Automation is the Future

a reply to: daskakik

Your not right but maybe neither am I. It stays the same of endless jobs either with or without automation. The jobs themselves change. I can't see that though right now maybe because i am missing something but the fact of having such an increase in population, 1 bill to 7 in just 100 years is hard to see by for me. With automation we will have 50 billion people by 2 more generation easily without a major catastrophe stopping growth. More people, more jobs with automation though I think.

a reply to: PhantomAntics
So now you are shifting the goalposts to the number of jobs stay the same but they are different jobs?

More jobs while automation increased doesn't mean the automation created those jobs.

What created more jobs was the need to feed, dress, house and entertain more people. Automation made it possible for less people to do more, in other words increased production with less workers, which means a smaller percentage of the population actually working.

If you ask me, all the pencil pushing jobs created in developed countries was just a way to justify a paycheck while doing nothing really productive. Like ThatDamnDuckAgain said earlier in the thread: "you need money, that you need to earn first?"

I think that is what the reset is about, changing that ideal because automation kills jobs and the new tech is poised to eliminate even more.

a reply to: daskakik

Automation is the only reason we have 7 billion people on earth or never made a 6 billion jump in 2 generations before. The only difference in the growth is electricity. That automation was a big jump. So that means automation created those jobs because there was no other difference that I am aware of.

People on computer are pulling the strings of the people that do manuel labor. That is a known fact, that is how economy has always worked unless your at war.

I am not a reset believer.

a reply to: PhantomAntics

We are 1 generation of promotions away from a major problem. People my age (gen x) were not as adept at computer coding as millenials, and then gen z are. We brought the dawn of computers, but didn't get past the days of BASIC really before we became enamored with the internet.

Millenials and zoomers...they understand coding. On a scale of 1-100 of coding aptitude, im in like a 15 range. I can automate a majority of may day to day processes using visual basic. I know people that are twice as good as me, and they can automate to a point that when the time of day comes it triggers a series of automated actions condensing several hours of work into a 20 minute automated process. Once Gen X moves out of the upper management and millenials take over, the ruse will be over. An entire generation of cubicle monkeys that have automated their jobs and just sit and do whatever all day will be phased out, as they've already proven that humans aren't needed once the code is built.

originally posted by: PhantomAntics
So that means automation created those jobs because there was no other difference that I am aware of.

You just can't seem to grasp it, automation created more production, not more jobs.

So yeah "Automation is the only reason we have 7 billion people on earth" but it isn't the reason more work needs to be done, that is a product of the population itself.

a reply to: daskakik

Population only increased this drastically because of electricity. We would only have about 2 billion people on earth without electricity. Electricy is the greatest advancement to automation since the wheel. Same goes for everytime a new age happens. From the stone age to industrial. Population jumps always happen during the beginning of these ages. But the ages are quickening so population jumps increase.

The more automation the bigger the military, that you can't deny. The more equiptment you make the more active duties you can have. Bigger & better the army the more rules you control. So a peaceful army with bigger & better automation will stop a less automated bad army from democracy or just not deleting people in general.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

When we go to space, it will be the same. Us earthlings won't know how to do what uranus is doing.

a reply to: daskakik

The more people we have the futher we can go. We travel the seas thanks to automation. Next we will travel the universe for it. More population more jobs. If the population didnt increase the jobs increase would not change, we just wouldnt have as much. If someone stays the same population for 200 years, your not gonma have more people work unless you starv em to work. So the jobs literally never change. The only reason jobs increase is because of automation makes population increase.

a reply to: PhantomAntics
So now the goalpost is shifting to automation increases population which increases jobs.

The problem with that argument is that developed countries actually have a decrease in population growth which completely contradicts your claim.

Care to explain that?

a reply to: daskakik

What do you mean by goalpost? I am aiming to say that more automation improves job growth.

Yeah but thats over 150 countries. Compared to the 42 that are considered developed.

a reply to: daskakik

I misread. That is straight not true that america or most parts of europe see a decrease. Immagrants are running rampant, that is literally the opposite of decrease. Beside the fact of contriceptans it has increase dramstically from natural births since the 1900s. Well if you look at mortality rates in the past 5 years from automation than yeah it makes sense the figure might slightly drop now and again but the population will still grow.

a reply to: PhantomAntics

What do you mean by goalpost? I am aiming to say that more automation improves job growth.

Yeah but in that post, after I said population spurs job growth not automation, you argued automation spurs population growth, implying it indirectly spurs job growth.

Here let me use a pic from another thread on depopulation:



Worldwide population growth is going down and automation is increasing all over the world.

