How many more jobs will be replaced by software in the near future? Was discussing the point of software and what it's capable of with my girlfriend and offhandedly mentioned that jobs like hers could be automated in the near future and she got all offended.
Thoughts?
-Drivers
-Remaining assembly line workers
-Pilots
>>7713503
>-Drivers
>-Pilots
Liability lawyers say no.
>>7713503
All I can say is that more cerebral jobs aren't necessarily safer. It's important to realize that very often the skills that require the least conscious thought rely on those human abilities that have been evolving the longest.
>>7713503
Should I skip out on a math degree?
I want to get a BS in it but it seems like people wouldn't need it anymore these days because of it :^(
Also I read this article about IBM replacing radiologists from hospitals so that's one
>>7713519
Hmmm, new theory
-Liability lawyers
>>7713607
I like the way this anon thinks
>>7713519
>Liability lawyers say no.
HAHAHA,,, that's what they said about cars!
>"Cars will never replace horses because cars are dangerous"
We all know what happened. Same will happen with truckers and other professional drivers.
Personally, I'd rather fly in a fully automated plane than a plane flown by a pilot... that's after automated plane has flown for thousands of hours of course.
>>7713503
>replaced by software
>assembly line
wat
>>7713606
I got a BS in math. I went to a PhD program for a bit to study it more too.
I would avoid choosing math, and I'd focus on something else (maybe CS and some Biz). The people in the PhD program either became skill-less pathetic miserable soulless drones, skill-less raging sociopathic assholes, or left to make software so that they could actually make enough to afford rent and buy food other than ramen. None had social skills or lives.
Math is awesome, shows you've got a rigorous mindset. But learn something else along the way too.
>>7713503
and the secondary effects of these job losses, jobs that arn't replaced, just gone.
-drivers.. so
-traffic cops, meter maids & high way patrol
-body shops
-dwi &accident lawyers
++bartenders..lol but true
-
>>7713649
Holy shit lol didn't even think of those
Haha I can't wait.
ofc it will be like that soon
you can add many more jobs to it in the far future.
take political managing position for example, all they (should) do is distribute budget or goods, according to needs. a program can do that better soon, using with big data.
I've studied graphic design and if I could not draw as awesome as I can, my job could now be done by wordpress templates and design apps too
social jobs (kindergarden, nurse etc.) and motion graphics is still very human dependent tho
and art is still undisputed human territory
>>7713680
That's why capitalism must die.
Person A and person B perform some work.
Person B obtains a robot that performs person A's work.
Capitalism: B gets double the wealth, A gets nothing. Alternatively B hires A to do his job and sits on his ass all day while A sweats so that B could get another robot to replace someone else?
Wouldn't it be nicer if both A and B got the same wealth for half the effort?
>>7713503
Replacing humans? In any aspect of work.
It strongly depends on the culture, the education and the minds of the population that is affected by the replacement though. These "factors" affect the time it takes to replace the jobs and decide if the replacements happen in the first place. Culture changes over time though, so any definite prediction is quite unreliable.
>>7713966
>A works hard, does well in school and university
>B drops out of high school
>A ends up building his own company
>B ends up working there, putting 2 wires together on a production line, day in, day out
>A sees that B is a dumb fuck and designs a machine to automate his menial tasks
>B loses his job
Literally nothing wrong with that. If you're replaceable by a current generation machine of any kind, you clearly don't have enough skills or work ethic to even contribute more than mind-numbing and repetitive tasks.
Why blame productive engineers and businessmen for being able to replace someone with such a low amount of value to add? You should congratulate them instead.
Drivers will be gone in 30 years. Current self drivable cars are already safer. Deliveries, truck driving, etc...will all be automatic. Hell, things like Pizza delivery may even be done by drone.
A lot of news articles are already written by computer. That's only going to grow. As CG improves, even news casters and then eventually actors may be completely replaced by CG AIs.
>>7713966
>Capitalism: B gets double the wealth, A gets nothing.
That is not what would happen. A wouldn't get replaced unless the robot could do the job more efficiently. Which means that the price of whatever A produces goes down, since B can afford to produce it for cheaper, which means he has to sell it for cheaper because C can also get a robot and undercut him if he doesn't. So then D through Z all benefit by getting A's former services for less money. With the money they save, they spend it on other things, stimulating the economy and maybe getting F and Q new jobs. And even A can get one, although he'll probably have to acquire new skills. At the very least, A's kids will have better opportunities.
So you see, it's not zero sum. EVERYONE wins except for A. And A only loses in the short term.
>>7713615
Personally, I'd NEVER fly in a plane without a pilot. What would happen to you if you were in the same situation as Qantas 32 with an automated plane? Simple answer: You die. The human element is always there to make the important decisions when something goes wrong. I really hope automated passenger planes never become a thing.
>>7714255
Except you're assuming that the value added by the person is worth more than the cost of production.
There's going to be a divide between the people who have value and the people who don't and the second group isn't going to magically benefit by their only economic value being taken away.
Capitalism will kill itself, it's inevitable.
Shit like this is why I advocate anarchy and theft
>>7713519
>Liability lawyers say no.
Funnily a BBC article on this very topic suggested that also lawyers are a threatened species in the automated brave new world.
But will they be going quietly into the good night?
>>7713781
>art
http://www.businessinsider.com/novels-written-by-compuers
Other examples abound, computers are getting better at art.
What about stress engineers? Could bigger supercomputers allow aerospace firms to create a fine mesh FEM for the entire aircraft all at once, making stress engineers obselete?
A-asking for a friend
>>7713519
>>7713606
>>7713615
satellites are piloted remotely. These satellites are high altitude aircraft that can stay up for years. The satellites you see in television and else where are not possible since those are in the thermosphere where temperatures reach very very high.
The satellites you track and can see are actually these guys.
https://www.rt.com/usa/google-buys-drones-titan-aerospace-488/
>>7714056
Yeah, I know, right? Everyone but the miniscule minority of people needed to fill the worlds need for businesspeople and STEM graduates should just get nothing and starve to death. The world would be a better place that way, overpopulation and religion and all, yeah?
>>7715041
Well yes.
Survival of the fittest.
Only the strong should live.
>>7714849
As long as there are standards which have to be met, mechanical stress testing will not be obsolete. That might change in the future, I can't see it happening soon, though. The experiment will always be the final step of validation. As good as FEM is, no one trusts it blindly.
>>7713519
google cars are already better drivers than humans and they are in the testing phase.
a simple risk assessment says that you are better off insuring the Google car over a human.
>>7715250
I want to believe this is trolling but I could honestly imagine a /sci/ poster actually believing this.
Fuck me.
>>7714849
They still need someone to sign the designs, just so they have someone to point at if it all goes wrong.
