now: you need to go to college so you can get a job and make money!

the future: you need to get a robot so it can get a job and make money!

Unemployment rises along with crime rate.

Universities get flooded and being an engineer/doctor is the bare minimum to make a living wage and no longer prestigious.

>>1153851
old video but it speaks the truth, somewhat. Well we either gonna have some "24h @ home" welfare - which is highly unlikely some people say OR people will be limited to 1 baby until only super rich who own the AI robots will survive, because monopoly- only 1 true winner.


So, yeah it's a shitstorm out there and sadly its only getting bigger.

Maybe it start to become more like star trek the next generation, where material need no longer is the driving force behind humanity's growth. Where poverty and disease have been eradicated, and people are truly free to make what they will of their lives.

Nah, what am I thinking, I'm on /biz/, we don't believe in that crap. TRUMP 2016.

Should I invest in google now because in the future they will basically be the government?

>>1153886
soooo people will fight about useless nonsense or having sex all the time- like they aren't doing it right now. fuck is your point, nigger?

>>1153932
Uh.. I don't know, man. No point, I guess.

>>1153888
google isn't going anywhere any time soon so... yes.

>>1153940

sorry but i really want to believe the same, it's just that certain powerful people bet against humanity every time.

Just mass poverty like in Africa or India. More crime everywhere, but rich people will all get armored cars and private security.

>>1153851
Over time - depopulation. In the long run (~200-300 years) - a star trek society based from the rich, their descendants and the brains who made it happen. If the average IQ to that time will rise to ~140-150, it will be a magnificent time to live.

>>1153851
Surely this means investing in precious metals and robot manufacturing companies would see us all billionaires by 2050...

>>1153952
I think you're wrong. Why would there be poverty, if we got robots?

>>1153952
This. Anyone who thinks we're headed toward a Star Trek-esque future, or a world where disease and poverty no longer exist, are simply delusional.

The only option is to scramble your way as close to the top of the shit heap before it all collapses. If you're on top you'll still get hurt, but at least you won't get crushed.

>>1153963
>Over time - depopulation
There's no way depopulation can happen when you have niggers in Africa and India multiplying like there's no tomorrow. Humans can survive and multiply in absolute poverty without any issue, that's a proven fact. Actually, the poorer they are, the more they multiply.
Anyway, you can always build old fashioned societies of supply, demand and human labour by limiting trade with the robot-led world. As long as you have nukes, everything is fine. I feel like countries like Russia and NK can easily go this route.
There are plenty of strong developed world nations who are governed in heavily socialistic ways. So in case robots take over, they will definitely tax the shit out of them and redistribute wealth as basic income. Actually, the whole of Europe, Canada and Australia are like that.

>>1154197
>There's no way depopulation can happen when you have niggers in Africa and India multiplying like there's no tomorrow.
You're wrong. Once they literally have no low wage jobs, there is no way that many savage can keep multiplying without any money.


>thinking socialism will work in robot society
fuck no. the rich will literally be able to do whatever they want. prices will be so cheap due to robots that it may not even matter. socialism will never work in any society ever btw.

>>1154046
more government dependant gimme dats, it's always been the agenda.. to get people dependant on the government then have the shrinking middle class to pay for it.

There was an economist awhile ago, Jeremy Rifkin, who believed that automation would foster growth in what he called the "social economy". Because most will be locked out of the "hard" economy, emphasis will shift to volunteer and low-paid type professions that have people help people. Think counselors, "life coaches", social workers, etc.

So far, I still think that's the best scenario. Worst-case, enormous stratification.

>>1153886
The reason this absolutely cannot happen is because of limited resources. Star Trek came out when the world population was 3.4 billion, they didn't even comprehend the problems of over 7.1 billion like we do today, and it's still growing.

>>1154046
>why would there be poverty, if we got robots?
Because you don't get a robot. Corporations do. Carl's Jr. is trying to completely automate their stores, removing the jobs of the people who work there. Nothing will replace the income that those jobs gave to those people, it's gone and the profits go to the company. I do the same thing at IBM; I design systems so we only need 3 software engineers to do the jobs of 10. Nothing replaces the 7 jobs, the profits go to the company.

>>1155268
>Nothing replaces the 7 jobs, the profits go to the company.
doesn't matter because the prices will be so low

>>1155301
Except they won't be, not for decades until a crash. Carl's Jr. plans to charge the same amount for burgers, especially with the upped electricity bills and to cover the initial cost of building the machines. IBM has no intention of lowing the price of its products just because I helped them replace people, if anything they intend to raise them over time because that's how they've always viewed their assets: appreciating.

We've already started the automation revolution and you're seeing the results: less good paying jobs, more unemployed or underemployed, and a fuckton more media available to keep the masses occupied. This trend will continue until we reach India-tier or a collapse occurs.

>>1155312
The future is Weed and VR for the Masses.

>>1155301

Do you think businesses are content to lower their prices to balance their new profit made from 7 less employees?
It's going in their pocket, anon. If they can get away with it they'll keep the price exactly where it is. Maybe once it reaches a point where these technologies are commonplace in whatever industry competition will force them to reduce it, but that'll take time, and in that time a lot of people will be struggling.

>>1153851
>muh massive ai layoffs

I see the "robots are going to replace us" threads all of the time on this board and it's probably the most inaccurate assessments of the future. It's the new generation's version of flying cars, or the "we're going to run out of oil" line that freaked everyone out in the 70s, and late 90s to the mid 2000s.

>Carlos Jr. is looking to become fully automated
and you still need people to maintain the machines, check stock, manage the restaurant, clean it, etc. You can comment about downsizing and full replication but most jobs as of now aren't close to be replicated by robots. It won't happen in our lifetime.

>>1153851
The service industry will keep bloating, so giving each other haircuts, doing each other's nails, selling each other coffee, and giving each other shady back-alley handjobs will just transfer the money around and around until it runs out and the system collapses.

And, of course, with the boomers getting older, there'll be a vast demand for people to care for their incontinent asses because they're still sat on savings and assets.
Although I'd like to see them left to rot in their own shit, frankly.

>>1154197
>the poorer they are, the more they multiply.
That's because when you're a subsistence farmer, children are an asset rather than a burden. They produce food, and you don't have to pay them beyond housing and feeding them.
And you have lots of them to combat infant mortality; if two out of three children die, you have three children for every one you want working.
In an industrial society with no child labour, kids are a burden.

In the end, though, if people can't afford to eat, either the price of food will drop to meet income, or you have a famine until population contracts to available jobs.

>>1155226
So, haircuts, handjobs, and pep talks?

Also, any remaining employees will have to become multi-skilled. Replace the machine in a pinch, clean and maintain the machine, clean the floors, load the machine, empty the machine, crawl under the conveyor belts to unstick the rats from the machine, de-ice the freezers, etc.
I work in a warehouse, but I do 5-6 different jobs over the course of a week, and I'm trained for twice that at least. I'm tempted to get my job title changed to dogsbody or gofer to reflect that.