# Will a robot take your job?



## Schrody (Sep 20, 2015)

On this interesting BBC page you can see is your job at risk, or better yet, are _you_ in risk of losing your job to a robot. Apparently, jobs with the worse case scenarios are Telephone Salespersons, Secretaries, etc, with 97-99%, and the least at risk are jobs like Managers, Therapist, Psychologists, with 0.4-0.7%. Us writers shouldn't be too concerned, as our "job" is on the 220th place out of 366, and the risk of 33%. I personally think that number is too high, while dealing with the creative thoughts won't be an asset of Artificial Intelligence for a long time, if ever. 

My job of Economist, Actuary or Statistician is at a pretty low risk, with 14.7%.


----------



## dither (Sep 20, 2015)

Schrody,
 bots are being programmed to reproduce and, because they're much cleverer, ultimately, i do believe, that they WILL, TAKE US.

So glad i'm old.


----------



## Deleted member 56686 (Sep 20, 2015)

How many movies are out there warning that robots will take over the world? Those CEO's better be careful. Those robots could take their jobs too. :wink:


----------



## dither (Sep 20, 2015)

It's no joke 615,
it's happening.
We're history.


----------



## Courtjester (Sep 20, 2015)

dither said:


> Schrody,
> bots are being programmed to reproduce and, because they're much cleverer, ultimately, i do believe, that they WILL, TAKE US.
> 
> So glad i'm old.



I don't think this will ever happen, because it will be impossible to provide robots with a spirit and soul. I believe that they are reserved for human beings. Cj


----------



## dither (Sep 20, 2015)

Spirit and soul?
Who needs it?
No offence intended.


----------



## Plasticweld (Sep 20, 2015)

I don't know.... rumor with the staff here is that MRMustard is a robot... he works tirelessly for no pay, never sleeps or complains... he has never hurt a human ... I am betting they  have already started to take over and we don't even realize it yet


----------



## dither (Sep 20, 2015)

It's happening man.


----------



## Deleted member 56686 (Sep 20, 2015)

Plasticweld said:


> I don't know.... rumor with the staff here is that MRMustard is a robot... he works tirelessly for no pay, never sleeps or complains... he has never hurt a human ... I am betting they  have already started to take over and we don't even realize it yet




I wish :lol:

But we do have Arthur G. Mustard. Could it be?...


----------



## Plasticweld (Sep 20, 2015)

You tell me?  we have Apple II now we have Mustard II  How long will it before we are complaining that we likeed Mustard 7 just fine and now Mustard 8 doesn't work worth shit...Why did they have to change it ... I see a pattern here


----------



## JustRob (Sep 20, 2015)

Schrody said:


> My job of Economist, Actuary or Statistician is at a pretty low risk, with 14.7%.



I assume that the list was compiled by statisticians, so that's just establishing their own security, isn't it?

The flaw in all of this is the assumption that people are employed to fill specific jobs. That is a flaw not in the analysis but in society itself. My old mutual company used to have not employees but "working members" as distinct from investing members. Each person did what they could best contribute to make the enterprise a success. In other words the people were employed to take advantage of all their capabilities, not just a specific set predefined by a job description. Later new management made us employees and the personnel department became "human resources". Eventually the machine they'd created broke down, was taken over and dismantled. By then the people who'd made it a success in earlier years, including myself, had left. 

Large companies are psychopaths just as computers are. It is up to humans to moderate the behaviour of these psychopaths and make them capable of evolving and surviving. In this humanity is millions of years ahead of robots. Apart from anything else the materials used in the construction of humans are far better suited to purpose than the crude ones used to construct robots. Maybe one day nanotechnology will catch up with natural evolution, but it will do so to a great extent by mimicking it. When the ultimate general purpose robot evolves it may be almost indistinguishable from humans in its behaviour and worry about having its existence threatened by -- what? -- natural organisms maybe, because they'll have been evolving too.


----------



## Deleted member 56686 (Sep 20, 2015)

Plasticweld said:


> You tell me?  we have Apple II now we have Mustard II  How long will it before we are complaining that we likeed Mustard 7 just fine and now Mustard 8 doesn't work worth shit...Why did they have to change it ... I see a pattern here




That's true. Nothing ever beats the original :joker:


----------



## Phil Istine (Sep 20, 2015)

I thought the world had already been taken over by robots.
We even have a name for them:

Politicians


----------



## dither (Sep 20, 2015)

mrmustard615 said:


> That's true. Nothing ever beats the original :joker:



Yeah but who needs it?

Life simply re-invents.


