mailing me an angrily-written letter soaked in cat urine.
>>72539713
You're seriously underestimating the notion that some of us in here work with AI enough to know what AGI is, let alone ULM, or RNN, or what other acronyms you want to spew.
>>72538280
>So what I got from this thread is every job in the future is fucked. I would go into Medicine but I didn't take biology in highschool so I'm fucked. Well guess we need Trump to save us.
Trump won't save us. Robots replace immigrants, remember? Affordable automation is literally the technology that could justify 'remove burrito'.
However, in the same breath that is does that, it removes the justification for a vast swath of native populations.
The lower and middle classes will be reduced to uselessness, and the wealthy will have no reason to do any more than make the passing of 80% of the population gentle enough to not disrupt their own plans and comforts. Some form of management of the jobless that promotes population reduction (perhaps a form of basic healthcare and welfare that prevents reproduction.)
Entertainment will likely remain a big field, likely exploiting some aspects of virtual reality, because you simply MUST find something to distract the masses with while they slowly wither away.
>>72539713
Why would anyone build a machine that can feel, other than for fun and "scientific" experiment to gather more government donations tio their university? You don't need self awareness to manage shit that most humans can't. If anything it would be counterproductive.
>>72539587
Learn those practical skills then. They don't take too long to learn.
>>72535470
>And why is not easy to stop the truck and steal shit now?
Getting killed by the driver comes to mind
>>72534069
It will be absolutely every job in the final analysis. Humans are the new horses.
But it will be rolled out based on relative ROI. So fast food workers would have been safe, but $15/hr means no longer.
Jobs requiring high levels of trust will be the most protected by government: Dentists, surgeons, lawyers, money managers, hair stylists.
But the day will come when none of us could imagine the barbarism of being opened up by another human.
>>72540038
learn that those skills will be gone soon
>>72539713
>All of you faggots are thinking of Narrow Intelligence, not General Intelligence.
I'm specifically speaking of "narrow intelligence" actually.
That is needed for automated cars. There's no need for a self driving car to give an opinion on Mozart. Many tech needs focus on the essentials to make it function and that's all.
>>72539940
>in our lifetime
Fuck off, Monaco. You have no idea of our culture.
>>72539940
>>72540013
>forgetting the whole "laws" part
Good luck passing that legislation, faggot. I work with the DMV of my state and I can guarantee we will never approve automated cars on our Interstates for another 60 years.
>>72534882
Someone could basically create a law version of TurboTax.
Tell it your problem and then it does it look up against all the laws and comes up with recommendations it walks you through the steps of what to do next
>>72534251
>mechanics
Dead
what....
>>72535313
The next big thing in programming is computer programs themselves writing code. No more need for software engineers at that point.
>>72540079
If you're a trucker are you really going to risk your life in a shootout to protect whatever it is in the back of your truck? It's not like you own the cargo. You have no incentive to prevent it from getting stolen other than taking basic precautions so you aren't fired.
Even if it were easier to steal from a robot driver, it would be harder to get away with it. There would be cameras at the front and back of the truck, and if the trailer doors were opened at any point before the delivery the police could be automatically alerted and sent to the GPS position.
>>72535859
Only until the self driving technology has less accidents than humans
>>72534251
>people will just buy shit online
which requires packers, stockers, and so on.
majority of people don't do online shopping, faggot. you may have it in your big cities with retards who own apple products, but they aren't the majority. just concentrated retardation.
>>72540446
>Good luck passing that legislation, faggot.
We need campaign finance reform.
Otherwise, moneyed interests can just pay for the legislation they want, like they do already.
The rise of automated cars will make those interested very rich.
Uber wants to eliminate their human driver fleet and replace it with Uber-owned self driving cars that won't rape their passengers and crash like a human.
>>72536752
Were changing the song on the stereo
>>72534069
Basically you will have to be Really good at whatever you do or the globalist will have no use for you.
>>72538835
>>72539504
Accounting student here, we will always be necessary as long as politicians fuck up with arbitrary laws and regulations, also, big corporations and rich people will always need to cook their books.
You can't do that with a robot.
You need creativity which a robot lacks.
>>72540848
>We need campaign finance reform.
Again, good luck, faggot. Refer to the First Amendment and cry like a little bitch, you stupid fucker.
>>72540446
>>72541089
Uh... I'm not in charge of passing legislation? Especially because I'm even in Canada, let alone not in America? I don't think I forgot about the laws, though. If I recall, laws in our little North America operate in a fancy system with about 3, if not more, levels of government. With that, I can guarantee that working with the DMV in your state only delays the inevitable. From the way you just worded it, it doesn't sound like you operate on a federal level. You know, the legislative part of the feds that can " make laws necessary to properly execute powers"... ?
I can't possibly imagine how an incredibly efficient supply chain would hamper a country. Can you?
If none of the above, >>72540848.
And, correct me if I'm wrong here, but this means you at least now acknowledge that self-driving cars will be approved by 2076. Right?
>>72540631
Except when you want to check the code for anything that, you know, probably shouldn't be there. Something that doesn't bode well for human bystanders and whatnot.
>>72536857
Go back to /r/futurology you fucking faggot
>>72541307
>>72538383
Now kiss!
>>72540446
>I work with the DMV of my state and I can guarantee we will never approve automated cars on our Interstates for another 60 years.
Scenario:
>A major retailer, like Wal-Mart changes over to an automated fleet of trucks for distribution.
>The Governor of your state, Georgamississkentuckistan puts his big conservative foot down and says "We don't want none of them ding dong robot trucks in our state! It's the work of Satan!" and passes law banning them.
>The other retailers including WalMart have to adjust to this law keeping human drivers in the state, but at a cost
>It cost more for insurance, salary and time to allow for the human truckers to do their job.
>The price of good go up and some retailers just abandon the state all together.
