This is not CGI, it's a robot, and it scares the hell out of me!

[Archae]

#t=97

[Wounded Bear]

1. Hey, that's kinda cool...

cue the expensive sex toy jokes, of course. But I can see some important applications beyond anal probing.

[notadmblnd]

2. Why does it scare you?

[Archae]

4. Reminds me of the T-1000 or Doctor Octopus' arms.

[notadmblnd]

7. See, that's why I don't watch scary movies

As shown, I don't think it has any practical use.

[MindPilot]

11. Bite my shiny metal...

No practical uses?! Robot tentacle porn. One good use right there.

[notadmblnd]

13. Lol.

That's too funny

[Motown_Johnny]

3. Why does that scare you?

Imagine tiny ones being used to save lives in delicate operations, or even this one making repairs in dangerous places like Fukushima.

I like it, very cool.

Maybe someday they it be cleaning out the drain in my basement.

[MindPilot]

5. Yeah, the imagination does kind of run a little wild.

especially as the technology advances and that thing gets smaller.

[Archae]

6. Gives "anal probes" a whole new meaning...

[MindPilot]

8. Actually it was the electrician part of me that want a miniaturized one.

Threading wires through walls just got a lot less difficult.

[notadmblnd]

14. Attach a camera and it might be good for a colonoscopy or two.

but don't we already have those devices?

[MindPilot]

21. But this one can "retract along the same path".

That I believe is a substantial advancement in colonoscopy technology.

[onehandle]

9. The future of citizen control. nt

[LiberalElite]

10. Just another machine

doing what some human tells it to do.

[PumpkinAle]

12. Cool, but it scares me for a different reason

more jobs taken from humans.

It worries me no end that machines are doing more human jobs - what are the humans going to be doing? There are only so many service industry jobs out there ............ all at low pay and getting lower.

[Feral Child]

16. Fixing robots?

Selling used robots?

Designing robots?

I don't know, I don't know what most Americans do now. We quick making most everything.

Probably they'll sit around logging onto the internet so they can cavil about robots.

[Warren Stupidity]

19. robots can fix themselves - design provides few jobs

The problem of automation is very real.

[yeoman6987]

28. That is what scares me about the 15 dollar an hour

Debate. I want folks to make a decent wage but the same ones are going to be out of a job as automation will replace them so the 15 dollars will be out, but so will the 8 dollars they get today too. Scary indeed.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

50. So what. Those jobs will go away just as fast at 8 dollars as 15.

Might as well get paid a decent living on the way out.

It's not like the owners are planning on keeping those people.

[Feral Child]

40. Yes, we're joking

because crying openly is unbecoming.

What to do when the upper class no longer needs serfs...

[PumpkinAle]

20. May be its' because I read this thread first

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026035450

[Feral Child]

39. Dig it.

I'm lucky, my wife still makes a good living that supplements my meager retirement. Unsure what will happen when she turns 65 and gets forced into "retirement".

"Good Morning, Sir, Welcome to Walmart..."

[MindPilot]

17. True, but in many cases the jobs are not really "jobs" to begin with.

The tasks these kinds of robots would perform are often dangerous, in toxic environments, or so mind-numbingly repetitive and tedious, humans wouldn't be doing them anyway.

[Taitertots]

29. Technological improvements don't cause increased unemployment

Two important reasons
1) No evidence that there is correlation between technological improvements and unemployment/wages (whole economy)

2) There is no coherent economic model to explain why efficiency improvements would cause higher unemployment/lower wages.

Wages and employment are mostly determined by government and capital holders.

[DetlefK]

34. Economics is just empirical guess-work.

To question 1):
How many workers did it take to manufacture a car at an assembly-line back when all work was done by hand?
How many workers does it take today to make a car?
All the stamping and welding of the metal-sheets into a frame is done by robots. The humans are responsible for screwing on delicate parts. And the paint-job is again done by robots.

To question 2)
Simple counter-question: What will the (estimated) tens of millions of people in the US do for a living when it's cheaper to hire a robot for menial labour?
For example: Warehouse-workers. There are robots that carry around stuff in ware-houses and you need only a few humans as supervisors. What new jobs are created by the fact that ware-houses are now run by robots?

[Taitertots]

35. 1) Your response exhibits a fundamental error in thinking about the issue

You are focusing on only the jobs directly impacted by the improvement. You have to show correlation between unemployment/wages and technological development. Everything you posted is irrelevant to the discussion.

