Donald Drumpf sucks thread but come in and watch Sir Gal and Coke kneel before the dumbass

[UCFRogerz]

Half the posts on this board blame liberals for the countries ills, but EE is putting people into buckets. Sir G said the economy would collapse if Obama was re-elected, which I'm anxiously waiting for. Keep believing AI, robotics, and other technologies won't be eliminating jobs, they surely haven't already.

Who took care of the robots at the Ford factory in the 1920s? (Oh yeah, what's a robot, it's the 1920s)

OH NO these robots are going to take all the Ford factory worker jobs!

Shit this robot is broke, who's going to fix it?

AI/Robotics/tech will CHANGE jobs, not necessarily eliminate them. This has been the case for centuries, I'm sure all the farmhands were PISSED when mules and combines came onto the scene.

 

[CommuterBob]

Who took care of the robots at the Ford factory in the 1920s? (Oh yeah, what's a robot, it's the 1920s)

OH NO these robots are going to take all the Ford factory worker jobs!

Shit this robot is broke, who's going to fix it?

AI/Robotics/tech will CHANGE jobs, not necessarily eliminate them. This has been the case for centuries, I'm sure all the farmhands were PISSED when mules and combines came onto the scene.

Robots didn't take Ford factory worker jobs, Mexico, Brazil, Asia, and other countries did.

 

[UCFRogerz]

Robots didn't take Ford factory worker jobs, Mexico, Brazil, Asia, and other countries did.

You understand the intent. Shut it.

 

[MACHater02]

Who took care of the robots at the Ford factory in the 1920s? (Oh yeah, what's a robot, it's the 1920s)

OH NO these robots are going to take all the Ford factory worker jobs!

Shit this robot is broke, who's going to fix it?

AI/Robotics/tech will CHANGE jobs, not necessarily eliminate them. This has been the case for centuries, I'm sure all the farmhands were PISSED when mules and combines came onto the scene.

Those farm devices eliminated jobs. Some farmers adapted others fell into poverty. That's the point, technology is going to force more people into the latter. Stephen Hawking thinks we could have a worker less society as a result of advancements in the next 100 years. I think that timeline is aggressive, I just think wealth gap will be much worse.

 

[UCFKnight85]

Are there not distinct lines of thinking between liberals and conservatives? Conservatives are naturally resistant to change, that's why they're called conservatives.

But change is coming. it doesn't mean that everyone is out of jobs in 10 years. It does mean that in the absence of adaptation a lot of people's quality of life in the U.S. will be diminished. That's the issue serious men need to be addressing. I've made the argument 10 different ways so far, so take it or leave it.

This is the continual problem with your entire existence on this board.

You make extremely vague generalizations that most people would agree with anyways, self fellate yourself as being a super open minded liberal with views that others just can't grasp, then say half-understandable things regarding how you can see the future coming, and how you're just trying to do us simpletons a favor in sharing your advanced warning knowledge.

You're like the guy who on a really windy day, goes outside and says "Boy, the sea must be really rough today. But no one is stopping to think about this but me. I understand what's happening out there"

 

[UCFRogerz]

Those farm devices eliminated jobs. Some farmers adapted others fell into poverty. That's the point, technology is going to force more people into the latter. Stephen Hawking thinks we could have a worker less society as a result of advancements in the next 100 years. I think that timeline is aggressive, I just think wealth gap will be much worse.

The farm devices eliminated jobs but also created new jobs. Jobs to take care of the mules and jobs to take care of the farm equipment. Back breaking and hand labor is going by the wayside.

I'm not concerned about the wealth gap because "high tech" jobs now may be equivalent to blue collar work in years to come both in terms of quantity and knowledge required. Take physical discoveries or mathematics that occurred hundreds of years ago that took the smartest humans years to understand and work it out. Most of that is common knowledge now. Newtonian physics was magic when discovered, now it is level one course work. I see tech working in much the same way.

Workerless in 100 years? eh, 1000 years, maybe. I still don't see how all this new technology is going to crop up and be 100% maintenance free and 100% management free. New technology won't be created without human input and guidance. As it stands right now, a robot can only know what a human knows, however, AI is much much more efficient at gathering/organizing/recognizing data and trends. Critical thinking won't be going to AI anytime soon.