>your state begins to get starved out, while other flourish as business proceeds as usual.
>Your state eventually caves and repeals their law, especially after relevant companies help fund their re-election campaign or they get thrown out of office by a equally funded, rival candidate in the pockets of the retailers
and it will only take a couple of years at most.
>>72541209
>I'm not in charge of passing legislation? Especially because I'm even in Canada, let alone not in America? I don't think I forgot about the laws, though.
Okay then, fuck off you god damn retard.
>From the way you just worded it, it doesn't sound like you operate on a federal level.
No, I work on the state level, and we will never pass any legislation that allows automotive vehicles.
>>72541554
Fuck off you goddamn globalist piece of shit. You have no idea of the sovereignty of independent states. Some states aren't controlled by Jews.
>>72540762
>which requires packers, stockers, and so on.
lol, they have fully automated warehouses already. Amazon is a true pioneer in this field.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quWFjS3Ci7A
You're out of date with your ideas by over a decade.
Everything non stem. People who can program robots will rule the world.
>>72542000
Good luck, man.
Just don't think about the machine that will be able to run the DMV without pay.
>>72540724
>>72535859
That's correct that it'll only be until the self-driving cars prove they are safer with stats.
I do agree that automated cars will need a big red "STOP AND PULL OVER" button for emergencies but that's all it should do.
>>72542000
>Fuck off you goddamn globalist piece of shit.
Uh, just because I know how the world works doesn't mean I approve of it.
Even I said earlier "we need campaign finance reform"
All of them, hopefully.
>>72534069
Computer programmer
>>72542000
>and we will never pass any legislation that allows automotive vehicles.
of course, but only because that isn't your particular job. Other people in your state will.
>>72541089
>Again, good luck, faggot. Refer to the First Amendment and cry like a little bitch, you stupid fucker.
So you honestly think you don't need campaign finance reform because the politicians in your state are too honest and the millions they get from private companies for re-election doesn't effect them at all? Are you actually making that argument?
Lets see what happens when the moneys starts flowing.
>>72534069
Shitposting
>>72535313
>ALL jobs with the exception of "jobs" in the arts and humanities
Got news for ya, bub, some of the very first things to be automated are "creative" jobs.
Professions like music, graphic design, and writing follow certain formulas. There's already software that generates compositions in any musical genre that are as good as anything middle-of-the-road out there now, same with graphic design (if you even need software to generate new designs, there's already so many variations on a couple of shitty basic layouts our there now), most journalism and screenwriting involves rules-based systems, and that's being extended to popular writing, too.
>But that's not 'real' art!!
Most people couldn't give a shit. They're fine listening to Nickelback or the latest easy-listening generic pop flavor-of-the-month, they don't notice good design, and not even that many people really read anything after finishing school except for shit like the Twilight books.
Sure, there will be a tiny market for people who want to experience real creative output, but that's getting smaller and smaller, and that will only continue as AIs get better. Shit, even live music is competing with shit like holograms now (I know, it takes a lot of people to put those shows on now, but the tech is only getting better).
tl;dr: Creative professions are rapidly becoming irrelevant.
Not even going to address humanities. No one cares about those anymore, nor do people even remember why we once did.
There will be a rapidly-shrinking group of people who care about things like history or literature, but we will lose that quickly. Look around anywhere, and you'll see that there's been a huge cultural shift against the study of humanities.
Nope.
The jobs of the future will be anything not worth developing a robot to do. Emptying bedpans and wiping old people's asses, at least until we start wholesale euthanasia (after all, without humanities and arts, why would anyone think it was wrong?).
>>72539281
>Land can't be replicated
Space stations with hydroponics and living quarters?
Also, making Starfleet more like the United Citizen Federation/Mobile Infantry would fix the laziness and degeneracy problem. Would you like to know more?
In the USA truck driver is the best paying job that supports most non-college educated men. It might not go away over night but even if trucking company's could pay less for a "truck monitor" that supervises a robot truck it's just a matter of time before the truck monitors are replaced too.
I see self driving cars as the norm in under 30 years if not sooner. It will be so cool to jump Ina car and go to sleep and wake up in a new city. This could lead to Fewer motels/hotels too.
>>72534069
>tfw getting into trucking right now
Hopefully it stays kicking for a while longer
>>72543072
lol, terrible move.
There is no future for it.
>>72536156
>I know I will never trust the life of me and my family to some machine.
Insurance companies will drive this.*
Already, we're seeing self-driving cars have accidents only when they encounter humans behind the wheel.
Pretty soon, you'll get a break on your insurance if you have a car with self-driving capability, then they're will be breaks for having telemetry that indicates you let the car drive itself most of the time.
In a few short years, people driving their cars will be as much of an anachronism as a phone booth.
________________________
*Pun intended
>>72542987
>there's been a huge cultural shift against the study of humanities
>No one cares about those anymore
>7+ billion people
>all 0 of them care
What... but Sociology itself is being ratified and scrutinized by it's own academia this very current year, with the intent to make it an actual science...
I mean, I understand, the only way forwards isn't through flesh and the human scope. But... what?
Kino's Journey had a pretty good episode on total automation in a society. They went on to give themselves jobs so they didn't flip shit because, as should be obvious, humans need stress in their lives. Some may require more or less, but one simply can't get by without at least a tiny bit of stress.
To be honest, complete automation sounds boring as fuck.
>>72537417
I'm not sure it will be the first job.
As long as those fancy terminator bots are still expensive, it'll be better to send cheap, disposable humans in first.
After the price comes down, then they might send robots in first...but only when they're good enough that some Tariq or Abdullah with a 100yo Enfield or a fucking flintlock can't hit a critical bit and knock them down and then loot it for parts.
In the immediate future, however, they're going to have an abundant supply of unemployed, desperately cheap, disposable humans.