2) What will they do? Anything else. I'll spend the money I would have spent on warehousing and paint creating a different job for them. What do you think happens to the money that would have otherwise gone to menial labor?

[DetlefK]

52. Money. Excellent point.

Warhouse-owner used to have 30 human employees. He turned a certain profit and paid salaries for 30 employees.

Warehouse-owner now has 10 human employees. He turns the same profit and pays salaries for 10 employees.

The warehouse-owner makes more money, 20 people go without salary. You have the premise that rich people will create jobs if they have enough surplus-money. Now, think of all the billionaires out there. How come unemployment still exists? The billionaires could provide everybody with a job!



The truth is, creating jobs is just a byproduct of money-making. An investor won't build a factory and hire people unless he figures that he will be able to sell the product and make a profit.
Robots make people unemployed. -> People don't have money to buy products. -> If no one is buying a product, there is no point in hiring people to make it. -> People stay unemployed.



"What will they do? Anything else."
Wrong.
A good bunch of these "any other jobs" are way better suited for robots. Will sweep the streets for food? Will wash your car for food? Will dig canals for food? Robots are better and cheaper at that. (Or will be, 20 years from now.)
The warehouse-workers were hired for muscle. Not for their looks (e.g. service-jobs that require human interaction like plumbers and restaurants) or their brains (e.g. jobs in art and science), but their muscle. All the jobs that require looks or brains are already taken and there are only so many new openings. And most jobs that require muscle can be done by a robot that's cheaper and more efficient than a human employee.



"What will they do? Anything else."
What is this "anything"?

[Taitertots]

56. There is really nothing to discuss because you still have not shown any evidence to indicate that

technological developments have lead to higher unemployment and/or lower wages. If anything, the body of evidence would suggest that the last 100 years have seen skyrocketing productivity and largely stable employment. How can we have had 100 years of continuous improvement without 100 years of economic contraction?

What do you think happens to the money that you would have spent paying people to sweep the streets? Do YOU (Not billionaires, but you personally) take that money and spend/invest it in something else? Do you take the savings from warehouse automation (present in prices of everything you buy) and spend/invest it on something else?

The simplest way for you to understand where the displaced workers would go is to ask:
Where did all the stable boys go to work when automobiles displaced cars?
Where did all the telegraph operators go to work when automated systems made their jobs obsolete?
Where did the cobblers go when people stopped resoling their shoes?
They all found new jobs because technological improvements don't cause unemployment.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

57. Technological improvements *do* put people out of work, though.

That's not quite the same thing as "causing unemployment", because they often create other jobs for other people. But it's not the non-issue that you make it out to be.

Generally, when a technological improvement makes a form of skilled labour superfluous or reduces demand for it, it's very bad news for the people concerned - many of the cobblers, etc you mention won't have found new jobs, and many of the remainder will have found lower-paying ones.

So while the net effect on employment may not be negative, you're wrong to be so blase about the people affected. This is not a situation where x + -x = 0 applies.

[DetlefK]

58. For example: slavery.

The stable boys, the telegraph operators and the cobblers got jobs because some investor figured that he could turn a profit by hiring these humans.
But in the near future an investor can turn an even bigger profit by hiring robots instead of humans.

For example:
Imagine an economy based on selling products and paying employees a salary. What happens if slavery suddenly became legal and morally justified, with a near-unlimited supply of slaves? There would be no incentive to create paying jobs if the same or a bigger profit could be achieved with slave-labor.

There is no similar historical event because we haven't had this situation before: Human society has seen a decreasing number of slaves over the centuries, not an increasing one. And for moral reasons, not economic ones.

[Taitertots]

59. If what you say is true, why hasn't 100 years of improvement caused 100 years of contraction

There is absolutely no reason to believe technological improvments cause high unemployment.

[DetlefK]

60. Sigh. Where are all the cleaning-ladies and plumbers in Magical Britain in "Harry Potter"?

You don't need those human workers, because there is a cheaper alternative in Magical Britain.

You take the human worker and replace him with a slave, with a trained dog, with a robot, with magic... whatever. If the replacement delivers the same productivity as the human and is cheaper, THEN THERE IS NO INCENTIVE TO PICK A HUMAN WORKER OVER A WORKER OF ANY OTHER RACE.




It's not the improvements that make humans obsolete, but the creation of a new class of cheaper workers. The technological improvements increased the amount of productivity while keeping the need for human workers.

But now whe have reached a level where the technological improvement cannot be separated from a the entity "worker".