 

[fabknight]

This is the continual problem with your entire existence on this board.

You make extremely vague generalizations that most people would agree with anyways, self fellate yourself as being a super open minded liberal with views that others just can't grasp, then say half-understandable things regarding how you can see the future coming, and how you're just trying to do us simpletons a favor in sharing your advanced warning knowledge.

You're like the guy who on a really windy day, goes outside and says "Boy, the sea must be really rough today. But no one is stopping to think about this but me. I understand what's happening out there"

 

[MACHater02]

The farm devices eliminated jobs but also created new jobs. Jobs to take care of the mules and jobs to take care of the farm equipment. Back breaking and hand labor is going by the wayside.

I'm not concerned about the wealth gap because "high tech" jobs now may be equivalent to blue collar work in years to come both in terms of quantity and knowledge required. Take physical discoveries or mathematics that occurred hundreds of years ago that took the smartest humans years to understand and work it out. Most of that is common knowledge now. Newtonian physics was magic when discovered, now it is level one course work. I see tech working in much the same way.

Workerless in 100 years? eh, 1000 years, maybe. I still don't see how all this new technology is going to crop up and be 100% maintenance free and 100% management free. New technology won't be created without human input and guidance. As it stands right now, a robot can only know what a human knows, however, AI is much much more efficient at gathering/organizing/recognizing data and trends. Critical thinking won't be going to AI anytime soon.

All the travel agents who lost their jobs didn't go work at expedia. All the book store owners didn't go work for amazon. Wealthfront.com and Betterment.com aren't looking to hire financial advisors. We're becoming a service based economy and where possible startups and corporations are working to remove the human element from those services. New industries will be created but they won't require a ton of workers.

 

[UCFRogerz]

All the travel agents who lost their jobs didn't go work at expedia. All the book store owners didn't go work for amazon. Wealthfront.com and Betterment.com aren't looking to hire financial advisors. We're becoming a service based economy and where possible startups and corporations are working to remove the human element from those services. New industries will be created but they won't require a ton of workers.

You just made my point.

Travel agents lost their jobs BUT new jobs were created at Expedia such as website design, call center, sales etc.

Now what jobs were created when Amazon ate bookstores? website design/maintenance, sales, stock rooms, shipping, data center maintenance...

There is also secondary jobs too. Does FedEx/UPS do more or less business now than before Amazon was around? Is traveling more popular/accessible with Expedia? Does AT&T need more maintenance people for internet infrastructure? Are computers being manufacture more now than back then?

Again, job titles were lost, not necessarily the quantity of jobs. I'm not saying it is a 1:1 ratio, in some cases it might be 1:2 or 2:1 or whatever. It is not as dire as you think.

 

[UCFEE]

This is the continual problem with your entire existence on this board.

You make extremely vague generalizations that most people would agree with anyways, self fellate yourself as being a super open minded liberal with views that others just can't grasp, then say half-understandable things regarding how you can see the future coming, and how you're just trying to do us simpletons a favor in sharing your advanced warning knowledge.

You're like the guy who on a really windy day, goes outside and says "Boy, the sea must be really rough today. But no one is stopping to think about this but me. I understand what's happening out there"

And you're like the guy who shuts down conversation by being an dickhole because you're scared (or incapable) of abstract thinking. It's a relevant topic on which a ton has been written about if you want a more concrete discussion. Look for some of the work done by Erik Brynjolfsson, Alec Ross, and various think tank reports on the future of work. That might clue you in a little more on the changes I'm talking about in "vague generalizations".

 

[Poolside Knight]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features...g-for-the-general-election/?ex_cid=538twitter

 

[UCFEE]

All the travel agents who lost their jobs didn't go work at expedia. All the book store owners didn't go work for amazon. Wealthfront.com and Betterment.com aren't looking to hire financial advisors. We're becoming a service based economy and where possible startups and corporations are working to remove the human element from those services. New industries will be created but they won't require a ton of workers.

You got it. Further, there will be a large class of workers who will have their standard of living decrease if social safety nets are not in place, because they're now self-employed and peddling work via sharing platforms.

Anyone with a brain and social conscious can see the pending problem.

 

[UCFEE]

You just made my point.

