It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
One factory has "reduced employee strength from 110,000 to 50,000 thanks to the introduction of robots", a government official told the South China Morning Post.
originally posted by: pl3bscheese
Agree with your conclusion, but it's pretty difficult with laws in place as they are. It'll be a difficult transition, but I have hope we get through this together. Technology should be embraced and used for the public good. I just hope there isn't enough short sighted people who backlash against the advancements instead of innovating the social sphere.
originally posted by: makemap
www.digitaltrends.com...
Another article.
Anyways. I wonder what those 60k workers going to do?
Edit: Well if it is cheaper to build, they better make their computers cheaper or else, it won't be good for the economy.
originally posted by: Vdogg
originally posted by: makemap
www.digitaltrends.com...
Another article.
Anyways. I wonder what those 60k workers going to do?
Edit: Well if it is cheaper to build, they better make their computers cheaper or else, it won't be good for the economy.
But you and I both know they won't make it cheaper. They're simply going to pocket the difference.
originally posted by: markosity1973
a reply to: pl3bscheese
There is nothing to think about.
Robots take away human jobs. The OP article is about 60,000, 60,000 job losses.
If we estimate that approx one in three people work taking into account children, stay at home parents and the retired, we are talking the population of a small city out of work.
You cannot possibly claim that this is innovation and progress. It's capitalism at its worst looking for ways to make things at a lower cost and damn the human toll in the name of profit.
We need to start working on a basic income and we needed to start working on it yesterday.
originally posted by: MiddleInitial
a reply to: Metallicus
I enjoy reading your comments in the threads and very much agree with you a lot of the time, but I must say I couldn't disagree with you more on this point.
What is the point of innovation if it creates poverty?
originally posted by: MiddleInitial
a reply to: Metallicus
I enjoy reading your comments in the threads and very much agree with you a lot of the time, but I must say I couldn't disagree with you more on this point.
IN 1930, when the world was “suffering…from a bad attack of economic pessimism”, John Maynard Keynes wrote a broadly optimistic essay, “Economic Possibilities for our Grandchildren”. It imagined a middle way between revolution and stagnation that would leave the said grandchildren a great deal richer than their grandparents. But the path was not without dangers. One of the worries Keynes admitted was a “new disease”: “technological unemployment…due to our discovery of means of economising the use of labour outrunning the pace at which we can find new uses for labour.” His readers might not have heard of the problem, he suggested—but they were certain to hear a lot more about it in the years to come.
If a robot can do the same work as a human for less cost then what logical reason is there to keep the human?