>>72534789
Looking at Japan today it could be the end of humanity to turn women lackadaisical.
Which I personally find hilarious, but mostly because of the feminazis claiming to be important.
>>72537465
>Did you know that you could be firing lasers that burn wood with your phone? But, your phone isn't currently equipped with the proper hardware. I guess that technology doesn't exist.
The technology exists, but there's legal limitations to how much power you can have in a hand-held laser (think of the jackasses that point their lasers at pilots at night; now, imagine if they had a laser several magnitudes more powerful...)
>plebs itt haven't read dune
>they think we're automatically going to give our minds over to the machines because they do
You guys may not be human. I'm not even a Jew.
>>72543896
Right...
But we're both saying it now... the technology exists. That was my point with respect to >>72537142's >so it doesn't fucking exist.
>>72538280
>Well guess we need Trump to save us.
Yeah, like he gives a shit.
He wants to maximize his profits. If he can replace the illegals he hires now with robots, that's even better.
Don't think for one moment anyone in this oligarchical kleptocracy has your interests in mind, regardless of what party in which they claim membership or what line of bullshit promises they spout.
>b-but Sanders...
...never had a chance of a snowball in hell. Billiary was annointed by the superdelegates long before the first caucus.
Your votes no longer determine anything except who is going to be the next dogcatcher in your town.
>>72543316
We're still decades and decades away from 100% of all vehicles being self-driving. Maybe even 50 to 100 years, and there are two reasons for this.
1.) The tech needs to be 100% foolproof, all around. I mean standards that far eclipse even the airline industry. The fact that manually operated cars will occupy the road simultaneously with driverless ones means that there are going to be countless accidents involving driverless cars, and that will seriously slow the adoption rate.
2.) It will essentially kill off the vast majority of the auto industry. If it's mandated that all cars be 100% autonomous, then there will be no point in sports cars. There won't be Mustangs or Lamborghinis or even Maximas if no cars are ever allowed to go above 80mph. I'm sure there will still be luxury models that offer a more comfortable sleeping experience, or a better audio system, but the vast majority of people will view their car as a transportation tool rather than a recreation vehicle. I lease a new car every few years because I make good money and enjoy having a shiny new toy to drive around, but if we get to the point where I just hope in my self driving car and take a nap or read a book on my way to work, I'm not going to give a fuck what the car looks or performs like.
It's also worth thinking about from a national security perspective. If 100% of our transport is automated and reliant on GPS, our enemies could bring our entire economy to a standstill by taking out our satellites.
>>72538383
That's fine, just expect to pay for that privilege.
>most people I know don't like driving
>they can't wait for self-driving cars
>they would rather pay less in insurance than pay more to drive themselves
I ride a motorcycle, and I have an old car from the early 60s. I like driving, but I'm not just tired of these people that would rather text or use their phone than drive...I'm getting downright scared.
Frankly, if they don't outlaw driving yourself, I'm kind of in favor self-driving cars because it will make my driving easier (I hope).
>>72538773
>All we will need are people to design better robots really.
We already have robots designing better robots, Senpai.
>>72544720
The tech is way better ahead than what you suggest.
Furthermore, the accidents you speak of will be to blame on the human-controlled vehicles.
Your 2) also makes no sense. Vanity will always exist - back when people had a driver if they owned a cart there were still luxury models and pleb-models. Don't presume vanity would die from cars simply no longer requiring a driver; that's utter nonsense.
Also, it will be unlikely that fully automated cars would be limited to 80mph, but this is a whole other case.
Just because you don't care what your car looks like, doesn't mean others don't.
Your enemies cannot into attacking satellites, as they can't throw rocks that far.
Your paranoia is messy and stupid, sorry (not sorry).
>>72543740
>In the immediate future, however, they're going to have an abundant supply of unemployed, desperately cheap, disposable humans.
>>72537417
Both of you are forgetting how effective drones are.
self driving cars will never become mainstream because of one simple thing
they're expensive, no way average joe has money for that crap. and do you seriously want to leave driving to an AI when there's a 18 year olds driving like a maniac driving next to you?
My retirement plan is to assume that in +30 years labour will be totally redundant and there will be such a massive supply-side surplus due to automation that states will start providing living wages just to produce some demand
...otherwise I'm fucked.
>>72539554
>This shit will never take hold in our lifetime, I fucking guarantee it.
>Man will never fly
>Man will never go to outer space
>We will never need more than 640K of RAM
>Thomas Watson of IBM saying "I see a worldwide market for maybe 2-3 computers"
...blah, blah, blah.
When will you dumbasses ever learn? Technology is already there, and if you actually listen to people other than car enthusiasts, they can't wait for autonomous vehicles.
Nope.
In a few years, we'll have people doing dumb shit like going to shop downtown, but when they can't find a parking place, they'll just tell their car to circle for an hour or two while they go off to buy bon-bons and get their hairy toes waxed.
People will eat that shit up. Even if they never do it, they'll love the idea that they could.
For everyone of us flipping over the new Shelby with the Voodoo engine, there's 10,000 who see their cars as a kind of mobile couch in a box that they'd rather not have to drive.
When America was still heavily rural, cars were freedom. That's not the case for most now.
>Select all images with cars (lol)
>>72545002
>implying China and Russia don't have anti-satellite weapons programs
>implying there aren't millions of Americans who will never willingly surrender their ability to manually operate vehicles
>implying millions of urban trash dindu welfare collecting leeches are going to buy Teslas instead of riding around in unregistered Civic hatchbacks
Getting a country of 1 billion vehicles to go completely driverless will be one of the greatest endeavors in human history. I'd love to see it in my lifetime, but there are going to be some pretty sizeable hurdles, including some that we can't even imagine yet.
Daily reminder for unbelievers.
>“Everything that can be invented has been invented.” — Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899.