Again, job titles were lost, not necessarily the quantity of jobs. I'm not saying it is a 1:1 ratio, in some cases it might be 1:2 or 2:1 or whatever. It is not as dire as you think.

That's the main disagreement. I think you may be thinking more near-term (10-20 years). More long-term, the situation is different.

I think we're too early on in the transition for a lot of people to really grasp the magnitude.

 

[Bob the Citronaut]

Dump is mentioned in Country Grammar by Nelly. He's asking Dump to let him in... Dump has been building walls to keep minorities out for decades.

 

[UCFWayne]

EE needs to stop smoking so much.

 

[UCFRogerz]

That's the main disagreement. I think you may be thinking more near-term (10-20 years). More long-term, the situation is different.

I think we're too early on in the transition for a lot of people to really grasp the magnitude.

This situation hasn't changed for the past 300 years, why is the next 300 any different? You can go all the way back to picking ****ing berries. When farming was discovered what happened to the berry pickers?! OH SHIT they became farmers, they had to or they were out of a job. The same thing will happen to those in jobs that robotics or technology is taking over. They have to adapt to the new standard of knowledge or be left behind.

That is exactly what is happening now. Factory workers are becoming machine managers. Other low tech jobs that are disappearing are becoming jobs to take care of the new technology. Machines need maintenance. Machines need upgrading.

This is more of an education / training problem than a welfare issue in my eyes.

There is more of a problem of low level work leaving this country than the issues technology is causing.

 

[UCFEE]

This situation hasn't changed for the past 300 years, why is the next 300 any different? You can go all the way back to picking ****ing berries. When farming was discovered what happened to the berry pickers?! OH SHIT they became farmers, they had to or they were out of a job. The same thing will happen to those in jobs that robotics or technology is taking over. They have to adapt to the new standard of knowledge or be left behind.

That is exactly what is happening now. Factory workers are becoming machine managers. Other low tech jobs that are disappearing are becoming jobs to take care of the new technology. Machines need maintenance. Machines need upgrading.

This is more of an education / training problem than a welfare issue in my eyes.

There is more of a problem of low level work leaving this country than the issues technology is causing.

Well, I don't agree because I think you're neglecting the productivity gains of the past 300 years and you're neglecting the skill gap. Not every truck driver is going to be able to grasp what he needs to in order to go service a self-driving truck. Some will, but they will need years of training and rigorous study to grasp the mathematic and computer science background that would be needed in the new job.

So, even your argument calls for some social support to get folks educated for these new jobs. But even the idea of providing 2 years of college education publicly is looked upon as unnecessary welfare by the right.

 

[UCFKnight85]

And you're like the guy who shuts down conversation by being an dickhole because you're scared (or incapable) of abstract thinking. It's a relevant topic on which a ton has been written about if you want a more concrete discussion. Look for some of the work done by Erik Brynjolfsson, Alec Ross, and various think tank reports on the future of work. That might clue you in a little more on the changes I'm talking about in "vague generalizations".

LMAO

You just did it again! God, this is fun.

 

[UCFEE]

LMAO

You just did it again! God, this is fun.

Learn to think and converse in the abstract.

 

[UCFKnight85]

So, even your argument calls for some social support to get folks educated for these new jobs. But even the idea of providing 2 years of college education publicly is looked upon as unnecessary welfare by the right.

Yea, which is why students in most Red states can already obtain free 2 year college tuition via the tons of scholarships or programs in place.

Are you being deliberately ignorant and buffoonish at this point?

 

[UCFEE]

Yea, which is why students in most Red states can already obtain free 2 year college tuition via the tons of scholarships or programs in place.

Are you being deliberately ignorant and buffoonish at this point?

And how many of those programs are gearsed towards guys who got their GED 20 years ago and will have their menial job replaced?

I know socialism-word has been drilled as evil in your brain, but the solution will require a social component.

 

[UCFKnight85]

And how many of those programs are gearsed towards guys who got their GED 20 years ago and will have their menial job replaced?

I know socialism-word has been drilled as evil in your brain, but the solution will require a social component.

What in God's name are you talking about? Jesus Christ.

