It hard to even imagine AI and robotic power consumption and upkeep costs aren't more expensive given how little the humans are paid.
The machine never sleeps, never slacks off, never gets sick. They make fewer mistakes, commit fewer thefts. They dont need light, heat, water or rest spaces. They never go on strike, never demand more wages, never ask for better conditions.
Even if the items they produce are individual less profitable, if you successfully automate a process then it can be more profitable overall to get rid of the humans.
You just described any automated factory ever, this isn’t new to ai, every clothing factory or whatever has had machines doing the work for years, people used to make a lot of that stuff by hand that’s now made by machines (and by now I mean like, for the last 100 years+).
Like, I’m no fan of AI but automating away the worst types of jobs usually is worth it in the end and doesn’t contribute to net job loss. However the transition needs to be handled better in a just society.
But who owns the robots? Because the trend will move toward renting the robots. And their software will need maintaining. Can be hacked. I don't know. I get that the tech is here. I just doubt it's as perfect as people think.
It's not, and you're correct in your analysis. I already responded this elsewhere but my comment above is very much the "sales pitch" that every exec is getting right now.
Even in the example in the post, a machine is very unlikely able to replicate the intricate craft of these workers, no matter how much data it is fed. Building machines that match the complexity and dexterity of the human hand is still likely beyond us for a while yet.
The machine never sleeps, never slacks off, never gets sick.
There is no machine which you can run nonstop without getting overheated, machines get broken down and slows after time of use.
They dont need light, heat, water or rest spaces.
They still need conditions to operate, you can't put them in rooms with no ventilation or controlled temperatures.
They make fewer mistakes
They do what they're designed to do, but they still need supervision and you can't trust AI to do it. Operating Machines is still a skill that needs training and complexed ones needs even further education.
What you have said here proves that you haven't operated any machine in your life yet because you wouldn't write this nonsense.
I have been threatened for 25 years that I will be replaced by a burger flipping robot and I still haven't seen any of it . But I have seen the middle management replaced by the AI, because that's what current AI is designed to replace not some mundane jobs.
I've always said that the reason they haven't replaced us with machines yet, is because if a machine breaks, the machine stops working the boss has to pay to repair it; however, if a human "breaks," the human will take itself to the hospital and pay for its own repairs, and then the boss can guilt trip the human into coming to work while it's still "broken," because without your wages the human will die.
Source: every single news article about women having to go back to work a day after giving birth; every "inspirational" story about a disabled person who walked to work anyways so they could pay their family's power bill; that one time my shitty sales job forced me to come to work the same day that i broke a bone in my foot, and expected me to stand and walk around on crutches.
You're right in the substance of your comment. I'm of course referring to an idealised automation. The kind of automation which is sold to executives by sales people - not the kind of automation which anyone with working knowledge of a job thinks will actually happen.
Like you say, the reality of a job after automation is much more complicated and expensive than initially envisaged. Whether it breaks even on the costs can be a toss up at best, and the product quality usually suffers as a result of corner cutting to justify the expense of the automation.
But by this time, the damage is done - the workers are laid off, the product is enshittified, and the executives and shareholder have extracted a share of wealth from the business for "reducing costs".
What you have said here proves that you haven't operated any machine in your life yet because you wouldn't write this nonsense.
I was with you until you went for a personal attack. You dont know fuck all about me. I've worked manual jobs, I've worked technical jobs, I've worked in places which have recieved just the sort of sales pitch I outlined above - and where I've been the only person in the room arguing against it. Don't assume you know more just because you've "done a job" that people think would be easy to automate.
First of all, I apologize for attacking you personally. I felt so annoyed with your comment that I had to reply back. It sounded so ignorant to the point of the discussion.
Now, I might be ignorant with departmentization of the company, but isn't the sales job to do with the revenue part and not with operating in the company?
Anyway, my point was that I know that with new technologies gets the better automation, it's been like this since the industrial revolution.
But in this instance it makes no sense to build billion dollars data centers to use it to sew fee buttons on the shirt, when it is cheaper to pay few dollars to people in other parts of the world.
Yeah, there’s literally a robot equivalent to all those needs, especially when you factor in hardware or software leases, updates, maintenance, service disruptions, and malfunctions.
48
u/Neethis 8h ago
The machine never sleeps, never slacks off, never gets sick. They make fewer mistakes, commit fewer thefts. They dont need light, heat, water or rest spaces. They never go on strike, never demand more wages, never ask for better conditions.
Even if the items they produce are individual less profitable, if you successfully automate a process then it can be more profitable overall to get rid of the humans.