So, if your claim was true then more automation should equal more population growth, but it doesn't, so your claim that automation spurs population growth is wrong and the implication that it indirectly spurs job growth would also be wrong.

a reply to: daskakik

So this influx must mean it is because not many poeple are investing into automation as they should. To many people dying off means we are going backwards with population/automation paradigm To many people for not enough automation maybe. Maybe now that the world has stopped for 2 years & will start investin more monyey into sutomation we will see another increase in population in 30 years?

a reply to: daskakik

But i still know automation doesnt just indirectly correlate to population growth but to more new jobs created because automation is habit of growth.

originally posted by: PhantomAntics
a reply to: daskakik

So this influx must mean it is because not many poeple are investing into automation as they should. To many people dying off means we are going backwards with population/automation paradigm To many people for not enough automation maybe. Maybe now that the world has stopped for 2 years & will start investin more monyey into sutomation we will see another increase in population in 30 years?

That is a lot of maybes for someone who started off sounding pretty certain.

But i still know automation doesnt just indirectly correlate to population growth but to more new jobs created because automation is habit of growth.

That doesn't even make any sense.

Where have you shown automation creates jobs? You have not, you just keep saying it.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

My experience has been rather different..

I think there was an increase in general ability to code in the younger Gen X crowd and older millenial crowd. In a lot of ways, this was something of a requirement to use technology in the first place.

However, as the interfaces with technology improved and became easier to use, I think we have seen a decline in general knowledge and ability of what happens behind the scenes. Meaning, the younger crowds may know how to use technology, but not much more than that.

There are certainly some super talented people in the younger crowds, and its easier to share their work than ever (which may give the appearance of a greater talent pool), but in looking for people with specific skillsets myself.. The general trend actually seems to be less numbers, but with more of an online social presence.



As for the OP, I think "automation" is being viewed in far, far too general of a perspective and also too strictly based in the prevailing paradigm surrounding automation.

While it may create some jobs, the replacement of more traditional positions almost certainly is a larger number. We are looking at an entirely different paradigm though, and I think trying to examine it in term of job gains or losses is something of a non-sequitor. Kind of like "all the hunters and gatherers will lose their jobs if we go through this Neolithic Revolution thing."

Automated systems could very well spell the end of humanity. It could also provide the basis for us to truly realize our potential as a species, and everything in between those extremes. Like any tool, its in how we use it. Personally, my approach is to utilize technology so that it becomes covert and actually enables us to enjoy the "natural world" with ever-increasing ease.

This is in direct opposition to the current trend of interacting with the world at large through a digital filter. Where we encase everything about humanity in transistors and electronic buffers under the horrifically misguided notion that this is the situation we all must either oppose or support.

I strongly advocate for decentralized, automated systems of self-sufficiency. Using this as a foundation is the way to go, in my opinion. However, the general trend is almost exclusively corporate, centralized implementation. At a certain stage, this could mean absolute dependency on those centralized systems. When this is coupled with things like the Iron Law of Oligarchy, we could be looking at a very, very bad situation with no way out. And, thats just in the immediate future.. With the technology that will be released in the coming decades, that situation will only get worse. Including for the people who believe they benefit from the corruption and power the most.

Trying to incorporate this level of capability into centralized systems is like trying to lay on a single nail. It will, with near certainty, puncture your body. However, when it is distributed over hundreds or thousands of nails, one can lay on it with a great degree of confidence that none of the nails will cause harm.

Its also probably important to note that things like "the power going out" are somewhat archaic. While this is still relevant for some systems, there are a plethora of ways around this and there is no event (barring utter civilizational annihilation) that will actually destroy electricity-based technologies across the board. Of course, we could do a much better job in preparing for events that might remove energy capability in general and the general public is typically reliant on somewhat fragile systems, but that would also involve reducing centralized authority and control.


Most people seem to either fully support said centralization, or have no interest in adopting modern technology in novel ways. Im not sure either of those approaches is really the best path forward, but luckily, we still have plenty of options in how we actually build towards the future.

a reply to: daskakik

That would take a lot of work. I would have to have many people telling me that if I can prove automation creates more jobs than it destroys there would be a reward. I have somewhat done it here in a non literate form of broken up thoughts. I do know I am right thouugh if I could just figure out how to explain it properly in length.

a reply to: PhantomAntics
You can't explain it, because it isn't true.

My example of a production line with 20 workers being replaced by automation and leaving just 1 line operator and the occasional maintenance tech coming in to do his thing refutes everything you have said here. Multiply that by automation being implemented in more and more businesses and the number of jobs lost just continues to grow.

It isn't that hard to see.

a reply to: Serdgiam

it doesnt matter how you use a tool, it is meant to build to fall properly.

Trying to desribe jobs as a joke is a joke. Money is a joke, not jobs.

Humanity is only described by our automation. Evulution is described by forms of automation.

Centralized systems have always been the way. It still is from when it was & will be. Always.

I said the same thing about the power going out.

a reply to: daskakik

If technology never happened & there was no jobs, I agree. If we are talking about existant technology since a bird put mud to straw or human put wood to wood to create fire & shelter & traps than i disagree. That is automation.