Here- maybe just read this and respond with something halfway intelligent.

http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/18/pf/college/free-community-college-tennessee/

Unless of course you'll tell me that Tennessee is not actually a Red state, like you attempted to do with Texas.

 

[UCFEE]

Hey, you just promoted a liberal idea being implemented in a red state as a good thing. Keep on coming around.

 

[UCFEE]

EE needs to stop smoking so much.

But the universe doesn't give me all these ideas when I'm not smoking maaaan.

 

[fabknight]

@UCFEE - I'm glad you're posting in the cooler again.

 

[Poolside Knight]

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/la-na-breitbart-rise-fall-20160318-story.html

 

[UCFKnight85]

Hey, you just promoted a liberal idea being implemented in a red state as a good thing. Keep on coming around.

Wrong. The liberal idea, from what I see everywhere today, would be demanding that every kid gets to go off to a 4 year Ivy League school, major in some bullshit liberal arts major, and demand that the Federal Government pick up the entire tab. Oh, and they'd also of course want the Federal Government to pay for their room, board, food, and drugs.

On the other hand, Tennessee has stated that a student must first: Maintain at least a 2.0, meet with a mentor before each semester, and apply for all available State and Federal Grants. Once those are done, the State will pick up whatever remaining cost remains to provide that 2 years free community college. While allowing that student to stay at home or seek very affordable housing to attend that community college for 2 years.

It's a means tested way to provide a path for free community college. In other words, it's very conservative in nature vs. what the whining crybaby liberals are screaming for today.

Oh, and it's costing Tennessee just $12M per year to do this.

 

[UCFRogerz]

Well, I don't agree because I think you're neglecting the productivity gains of the past 300 years and you're neglecting the skill gap. Not every truck driver is going to be able to grasp what he needs to in order to go service a self-driving truck. Some will, but they will need years of training and rigorous study to grasp the mathematic and computer science background that would be needed in the new job.

So, even your argument calls for some social support to get folks educated for these new jobs. But even the idea of providing 2 years of college education publicly is looked upon as unnecessary welfare by the right.

Your absolutely right. Not everyone will be able to make the change. (this isn't a new thing either, computers straight up ostracized many old people who were used to manual drawing or calculations) However, this change isn't going to occur at the flip of a switch either, so there is time. The social aspect i'm talking about is ensuring that the curriculum in public schools match the work expected to be performed. If the baseline of work coming out of highschool transforms from manual labor to tech support, the curriculum needs to reflect that.

The tech support shouldn't require calculus or other computer science curriculum just as being a car mechanic or roofer doesn't need the theory. You need to be able to read, follow directions, and troubleshoot. In this pie in the sky world you are talking about the tech will be designed with ease of maintenance in mind so it shouldn't be cumbersome.

 

[UCFEE]

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/la-na-breitbart-rise-fall-20160318-story.html

Yep, them boys don't take too kindly to new ideas as we can see. Seems to take a complete crisis before something sinks in (probably not just conservatives though, most people in general)

 

[UCF w00t]

Well, I don't agree because I think you're neglecting the productivity gains of the past 300 years and you're neglecting the skill gap. Not every truck driver is going to be able to grasp what he needs to in order to go service a self-driving truck. Some will, but they will need years of training and rigorous study to grasp the mathematic and computer science background that would be needed in the new job.

So, even your argument calls for some social support to get folks educated for these new jobs. But even the idea of providing 2 years of college education publicly is looked upon as unnecessary welfare by the right.

This stuff won't happen overnight. Gradually less people will get into trucking and more people will get into robotic technicians.

The idea that there will be no jobs implies that our society will decide that "whelp. We're good now. Nothing left to do" and won't continue to increase our standards and invent new things and improve our state as a species. Dis humans just quit inventing new things and progressing after the industrial revolition? Of course artificially removing benefits of progress by giving everyone a paycheck simply for being born would hell to slow progress.

 

[UCFEE]

Your absolutely right. Not everyone will be able to make the change. (this isn't a new thing either, computers straight up ostracized many old people who were used to manual drawing or calculations) However, this change isn't going to occur at the flip of a switch either, so there is time. The social aspect i'm talking about is ensuring that the curriculum in public schools match the work expected to be performed. If the baseline of work coming out of highschool transforms from manual labor to tech support, the curriculum needs to reflect that.