>“Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons.” — Popular Mechanics, forecasting the relentless march of science, 1949
> “I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.” — Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943
>“I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won’t last out the year.” — The editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall, 1957
> “But what … is it good for?” — Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968,commenting on the microchip.
> “There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.” — Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977
> “This ‘telephone’ has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us.” — Western Union internal memo, 1876.
>“The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?” — David Sarnoff’s associates in response to his urgings for investment in the radio in the 1920s.
I fix soda machines at restaurants, impossible to outsource and automate. Those fancy Coke freestyle machines? I install them too and program them. They are equally a pain in the ass as traditional fountains. Pic related
>>72545842
>Russia and China are the enemies
>caring about what american dindus are doing
>more about dindus
Dude, fuck off - you suck.
>>72545994
>"Nobody will ever have to walk again." - inventor of the Segway, before his Segway drove him off a cliff.
We'll also have to see how the lawsuit plays out after the first death occurs from a driverless car. If the family gets to sue Tesla or Google then things are going to get very interesting.
We don't have the hegemony to be a driverless country. Anyone who REALLY needs a car right now can go buy a functional shit box off of Craigslist for $500. That's never going to be the case with an autonomous car.
Driverless cars only work 100% if there are no manual operators on the road, and that's flat out not going to happen in the US for a very long time, if ever.
>>72546827
The point is that the fact that you can't imagine it ever working is a problem with your imagination and not a physical restriction of the universe.
People in the 1920s would never ever had imagined a 4000 ton plane flying either, and yet the Airbus A380 does several thousands flights a year.
I think you're underestimating how fast technological advancement comes to us.
>>72546738
If you've never been to America you should shut the fuck up.
I live in a major city, and like every major city, half the population is minority and on welfare. I've been in 3 accidents over the past 15 years, not a fault for any of them, and all 3 were caused by unregistered drivers (one of whom fled the scene outright). For every affluent urban dweller driving a nice, safety feature laden vehicle, there are a dozen animals blowing through red lights in Civics or on four wheelers and dirtbikes.
A driverless America is a beautiful thought, but it's a fantasy as things currently stand. There are far too many shit bags dragging the rest of us down.
>>72547499
Oh, it's not an America-only thing. If it is, it made it's way all over North America.
Out of most of the jobs, programmers will probably be the one to last the longest. It's a job that will remain until AI are able to code themselves, which is VERY far into the future.
>>72547726
>which is VERY far into the future.
Or right around the corner.
>>72537433
>You can't have people "just sit around".
dis nigga gets it
all the others: read brave new world... the reason to work there is just that people aren't sitting around getting cabin fever
>>72534251
No, see the point of the thread was to post jobs that are going away...
>solicitors will be safe
solicitors will go before there's mass unemployment of truckers
any data centric roll will go long before many blue collar jobs.
The computer science world has been working on big data for a while now. It's only time until improved A.I. algorithms and data mining techniques yield a breakthrough.
Google will release a search system that will workout the context of a loosely structured search query (i.e english).
After that point data just has to be cleaned and structured to make: doctors, lawyers, solicitors ect.. superfluous.
Our lifetime will be an interesting one There'll probably be a global war.
>>72547811
I just want to put it out there, that while it may be around the corner, it won't mean that programmers vanish off the face of the Earth around said corner (maybe into said far-ish future).
Unless you're fine with no relatable human being knowing how a car decides not to run humans over, but only that it shows that it won't run other people over if they're on a crosswalk. Or, what decisions the auto-surgeon makes based upon each circumstance- if it even operates on a case-by-case basis. Maybe it just performs tasks and doesn't care if your heart is on the left side.
What's the fastest way to deal with a pedestrian? Answer: straight through them.
>>72547499
Been there once, three weeks. I wasn't really impressed, but eating at a diner looking like something from an 80's movie was pretty rad.
I've stopped paying attention to you now, though.
>>72544720
>1.) The tech needs to be 100% foolproof, all around. I mean standards that far eclipse even the airline industry. The fact that manually operated cars will occupy the road simultaneously with driverless ones means that there are going to be countless accidents involving driverless cars, and that will seriously slow the adoption rate.
Nope. It just has to be better than humans and that's easy. A self driving car will never be tired, distracted by texting or putting on makeup or eating a cheeseburger while driving.
>>72540637
If you get your shit stolen, you're docked the hours it takes to get you back on the road with a new haul, and you get fucked by getting shorter hauls with less pay.
I have a theory:
>An intelligent high IQ society will naturally have lower birth rates over time.
> An intelligent society will naturally automate and there will be less demand for labor.
> If the increase in automation and the decrease in population are fairly equal I think that this will all even out.
Does my theory make sense? There will always be a need for creators and inventors and people to actually create the machines for automation. If over time the human population decreases in first world countries proportional to the increase in automation maybe it will all work out.
>>72548432
>After that point data just has to be cleaned and structured to make: doctors, lawyers, solicitors ect.. superfluous.
what you are talking about is called expert system and is in use since the 80s
when i studied for my degree in cs we had the taks to write a little one our selves which could also explain it's answers.... long story short : one shoudl never ever value the opinion of an expert system over a well trained human.
why? because creativity and handling the unexpected.....
i suspect that there will be something like the butlerian jihad from the dune books in the future with all higher level ai banned afterwards.....
>>72544720
>It's also worth thinking about from a national security perspective.
Oh boy. One of your kind.
That's as stupid as saying we have a national security problem because most of our locks use keys or because we all eat food.
>>72546492
>I fix soda machines at restaurants, impossible to outsource and automate.
lol, nope. There's a huge push for self-servicing machines at the moment.
>>72546827
>We'll also have to see how the lawsuit plays out after the first death occurs from a driverless car. If the family gets to sue Tesla or Google then things are going to get very interesting.
People kill others everyday with cars. Lawsuits don't stop that from happening.