----------



## Courtjester (Sep 20, 2015)

dither said:


> Spirit and soul?
> Who needs it?
> No offence intended.



By the look of your question, you do! Cj :friendly_wink:


----------



## Schrody (Sep 20, 2015)

dither said:


> Schrody,
> bots are being programmed to reproduce and, because they're much cleverer, ultimately, i do believe, that they WILL, TAKE US.
> 
> So glad i'm old.



Only if we let them


----------



## dither (Sep 20, 2015)

We have a choice?


----------



## Schrody (Sep 20, 2015)

Yep. We don't have to built them in such manner where consequences would be surpassing our intelligence.


----------



## Courtjester (Sep 20, 2015)

dither said:


> We have a choice?



We always have a choice in everything. Even not making a choice requires a decision. Cj


----------



## Kevin (Sep 20, 2015)

Our lives have  already been 'taken over' by machines, not robots. It happened when the first human/horse was replaced by a mechanism. We're supposed to be dish washing/clothes washing, all day, and farming, raising livestock, hunter-gathering... 

"Statistician"- is that someone who 'interprets' numbers? Sort of like a therapist/card-reader for business-people? I hope so, because if it's just gathering numbers and placing them in comparative categories that seems very well suited to... nevermind, I'm sure we'll always need at least several persons to monitor the tickertape jam-ups, spill coffee. 


I was thinking another safe job is that person that runs out real quick to get the tennis balls at the net during the tennis matches. They were almost replaced at one time, but the players complained about the slobber the 'true' retrievers left (dogs)(...and how's your ankle, S'tr? What do you say, get in shape, run, all that sunlight/fresh air? we could be a team... no degree required, I think).


----------



## Arthur G. Mustard (Sep 20, 2015)

It has begun, The Menacing Mind Melding Mustard Robotic Army has already been programmed and launched.  Final adjustments been made to Mustard 3 as we speak.


----------



## Teb (Sep 20, 2015)

Robots would probably want more money than I get to do my job, but they could probably do it the way the company wants us to.

In fact, some staff in my office I could quite happily describe as mindless wastes of oxygen, whereas a robot would at least save on air.


----------



## bazz cargo (Sep 20, 2015)

The company I work for have spent upwards of $50,000 on machinery to replace me. I'm still there and showing the machine how to do the job. One in the eye for Arnie.


----------



## Terry D (Sep 20, 2015)

Machine already control our lives and our minds. Don't believe me? Try to take the average person's cell phone away from them. We've grown dependent on being 'connected' with having any real connection. But, as far as robots taking jobs? Some of that will happen soon. As was mentioned above Point-of-Contact jobs: cashiers, fast food order takers, telemarketers, etc. are already being replaced by machines that are much less costly (the price of an increased minimum wage). Most jobs, however, require the one thing no machine has, judgement. For the four decades I've been in manufacturing I've heard about robots replacing line workers. A bit of that has happened, particularly in jobs that were dangerous, unhealthy, or mind-numbingly repetative. Jobs people didn't want anyway. Every person that does a job has one asset that robots do not have, a brain. People can learn new tasks, and, more importantly, people can have ideas. That is an invaluable resource for employers. Automated assembly, or fabrication equipment is expensive as is almost always designed to do one thing very well. When products change -- and how many products do you know of that have stayed the same for even 3 years? -- it is expensive and time consuming to change a purpose built-machine to the new task, if it is even possible. With human workers all you need to do is show them what needs to be done and get the hell out of their way.

No, machines aren't going to take over. Even the most powerful robot is stupid. Big Blue could beat a chess master at chess, but it couldn't balance your checkbook without a human telling it what to do.


----------



## Kevin (Sep 20, 2015)

Big Blue...

Big blue will replace doctors... not all doctors, but many, thereby eliminating jobs. Virtually every conversation, discussion of symptom, treatment, every interaction you've every had in a professional healthcare setting will be stored in your file. All of that data can be more readily, more precisely, accurately considered when it comes to diagnosis _and_ treatment. They'll be no unforeseen negative drug interactions as all the latest data from every connected source will instantly update...better than any doctor, statistically and actually. No human error. 

Reducing labor is the impetus. In the beginning these innovations often don't perform, but it's only a matter of time. With the our inter-connective-ness technology all input could be automatic. We already track vehicles (and thereby employees), track purchases, 'cookies', and you already receive automatically referenced responses (all those 'coincidental' ads after you do _anything_ online). Virtually every action could be recorded (eliminating cash would help) and cross-referenced (and responded to) without any human labor (once the initial connection is up). There's a lot 'dialing-in' going on, but they'll eventually get it. The profits there are too great to ignore.