The tech support shouldn't require calculus or other computer science curriculum just as being a car mechanic or roofer doesn't need the theory. You need to be able to read, follow directions, and troubleshoot. In this pie in the sky world you are talking about the tech will be designed with ease of maintenance in mind so it shouldn't be cumbersome.

Well, in that scenerio new jobs aren't being created to replace the old. We already have maintenence men that can follow instructions, they'd just move to work on the newer technology, and there's still a gap.

 

[UCFEE]

This stuff won't happen overnight. Gradually less people will get into trucking and more people will get into robotic technicians.

The idea that there will be no jobs implies that our society will decide that "whelp. We're good now. Nothing left to do" and won't continue to increase our standards and invent new things and improve our state as a species. Dis humans just quit inventing new things and progressing after the industrial revolition? Of course artificially removing benefits of progress by giving everyone a paycheck simply for being born would hell to slow progress.

I never said no jobs. I said displacement at a scale that will be a big drag on the economy and require social nets to maintain quality of life for people that want to work, and to keep a capitalist economy driving forward.

 

[UCFEE]

Oh @fabknight let me kiss your cheek.

 

[UCFRogerz]

Well, in that scenerio new jobs aren't being created to replace the old. We already have maintenence men that can follow instructions, they'd just move to work on the newer technology, and there's still a gap.

It scales. Replacing a manual job with a robot adds more items to maintain, setup, dismantle, change, upgrade, etc. Your A/C tech isn't going to switch to robotic cars over night.

/sigh You want to change everything to robotic/automatic but don't think the maintenance workforce will need to increase.

 

[fabknight]

Oh @fabknight let me kiss your cheek.

 

[UCFKnight85]

This stuff won't happen overnight. Gradually less people will get into trucking and more people will get into robotic technicians.

The idea that there will be no jobs implies that our society will decide that "whelp. We're good now. Nothing left to do" and won't continue to increase our standards and invent new things and improve our state as a species. Dis humans just quit inventing new things and progressing after the industrial revolition? Of course artificially removing benefits of progress by giving everyone a paycheck simply for being born would hell to slow progress.

This is the hilarious fallacy of everything this guy says.

He wants you to believe that a society comes to a complete standstill the minute the populace is introduced to a new technology or way of doing things.

He's also under the delusion that saying and thinking ridiculous things qualifies as "abstract", and thus is really super intelligent.

 

[Bob the Citronaut]

Well, in that scenerio new jobs aren't being created to replace the old. We already have maintenence men that can follow instructions, they'd just move to work on the newer technology, and there's still a gap.

There will be more to maintain which will require more techs.

 

[MACHater02]

You all are focused on manufacturing, but I think of you are still off. The number of people needed to support a plant relying on robotics is less than what was needed to run the same plant 20 years ago. You all aren't even talking about service industries where code is automating processes. A team of 10 can maintain that code. Code that's doing the work of hundreds of people. Sometimes thousands.

 

[UCF w00t]

You all are focused on manufacturing, but I think of you are still off. The number of people needed to support a plant relying on robotics is less than what was needed to run the same plant 20 years ago. You all aren't even talking about service industries where code is automating processes. A team of 10 can maintain that code. Code that's doing the work of hundreds of people. Sometimes thousands.

What's your point? There have been numerous "revolutions" throughout history that had similar effects. Are you just saying that this will be different and the one to rule them all? Society will adapt.

I never said no jobs. I said displacement at a scale that will be a big drag on the economy and require social nets to maintain quality of life for people that want to work, and to keep a capitalist economy driving forward.

How is what you're positing at all capitalist?

 

[Sir Galahad]

then talk. in case you haven't noticed, there's a massive amount of people wanting some truth that the system isn't kaput that would love some truth from "strategic planners"

Fact is there is no magic answer or crystal ball. There are no generalities in terms of what

Half the posts on this board blame liberals for the countries ills, but EE is putting people into buckets. Sir G said the economy would collapse if Obama was re-elected, which I'm anxiously waiting for. Keep believing AI, robotics, and other technologies won't be eliminating jobs, they surely haven't already.

Where did I say the economy would collapse, I don't think any President has that ability. I said he would screw this country up and it's hard to argue that point.