>>72550612
This would be a car killing a person, not a person killing another person with a car.
>>72535859
>I predict automatic cars will have to have human "operators" in them to oversee them, even if they drive themselves.
Yeah. They're called passengers
>>72551279
You're mischaracterizing it.
It would be:
1. A lawsuit quickly settle out of court
2. A software patch to all other existing cars so that that type of accident would never happen again.
And that's a lot better than humans can manage.
>>72551279
Actually, it would be way more likely for it to be a person dying from torpedoing a robot.
Just like no one blames the robot in the factory for squishing a human being who acts outside of his boundaries - and for instance climbs into the massive cardboard contractor to pick up his watch and hit the ON-button on his way back up.
Robot cars would not be slaying humans - human error would always be to blame for any disasters involving a robot car.
>>72536156
You're showing your youth. Ask a 60 year old how much change is possible in 50 years. They used to get prescribed cigarettes from their doctor to cure anxiety
>>72534069
Any job that does not require thinking will be gone first.
At this point a base income for every person in the first world would be necessary.
Then eventually the AI would start doing the thinking and we'd probably just die out or we would become stupid animals while the AI carries our culture forward.
>>72545098
Drones are cheap and effective but boring. I want to see bipedal terminators that can use the same weapons as their human squad mates.
>>72534069
Msc. Business Informatics here, I deal a lot with what is now being called the fourth industrial revolution.
Most (probably not all but certainly 60%) of the following will be without jobs: Surgeons, Anesthesiologists, Logistics personnel, sales people (internet shopping will increase when we get quick drone delivery / self driving cars), mailmen, car repair, bankers (ai will be much better and faster at dealing with the stock market and most banking processes can be automated, look up high frequency trading), livestock farmers (soon we will grow most of our meat in vats, tech has already been invented and well on its way to scaling up), legal aids, librarians, translators, most administrative personnel, accountants, DMV employees, manufacturing employees, pilots, sailors (and other people working in harbors and boats once all that is automated), analysts, camera operators, journalists (you might not notice, but a lot of articles are already written by software), shrimp peelers, meteorologists, secretaries, personal assistants, butlers, dietitians, fitness instructors.
>>72552135
DID YOU LEARN NOTHING FROM WAT..-
This is actually likely to happen in our life-time.
Bostong is currently getting pretty good at making bipedal-robots that don't fall down upon taking their first step.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVlhMGQgDkY
>>72552655
>when he gets up
This shit is so uncanny valley holy shit
The fucking Amish were right
>>72552581
>livestock farmers (soon we will grow most of our meat in vats, tech has already been invented and well on its way to scaling up)
expensive, stupid and no. All taste tests for this shit was quickly rejected.
You must be one of those vertical farming faggots.
>>72553121
Not as expensive as having to grow and water tons of food to ship it to cattle to keep that fed and watered only to have that transported to a slaughterhouse, refrigerate it from there on as it is transported again to distribution centers and from there on to stores. Vat meat can be grown on site or nearby and takes much less resources (read: money).
Make no mistake, its an early tech, only here for two years. Cellphones took a couple of decades as well, this will too, but it will come to be, there is just too much money to be made from it.
Vertical farming is retarded unless you are Japan or Singapore and have no room for farming.
>>72552947
I've no idea what that means, but yes this is pretty fucking scary.
Also, combine it with this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skynet
I for one am looking forward to welcome our robot overlords.
>>72553555
>Not as expensive as having to grow and water tons of food to ship it to cattle to keep that fed
Uh, you greatly over estimate dropping corn and hay versus very carefully soaking stemcells in chemicals to make a steak that tastes like a baseball glove.
It takes more money to "grow vat meat" as you say and there is no indication that it will be cheaper, ever.
Anyone can raise a chicken in their back yard.
You're talking about building a laboratory for a couple hundred million to produce a few pounds of shitty chewy "meat".
The food markets are going towards more natural, less processed and organic anyway.
Fuck, even "soylent" is making more of an impact than lab grown meat. You're off base.
>>72544881
>most people I know don't like driving
Great anecdote, faggot.
>>72545739
>Technology is already there
You will not pass the legislature in your own fucking lifetime. They will never be allowed on public roads. Fuck your optimistic desires. It simply will never pass in the next 50 years.
>When America was still heavily rural
You dumb fucking nigger.
>>72536156
if you've ever flown on a plane you've been at the mercy of an autopilot
>>72553952
"Uncanny valley" is a term coined by a SciFi author to explain the middle point where robots resemble us in movement and appearance, but not enough to be comfortable to watch, creating a creepy effect to the viewer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley
>The uncanny valley is a hypothesis in the field of aesthetics which holds that when features look and move almost, but not exactly, like natural beings, it causes a response of revulsion among some observers. The "valley" refers to the dip in a graph of the comfort level of beings as subjects move toward a healthy, natural likeness described in a function of a subject's aesthetic acceptability
>>72554499
With an actual pilot there to override the robot should it fuck up. Nice try, Randy.
>>72554154
>You will not pass the legislature in your own fucking lifetime. They will never be allowed on public roads.
Give a good reason other than simply stating that like it's a fact. You don't have any and the companies pushing for it have many billions invested.
>>72554733
>as if the reason why a pilot ever takes the plane off of autopilot is because the computer is "fucking up"
>>72554557
Ah, that's pretty cool.
... I'd say the current stage robots are on right now are a bit too.... non-humanoid to be creepy. But we're definitely getting there.
>>72535313
swallow the bitter future boy, AI is the next step of evolution...
>>72554751
Because public opinion about them is negative, whether your hipster faggot circle thinks so or not. The public still does not trust a robot enough to invest the lives of them and their children to some magical self driving car. You might, but the general public as a whole does not.