----------



## J Anfinson (Sep 20, 2015)

I have to agree with Terry. I'm a welder, and although robotic welding is used and has been for over a decade, it can only be used for certain things because even a slight change in design, root gap, land, a dozen other variables will cause a bad weld or possibly a disaster. A machine can't think so it won't adjust to meet variables. 

I worked at a place that had a robot once. Know what we called it? The Million Dollar Piece Of Shit.


----------



## ShadowEyes (Sep 20, 2015)

Can't take what you don't have. (;


----------



## BobtailCon (Sep 20, 2015)

Robots have actually been stopped from being produced due to the reason that they are too similar to humans. Robots won't kill mankind, we'll kill ourselves.


----------



## Sleepwriter (Sep 20, 2015)

The good part is that when the robots do take over there will be less corruption, but corrosion will be on the rise.

on a more serious note, my company has automated the crap out of our work and every quarter I see more folks getting 'surplussed'.

the days of hiding in the middle are long gone. As Ricky Bobby says  "if you ain't first, you're last."


----------



## Riis Marshall (Sep 22, 2015)

Hello Folks

You're always going to need me - or at least one of my fellows - because no matter how clever your computer or robot is, I can always go behind it and pull the plug.

All the best with your writing.

Warmest regards
Riis


----------



## Bloggsworth (Sep 22, 2015)

Only if they come up with a "Retired" robot which stands in line at The Post Office queuing to collect its pension...


----------



## Blade (Sep 22, 2015)

The authors of the study do make it clear what features they think are 'automation resistant'.



> Oxford University academics Michael Osborne and Carl Frey calculated how susceptible to automation each job is based on nine key skills required to perform it; social perceptiveness, negotiation, persuasion, assisting and caring for others, originality, fine arts, finger dexterity, manual dexterity and the need to work in a cramped work space.





Kevin said:


> Reducing labor is the impetus. In the beginning these innovations often don't perform, but it's only a matter of time. With the our inter-connective-ness technology all input could be automatic. We already track vehicles (and thereby employees), track purchases, 'cookies', and you already receive automatically referenced responses (all those 'coincidental' ads after you do _anything_ online). Virtually every action could be recorded (eliminating cash would help) and cross-referenced (and responded to) without any human labor (once the initial connection is up). There's a lot 'dialing-in' going on, but they'll eventually get it. The profits there are too great to ignore.



There will be a certain amount of trial and error in the process but diminishing labour costs (and the inconvenience of human behaviour such as lateness, absenteeism, illness, quitting etc.) will be the target and basis of profitability. Much the same forces that drove manufacturing to low wage countries.



Bloggsworth said:


> Only if they come up with a "Retired" robot which stands in line at The Post Office queuing to collect its pension...



I have no worry on this. I get direct deposit to my bank account.:encouragement:


----------



## Terry D (Sep 22, 2015)

There is a self-regulation built into the 'robotics to replace human labor'. It is the economic effect. Once most goods and services are provided by machines, who will they be selling to? The supposedly replaced humans won't have any money to buy the products. Demand will evaporate which will make supply far too costly to maintain.


----------



## J Anfinson (Sep 22, 2015)

I'm won't say that robots will never perform all skilled trades, but artificial intelligence is going to have to improve a whole lot before it can happen. Judgement calls often have to be made on sight, as I've said, due to various factors. I looked up welding there and they're predicting 78% likely, and I can only guess they're basing that figure on repetitive, easy welding jobs that a monkey could do.


----------



## Mesafalcon (Sep 23, 2015)

Courtjester said:


> I don't think this will ever happen, because it will be impossible to provide robots with a spirit and soul. I believe that they are reserved for human beings. Cj



unfortunately, it doesnt matter what you "believe"

facts of reality and numbers crush beliefs. beliefs are  cheap, accurate numbers and facts are hard earned and compose this thing we call reality.


----------



## Terry D (Sep 23, 2015)

Mesafalcon said:


> unfortunately, it doesnt matter what you "believe"
> 
> facts of reality and numbers crush beliefs. beliefs are  cheap, accurate numbers and facts are hard earned and compose this thing we call reality.



Determining what "the facts of reality" are is dicey business. There are damned few immutable 'facts' in the universe. Most facts are simply generally agreed upon subjective interpretations of observation. At the smallest (quantum) scales, and the largest (multi-verse) even the concept of "accurate numbers" disappears.


