LogFAQs > #952430778

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, Database 8 ( 02.18.2021-09-28-2021 ), DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Controversial Opinion #4: Automation
LinkPizza 04/03/21 5:00:56 PM #47:	darkknight109 posted... Ironically, the point where the world is fully automated is actually when things look like they'll be amazing, because we'll be in a Star Trek-like utopia where no one needs to work because robots handle everything. It's the point between then and now, where robots do some stuff but not everything, that will be challenging. That is the part you should be worried about, not the post-singularity fully automated world. Not to me. I tried to think of a fully automated world. And all I ever see if one of those gross future worlds where technology was suppose to save everyone, but ends up destroying most things. And no one needing to work sounds boring. Especially when you can't afford anything because you make no money. And robot sound like a bad idea. Not just because they are part of a future where they could turn on us because humans suck toward them. But they can probably be hacked, as well... Which is also pretty bad... And who said I'm not worried about the time in between. In another UBI topic months or a year ago, I said I was worried about transition points the most because those are the times when every could go wrong will go wrong... darkknight109 posted... You think smart phones are "lesser" and need less testing than self-service check-outs? Seriously? Yeah. They already know how to make computer. A smartphone is basically a smaller computer. Or very similar to one. They've been making this smaller and smaller for years now. And a computer is no different. They even have it where tablet are basically computers. A phone is a smaller one. Self-checkouts have a computer, but also other things like a scanner, conveyor belt (for some), weight sensors (for some, again), and have to see how they will be used by people. Especially since people will still try to steal stuff... And people have to get use to them. It may be hard for some to get use to them, considering some people still have problems with computer... darkknight109 posted... here's a huge difference in economic drivers there. Self-service checkouts take a minimum wage cashier off the floor of a store whose biggest expenditures are overhead and inventory. The costs of wages for them are puny compared to their other expenditures. By contrast, for transportation companies their drivers are by far their biggest expense (especially if you count in incidental expenses, like damages, accidents, and down-time caused by human error). Over half of their expenditures are salary for drivers. There is a huge incentive for them to automate and it's not going to take long for them to do it, hence why some of them are already moving in that direction. Except it's been just sitting for 20 years. In 20 years, the amount of money that could have been save from self-checkouts in a ton. And it still took them forever to get to this point. Just because drivers have a more expenses doesn't mean much. I mean, 20 years worth of money that could have save is big to a company. So, there must be some other reason the technology is taking this long to spread when it could have been in every store for the past decade at this point... That's why I'm sure no matter how fast they want to move (some places, at least), they won't be able to. There's still a bunch of other stuff that needs to be dealt with, as well (AFAIK). Like how the insurance will work, which I think is a big one. Obviously, CEOs of store would want to make more money by getting rid of more cashiers, and having more self-checkouts. But I assume there's a reason that they haven't been able to. And whatever that reason is might also affect the self-driving trucks from taking all the truckers jobs... darkknight109 posted... People in wheelchairs exist in all cities. That problem has already been solved. https://www.iberdrola.com/innovation/disabled-vehicles Self-driving cars are actually being looked at with a great deal of interest by the disabled communities. There's buses that know sign-language, which put them ahead of a standard driver, and they're generally seen as improving accessibility for those who are unable to drive them selves in a normal vehicle. That's cars. But I'm talking about public transport. The people we pick up can't even afford cars. And when I say people, I don't mean a few. The amount of people we pick up in just wheelchairs is insanely high. And that's just for the paratransit vans. The buses have a bunch of regulars with wheelchairs. If we change to those vans (which look like they hold one person), we'd never be able to finish picking up everyone in one day... Not to mentioned the lack of space, and the cost to get even close enough to getting enough. Like when you were talking about thinking our station was getting self-driving buses anytime soon when our company has trouble getting the money for a regular (that's half the price, and hold twice as many people). Those would probably be close to our paratransit van prices, but only hold one person. The more profitable (and helpful) solution would be to keep utilizing paratransit vans that can actually hold 12 people (or 6 people in wheelchairs) at once. Especially when all going to the same place... darkknight109 posted... Better start working to figure out how to improve that then, because automation isn't stopping. Instead of sitting there and saying, "It won't affect me" - which isn't a very smart gamble, if you ask me - you'd be better off brainstorming solutions to allow humans to function in an increasingly automated world. Oh. I won't do that. Not like I can do much, anyway. Other people will try to figure it out. Like I said, I'm not really trying to make the world a better place. Nobody listens to a nobody, even if they have the right answers. Wouldn't do much, anyway. They'll still fuck it up. And I'll be dead by the time complete automation becomes a thing. And then it won't be my problem anymore. And it really won't affect me. How will it do that if I'm dead? I'll let the people who have to live through it figure out a solution. I'm just going to live my life the best I can, and then die, as all creatures do. --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around. <cite>LinkPizza posted [p:952430778] in Controvers... [t:79384298]...