>>72554901
Strawman. I said if an autopilot should fuck up, the pilot would take manual control. There are plenty of gauges and sensors to tell the pilot if something needs to be done if the autopilot happens to miss it. Such as air pressure, speed, altitude, etc.
>>72555114
>Because public opinion about them is negative
No, your opinion is. People will try it and like it.
Like those new fangled "horseless carriages".
>>72555114
You realize that modern planes, with their censors and gauges don't allow the pilot to directly control the plane right? Every action the pilot takes is told to the computer and then the plane moves. You seem to trust the computer then.
Do you think that when you turn the steering wheel in your car that YOU are the one actually doing something?
They aren't analog devices.
I don't like where the world is heading to with all this AI stuff
I just wanna live like a amish at this point
>>72555520
>People will try it and like it.
>will
Do you have any fucking clue how long it takes to pass new legislation? Your hipster faggots all on board with Siri driving your around and shit won't even vote on shit like this. You faggots don't vote regardless. And this is after legislation is even introduced. I mean, god damn. If this shit just magically got introduced tomorrow it would take at least 20 years to pass.
>>72534069
By 2050
Totally annihilated tier: (over 90% loss)
>code monkeys
>truckers
>taxi fags
>various jobs linked with imputing data into a computer
>oil engineers
>coal-anything
>store clerks in general
>textile workers
>assembly line workers (what are even left by now)
Really bad tier: (70-90% loss)
>teachers
>Primary and secondary sectors in general (muh miners, muh trades, muh plumbing)
>the bloated bureaucracy (could lose anywhere between 50 and 95%, depending on the political climate)
>accountants and white collar office workers in general
>non-creative humanitaries (historyfags etc.)
Endurable (20-50% loss)
>STEM
>economics/finance/business
Will flourish tier (some gain)
>medical professions in general (ageing population)
>advisors of (insert field)
>expert in (insert field)
>the most highly qualified people in most professions (the 2-5% that run society)
>research jobs
Will fucking explode tier (+100% gain)
>people with very niche skills
>HR/PR specialist
>marketing
>A.I. engineers
Hyperinflation (+1000%)
>art fags(painters/writers/musicians/entartainers)
The way I see it, there will be 70-80% unemployed on universal income, doing some very occasional work, 10-20% doing real work (upkeeping the automatization) and 10% artfags that live off commisions microtransactions (like mass customized entartainment)
>>72556115
>Do you have any fucking clue how long it takes to pass new legislation?
fast when money is passing hands. you act like google, tesla, toyota, ford, bmw and mercedes can't lobby.
>we'll never have satellites, internet, phones, cell phones, cars, roads or spacecraft! It's too risky, the infrastructure is too big and people will reject it!
yeah sure.
>>72556397
>teachers
You can't put children in front of a computer all day and expect a human being to emerge from it.
How many drooling, mouth breathing NEETs do you want to create?
>>72556115
>if this shit just magically got introduced tomorrow, it would take at least 20 years to pass
Well, I have news for you. This has been happening with various corporate entities well before 2016. So, it's at least 17 years off from now.
>>72556397
>HR/PR specialist
>in a declining, automated job market
>economics/finance/business
>somehow a human is going to do this jobs better and faster than a machine
You're a complete faggot.
Isn't Bulgaria known for glue huffing?
>>72534069
>Trucking
Lol. This meme needs to die.
>>72556980
The tech exists now. No one actually needs a fat fuck trucker do drive shit across the country.
>>72534069
tfw plumber that won't be replaced cause even niggers need water.
>>72556626
>fast when money is passing hands. you act like google, tesla, toyota, ford, bmw and mercedes can't lobby.
You act like those companies are actually lobbying for this shit. Why do they give a fuck whether the sheep drive themselves or some magical 1984 style vehicle drives them?
>>72556896
>at least 17 years
>at least
Okay.
You dumb faggots still don't understand what it takes to pass this shit. I work in my state's DMV as a software developer and small shit like $5 fee increases requires the Hand of God to pass. Passing automatic cars is going to take decades, senpaitachi.
Psychotherapist reporting in
Probably one of the long term safest jobs around
>>72557464
Okay. So... let me get this straight.
First you said that it would, at least, be passed in 60 years.
Then you said it would never be passed.
Then you said it would take at least 20 years.
So... despite my attempts to work with the figures that you're giving us, you've come yet again to change the ETA. I'll just be taking your $5 fee with a pocket of salt.
>>72534069
HVAC
All custom work.
>>72557464
>You act like those companies are actually lobbying for this shit.
Are you living under a fucking rock? Of course they are. They are investing millions and millions into self driving cars, they have huge PR campaigns for them and they are currently lobby the government, right now, for this legislation.
>Why do they give a fuck whether the sheep drive themselves or some magical 1984 style vehicle drives them?
Because they sell cars, that's why. Advertising a cheaper, safer and more reliable car makes business sense.
also if you're afraid of the government watching you but you probably have a smart phone- or even just a cell phone in your pocket at all times.
>>72557116
Then who is going to deliver my pallet of computers inside the building and make me sign for it
>>72534251
2nd post the worst
>>72534251
>authors
Ahahahaha...what? People can write and create stories.
>>72556809
>How many drooling, mouth breathing NEETs do you want to create?
By my estimates, 80% of the population, that will be paid just to exist and be good goys. School is becoming more and more like a second kindergarden where children are just taught how to read and have a very basic education in other subjects. Just look at the average retard, who has formally passed high school but knows fuckall otherwise.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mWtWz_aGyk
>HR/PR specialist
The goys have to be bombarded with commercials from all sides
>economics/finance/business
They are fucked, but those professions aren't just about the stock market. There will always be some token financial consultants/advisors/misc going around, since AI can't really create a business and set it's guidelines or overall financial strategy- it can just execute given tasks.
>>72558307
You act like there isn't robots for that.