----------



## Bishop (Sep 23, 2015)

IT Systems Architect... 1% likelihood of automation.

...probably because the robots will enslave me to build them better software or something...


----------



## hoihoisoi (Sep 23, 2015)

I believe that when it comes to some jobs described above, there is a certain need for the involvement of a human element. I mean judgement on grey areas are needed in cases where ethics is a big part of the job such as say accountancy and the likes. So I don't really think they can replace those kind of jobs any time soon on that plane. But say its a repetitive job with not many judgmental areas (Like say food delivery or typists), I think I could see it taking over in the future. Hopefully not too soon though XD


----------



## Crowley K. Jarvis (Sep 23, 2015)

Consciousness and emotion have already been linked to the brain, obviously. 

We can program a robot to do many tasks, and the number of things a robot can do will increase as does our skill in programming. 

But that number will have a solid cap, until the point where we create a program that emulates the function of a brain, and is capable of learning and growing just as we are. 

But even such a program would have it's limits until we PERFECTLY understand the brain, and THEN create a program that PERFECTLY functions exactly as a brain, and thus gains consciousness and self-awareness.

However, that development, if at all possible, is most likely very far outside any of our lifespans. 

They will take a certain amount of our jobs, for sure. But that amount is limited UNTIL said technology develops.

SO: I don't really worry about it.


----------



## TJ1985 (Sep 23, 2015)

Unless somebody designs a robot that can fix fences, paint fences, dig pipes, do plumbing, roofing, general carpentry, general handyman work, operate an airbrush successfully, and a dozen-dozen other things, I think I'm safe. In any event, learning to repair robots might be a lucrative line of study for an up-and-coming future employee. 

On a similar note, I trained in welding and at the time the whole industry was up in arms because CNC welding bots were going to put everybody out of biz. The funniest part was the press releases that worked their way through the trade. "Bots will replace us! They never demand pay, they never demand a raise, they can work 24/7 for months at a time!" The funny part? They don't demand pay, but they cost more than a skilled welder will earn in three years. They don't demand raises, but broken parts cost far more than a 10% raise possibly could. They don't demand a day off, but they can take a week off by breaking. Sometimes, they'll do all three things that a human can do. Break and take a week off, a technician orders a $_,___ part, that doesn't work and the whole shebang needs replacement. Plus there's that whole issue of retraining them via programming to make a minor adjustment to the work. Three factories around here were big fans of robotic workers until they discovered that there are numerous drawbacks to an automated workforce. (I don't think anybody mentioned disgruntled former employees who'd sneak in and screw with the machinery every single night, every single week, every single month. Southerners hold a grudge longer than most. I'm still aggravated about the shoddy workmanship on the Liberty Bell...)


----------



## BobtailCon (Sep 23, 2015)

Terry D said:


> There are damned few immutable 'facts' in the universe. Most facts are simply generally agreed upon subjective interpretations of observation.



Pretty much this, even our Laws of Physics are broken by the sheer size of other galaxies, galaxies so large that they shouldn't exist by these laws. Though I do agree with Mesa that religious/spiritual beliefs have no place in this particular topic.


----------



## Bard_Daniel (Sep 23, 2015)

Construction work? Oh yeah. My current job is replaceable. 

What I'm really waiting for is this:


----------



## Terry D (Sep 24, 2015)

BobtailCon said:


> Pretty much this, even our Laws of Physics are broken by the sheer size of other galaxies, galaxies so large that they shouldn't exist by these laws. Though I do agree with Mesa that religious/spiritual beliefs have no place in this particular topic.



The laws of physics are never broken. When conditions exist that 'appear' to violate them, it simply means our understanding is incomplete.


----------



## BobtailCon (Sep 24, 2015)

Terry D said:


> The laws of physics are never broken. When conditions exist that 'appear' to violate them, it simply means our understanding is incomplete.



Science grows and expands. My point isn't that the our laws of physics are concrete, my point was that our understanding is shitcanned when we look at other celestial bodies that break our current understanding of these laws.


----------



## LeeC (Sep 24, 2015)

TJ1985 said:


> In any event, learning to repair robots might be a lucrative line of study for an up-and-coming future employee.


Actually, that's what a nephew of mine does for a living. 

To the bigger question of this thread, how many of you have worked in AI? When I last did, we were still light years away from sufficient complexity, due in part to the lack of sufficient scalability in hardware to provide capacity. I don't think even quantum computing will be sufficient without substantial advances in microcircuitry. 

On the other hand, The Stepford Wives intrigued me when I was younger


----------