</cite> <quote>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>Ironically, the point where the world is fully automated is actually when things look like they'll be amazing, because we'll be in a Star Trek-like utopia where no one needs to work because robots handle everything. It's the point between then and now, where robots do some stuff but not everything, that will be challenging. That is the part you should be worried about, not the post-singularity fully automated world.</quote> Not to me. I tried to think of a fully automated world. And all I ever see if one of those gross future worlds where technology was suppose to save everyone, but ends up destroying most things. And no one needing to work sounds boring. Especially when you can't afford anything because you make no money. And robot sound like a bad idea. Not just because they are part of a future where they could turn on us because humans suck toward them. But they can probably be hacked, as well... Which is also pretty bad... And who said I'm not worried about the time in between. In another UBI topic months or a year ago, I said I was worried about transition points the most because those are the times when every could go wrong will go wrong... darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>You think smart phones are "lesser" and need less testing than self-service check-outs? Seriously?</quote> Yeah. They already know how to make computer. A smartphone is basically a smaller computer. Or very similar to one. They've been making this smaller and smaller for years now. And a computer is no different. They even have it where tablet are basically computers. A phone is a smaller one. Self-checkouts have a computer, but also other things like a scanner, conveyor belt (for some), weight sensors (for some, again), and have to see how they will be used by people. Especially since people will still try to steal stuff... And people have to get use to them. It may be hard for some to get use to them, considering some people still have problems with computer... darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>here's a huge difference in economic drivers there. Self-service checkouts take a minimum wage cashier off the floor of a store whose biggest expenditures are overhead and inventory. The costs of wages for them are puny compared to their other expenditures. By contrast, for transportation companies their drivers are by far their biggest expense (especially if you count in incidental expenses, like damages, accidents, and down-time caused by human error). Over half of their expenditures are salary for drivers. There is a huge incentive for them to automate and it's not going to take long for them to do it, hence why some of them are already moving in that direction.</quote> Except it's been just sitting for 20 years. In 20 years, the amount of money that could have been save from self-checkouts in a ton. And it still took them forever to get to this point. Just because drivers have a more expenses doesn't mean much. I mean, 20 years worth of money that could have save is big to a company. So, there must be some other reason the technology is taking this long to spread when it could have been in every store for the past decade at this point... That's why I'm sure no matter how fast they want to move (some places, at least), they won't be able to. There's still a bunch of other stuff that needs to be dealt with, as well (AFAIK). Like how the insurance will work, which I think is a big one. Obviously, CEOs of store would want to make more money by getting rid of more cashiers, and having more self-checkouts. But I assume there's a reason that they haven't been able to. And whatever that reason is might also affect the self-driving trucks from taking all the truckers jobs... darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>People in wheelchairs exist in all cities. That problem has already been solved. https://www.iberdrola.com/innovation/disabled-vehicles Self-driving cars are actually being looked at with a great deal of interest by the disabled communities. There's buses that know sign-language, which put them ahead of a standard driver, and they're generally seen as improving accessibility for those who are unable to drive them selves in a normal vehicle.</quote> That's cars. But I'm talking about public transport. The people we pick up can't even afford cars. And when I say people, I don't mean a few. The amount of people we pick up in just wheelchairs is insanely high. And that's just for the paratransit vans. The buses have a bunch of regulars with wheelchairs. If we change to those vans (which look like they hold one person), we'd never be able to finish picking up everyone in one day... Not to mentioned the lack of space, and the cost to get even close enough to getting enough. Like when you were talking about thinking our station was getting self-driving buses anytime soon when our company has trouble getting the money for a regular (that's half the price, and hold twice as many people). Those would probably be close to our paratransit van prices, but only hold one person. The more profitable (and helpful) solution would be to keep utilizing paratransit vans that can actually hold 12 people (or 6 people in wheelchairs) at once. Especially when all going to the same place... darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>Better start working to figure out how to improve that then, because automation isn't stopping. Instead of sitting there and saying, "It won't affect me" - which isn't a very smart gamble, if you ask me - you'd be better off brainstorming solutions to allow humans to function in an increasingly automated world.</quote> Oh. I won't do that. Not like I can do much, anyway. Other people will try to figure it out. Like I said, I'm not really trying to make the world a better place. Nobody listens to a nobody, even if they have the right answers. Wouldn't do much, anyway. They'll still fuck it up. And I'll be dead by the time complete automation becomes a thing. And then it won't be my problem anymore. And it really won't affect me. How will it do that if I'm dead? I'll let the people who have to live through it figure out a solution. I'm just going to live my life the best I can, and then die, as all creatures do. --- Official King of Kings Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1