Again, just because you're ignorant doesn't mean something doesn't exist.
>>72534069
Taxis are dying off now due to Uber.
Would inflation be involved? Blacks losing jobs would increase crime rates.
>>72558462
lol, they have computer generated text now. It's becoming a problem.
>>72558481
There isn't
Asimo cannot pull a pallet with just the right speed to jump over a 10 inch gap then ask a security guard to call my cell number.
>>72558307
You know when you get a package delivered to your home, and sometimes they get you to sign on that digital dongle with the fake stylo?
I have a feeling that the above will be involved. All hands dealing with the shipment will probably have formal training and various contracts attached via ball and chain, such that they only need to unload the shipment and wave the truck off.
>>72558612
Wait what?
>>72534069
>I think marketers, solicitors, will be safe.
AI will wipe out white collar (office/knowledge) work. Hell you don't even
need real AI, e.g. ad sales work has been wiped out by the automated systems.
>>72558528
http://www.businessinsider.com/why-uber-is-investing-in-autonomous-cars-2015-8
>>72558642
>implying any of these tools need to be humanoid to do one specific task.
Next you'll tell me there are no drone fork lifts.
>>72557810
It will take a gorillion years to pass whether city dwelling faggot ass thinks so or not. That's the point of all my impossible-to-actually-predict-precisely-because-I'm-not-God figures represents.
>>72558187
>Are you living under a fucking rock? Of course they are. They are investing millions and millions into self driving cars, they have huge PR campaigns for them and they are currently lobby the government, right now, for this legislation.
[citation needed]
>cheaper, safer and more reliable car
Pic related. You stupid faggot think this is all true, holy shit. All the retardation aside, you think these companies are interested in making means to consume their products less and for cheaper?
>also if you're afraid of the government watching you but you probably have a smart phone- or even just a cell phone in your pocket at all times.
Completely unrelated, fuck off and make a thread about this if you want to discuss it.
>>72534069
I think all job that are related to relational, will be safe
>>72559280
>[citation needed]
www.cnet.com/news/
techcrunch.com/
cnn.com/tech
look, it doesn't matter to me if you're ill informed. You probably don't even read the front page of any news sites so how are you expected to know anything?
>>72559516
>jobs that are related to relational
Muhammad please, practice your English.
>>72556809
>You can't put children in front of a computer all day and expect a human being to emerge from it. How many drooling, mouth breathing NEETs do you want to create?
Dunno, how many NEETS would Mister Moneybags the robot factory owner like his tutored children to compete against/rule over? Oh wait, that's what this entire debate is about... 90% of humans becoming obsolete as a commodity.
The face of this future is an elite of cybernetic god-kings ruling courts of collared and tagged human vassels and AI, who enforce and administrate over whatever collection of survivalists, dirt farmers and luddite serfs they want to allow to live on their land.
>>72559520
>www.cnet.com/news/
>techcrunch.com/
>cnn.com/tech
>legitimate sources
My fucking sides have left Earth.
>>72560104
What the fuck do you want? Automated cars are covered at least weekly by tech news.
Are you implying they are lying when they say a company is showcasing a self driving car? Like it's not happening, just a fantasy?
Are you on meth?
>>72559280
So, why didn't you just stick with never, or "a gorillion" instead of 20, 50, 60, or what have you? Not to mention... if you can't predict a reasonable, consistent, educated guess on when your stated requirements for self-driving cars would be "a go"... why should we listen to you?
You're a software engineer at your regional DMV, right? If you're not God, and can't predict these things precisely, you have to have a margin of error (which should exist because you're a software engineer at your regional DMV- you are the self-proclaimed individual with experience and credibility). Your margin of error should then be your final estimate, because according to you, you will never be able to predict (precisely) what the figure will be. That usually is the rationale behind making a claim, if not spouting conjecture-
Actually, stop the press.
You said it would take "a gorillion" years to pass so and so. Then you said that this was the point of your impossible-to-actually-predict-precisely-because-I'm-not-God figures.
Which are impossible-to-actually-predict-precisely, by your logic and your words. So basically, you're predicting an unknowable variable, based upon your unknowable, unfalsifiable evidence?
Oh, okay.
Hyperinflation (+1000%)
>art fags
this fucking meme, either
1) it will be automated
2) will be one of few jobs not automated -> people will flock to it -> inflation
>>72560310
syrup anon, there's no point in arguing with ignorant people.
His primary source for "information" is 4chan obviously and he's skeptical of that.
>>72537214
Your way sucks. Annual property taxes on IP would better harmonize with market dynamics.
>>72560328
Now that you mention it expect degenerative art.
>>72540631
Well let me know when it gets here, cause so far it hasn't.
People cite compilers as examples of this because of their optimizations.
Not how it fucking works at all. Compilers optimize solely based on cases that are written beforehand by the people who programmed the compilers.
Self driving cars are the new flying cars we all thought was gonna happen. I mean I know most of you millenial fags don't know how to drive a stick but most people enjoy driving themselves. Plus if the computer crashed which every system fails at some point do you think a lawsuit won't be slapped on to whichever company made it?
>>72560328
Artfags will take over the world. Every tard that can make a mix, write a fanfic or draw will take up commisions for them sweet additional shekels per month over the universal income.
>>72542987
>There's already software that generates compositions in any musical genre that are as good as anything middle-of-the-road out there now
You can't just say that without providing examples
>>72549011
Add quantum mechanics maths to decision making to add haziness; simulating creativity.
>>72560236
>What the fuck do you want?
Sources. Give me a source.
>>72560310
>So, why didn't you just stick with never, or "a gorillion" instead of 20, 50, 60, or what have you?
Because I tried providing as accurate an estimate as I could.
>You're a software engineer at your regional DMV, right?
I work for my state, on the system the Department uses at all the local county stations.
>the rest of your shitty post
I work closely with the heads of the Department and am currently working on altering the system to take into account legislature passed through Congress last session and that needs to take effect by the next fiscal year, which is only a few months away. I know a thing or two about how our laws work.
>>72551700
Those are different cases though. Those machines don't process input and decide whether or not to do something. They're essentially just tools.
The big conundrum will be that the autonomous car made the decision that ended up killing a human being
>>72550468
>There's a huge push for self-servicing machines at the moment.
lol, what.
We'll be on mars before you have a self-servicing vending machine.
I'ts more likely that we will have material science advancements that will result in a vending machine that can last for far longer.
Or, more likely, we create replicators, so you recycle the broken vending machine and 3D print a new one.
>>72555520
>You realize that modern planes, with their censors and gauges don't allow the pilot to directly control the plane right? Every action the pilot takes is told to the computer and then the plane moves. You seem to trust the computer then.
You don't really know much about planes, do you?
All of those can be overridden.
>>72534882
>>72536245
This. I took a paralegal certification course back in 2009. In addition to the traditional methods of "hitting the stacks" for case research, serving a summons, setting up a deposition, the latter part of the course was using the WESTLAW database.
Glad that I saw the writing on the wall back then, and hedged my career prospects by earning an ESL teacher certification. At least there's always a demand for English language education in this era of globalization.
>>72560978
>Self driving cars are the new flying cars we all thought was gonna happen.
They have the now, idiot.
Fuck where do you people live? What kind of news do you consume?
flying cars are multi-million dollar toys. Self driving cars are an actual, existing and affordable technology.
>>72562049
>Self driving cars are an actual, existing and affordable technology.
Where? How much can you buy one for?
>>72561493
>Sources. Give me a source.
You won't read technology news sites so what do you consider a source?
How about:
https://www.google.com/search?q=self+driving+car&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#q=self+driving+car&tbm=nws
Or why not Google or Ford or Mercedes or Tesla?
So you actually expect me to give you sources to the entire development of self-driving cars going back decades?
>>72561970
>All of those can be overridden.
>people actually steer the plane and lower the wheels for landing and make it go forward by going "vroom!"
No the computer does it. All of the buttons and censors in the cockpit are pretty much decorations to make the pilot feel "in charge". Same with all new cars.
>>72562583
>No the computer does it. All of the buttons and censors in the cockpit are pretty much decorations to make the pilot feel "in charge"
But that's fucking wrong.
Even in massively more complex planes such as modern fighter jets they all serve a function and all flight computers and limits can be bypassed.
>>72562224
You can buy a new Tesla in a couple of years.
The tech is here now. It's no longer science fiction.
Cars can drive themselves today, we just won't let them.
>>72562367
Top wew, faggot.
>>72562737
bypassed, but still, the pilot takes an action like turning a knob or pressing a button or hitting a switch and the computer then takes the action.
>>72561493
Okay. See what happens when you bother to actually get behind your words instead of just typing about "dumb faggots"? Look at this. This is nice.
So your new accurate estimate is now "never", because you've already put across the notion that attempting to establish a possible, absolute truth on when self-driving cars will be the norm is not an easy task- if not because you don't think the technology will attempt to take off, but because you're adamantly against it.
At least you acknowledged Congress. But, if you're not new to laws, you shouldn't be new to various attempts to change existing laws; some laws are changed in order to accommodate for some new phenomenon (e.g. the advent of smartphones over cellphones, or anti-smoke laws). After all, you're pushing against any sort of proliferation of the aforementioned technology whatsoever, and it has many applications that probably span over/provoke the minds of those who deal with a lot of what goes on in your rural state, that much I can guarantee.
>>72541554 isn't as unrealistic as you think. I could be moved to find real-life examples where the adamant opposition to "this or that" resulted in some serious shit-eating for a community, let alone a state or a small country. A prime leaf example is Quebec. Maurice Duplessis was some kind of man.
People have agendas. If you're confident that your agendas override the agendas of others, so be it.
>>72562738
>now
>in a couple of years
Okay then. At least you're consistent.
Dunno if you've seen this one
http://www.wired.com/2016/02/googles-self-driving-car-may-caused-first-crash/
>>72562916
>Dunno if you've seen this one
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year
>>72562889
Dude, stop trying to act like you know what the fuck you're talking about when it comes to planes.
They don't act anywhere near to the level of self-driving cars. Most autonomous systems in a plane merely just limit what the input can do depending on conditions, such as how fast the plane will pull up at certain speeds.
It's pretty much at the same level of pressing a button on your keyboard and your computer decides to enter the key on the screen. Sure the computer handles it, but it's a meaningless distinction because it's still a command that is carried out.
Planes still must be piloted. You can't just press a button to take it all the way around the world.
>>72562916
The companies have these cars it's just fuckheads like
>>72562739
who resist their sale.
I would buy one today if I can.
>>72534069
Steve is already dead, for one
>>72534069
>Trucking
I'd like to see a computer attempt to complete a 90 degree backup with a 52 ft trailer.
Computers will never replace truck drivers in our lifetime simply because there's no way you can have a 80k pound tractor trailer rolling down the road without someone behind the wheel. Driving around town, making turns, etc would be hard if not impossible for a computer, and many accidents involving deaths would occur.
>>72563082
>It's pretty much at the same level of pressing a button on your keyboard and your computer decides to enter the key on the screen. Sure the computer handles it, but it's a meaningless distinction because it's still a command that is carried out.
it's not meaningless. Especially the more sophisticated computers will become.
Eventually it's just humans pretending to be in charge while computers fly the planes, drive the cars and conduct the trains. And these machines will have systems in place to make sure the humans don't make mistakes, while making them feel special that they push the meaningless buttons and switches.
Many new cars have crash prevention and lane stabilization features. It's what's happening, right now.