Instead of HUMAN workers you get SLAVE workers or DOG workers of ROBOT workers or MAGIC workers... The consequences are always the same: The workers are still part of the economy, it's just they are no longer part of the human population.

[Taitertots]

62. "Magical Britain"? Come back to reality.

Prove it is happening with real world data or just admit that there is no evidence that technology increases unemployment.

[DetlefK]

63. Okay: How many white cotton-pickers where there in the southern US-states mid-19th century?

Answer: Next to none.
Why: Because it made far more sense to get some black slaves because they work for free.



Workers that work for free are better than workers who demand a salary. (At least in the economic short-term.)
Still with me?
Okay.



It is not the technology that is replacing the human worker, it is not the increased productivity that is making his work-power obsolete.
Instead, a new class of workers shows up in the economy. This worker can do almost anything a human can, but he works for free.
Stiiiiiiill with me?
Okaaaaay.



Employing this new kind of workers has economic advantages over employing human workers.
-> For the company, it makes more sense to give jobs to the new guys instead of humans.



At least pretend to read my argument.

[Humanist_Activist]

31. There's a reason there's increased talk of minimum basic incomes...

If robots are going to be responsible, in the future, for most industrial and economic activity, then humans should be taken care of, and possibly freed up to pursue other things.

[2naSalit]

15. Yeah, me too

Especially the part where they end up acquiring personhood rights!!

I fear it's inevitable.

[Feral Child]

18. It's creepy no doubt.

But my last several years have been spent dodging or recovering from colonoscopies. I'm pretty sure Dr. Cohen has one of those, in the Extra Large size.


EDIT: I knew I'd hate getting old. It was a general, ignorant sort of concern. The reality is much worse than my expectations.

[mopinko]

30. i hear ya. better colonoscopies would make a big diff for a lot of people.

after my last one i swore never again. i am 60. if there is nothin growing in there now, i dont think it will catch up to me before something else kills me.
or, before i wish i was done on this plain anyway.

i got a real taste of old and infirm in the last year. i dont like it.

[Feral Child]

36. That's pretty much how I felt, without having undergone a c'scope. (WARNING: TMI alert)

That is, until I found myself the proud father of a butt-baby, delivered by C-section.

Chemo and radiation wrecked me. Two years of treatment, numerous complications, but I was lucky. It was treatable, and two years after the treatment stopped, I'm near normal again. Diet and exercise, I've regained the forty pounds that I lost.

Telling the truth, if I'd known what I was in far, I might have elected to refuse treatment and lived out my short remainder eating happy-pills until I pulled the plug mydamnself.

If it comes around again, or anything like it, that's my plan.

I live in an ignorant, non-medical cannabis state, but be assured, I self-treated with that boon to mankind quite readily. It helps with the pain and nausea, and more importantly, it kept up my morale.


DAMN their puritan morality laws, and the suffering they cause...

[mopinko]

37. true shit.

use the herb myself, but my lungs dont like it. i sleep like a baby when i can do it, but i end up not being able to breathe, which doesnt go anywhere good.
do qualify for a rx, tho, and will likely apply. edibles would probably do me a lot of good. or oil.

best of luck to you. it sucks to get old. golf balls through a garden hose.

[Feral Child]

38. Vaping is good for the pulmonary-challenged.

Truth is I continue that therapy. Helps the Senior Citizen Blues.

Thanks for the good-wishes, and try for a happy new year, mopinko!

[mopinko]

41. yeah, didnt really help.

i keep looking.

working as hard as this old body will let me for a better year.

[Feral Child]

42. Sorry to hear that

I've been a heavy tobacco user all my life, been on again/off again the last coupla, so I guess I'm just lucky. I don't vape. Quality does make a difference, but high-quality is pretty normal now, much better than the Cambodian Red I started on.

Edibles can sneak up on you. I get a bit incoherent after a brownie. Gets me through a Dan concert, though.

I'm sure you know all this already, I just don't get to chat about my hobby often. Thanks for your patience.

Take care now.

[mopinko]

48. thx again.

[Warpy]

44. Eating it works but it hits you harder and for longer

so if you go that route, eat it as dessert after supper (a little dab'll do you) so you won't be left with a residual buzz in the morning. That's the timing that worked for me when I was a kid and self medicating because nobody believed kids got arthritis.

[mopinko]

47. yeah, the whole edibles thing sorta worries me, in general.

when you take pretty harmless coca leaves, and refine them into cocaine.......

dosage control will be a challenge for an old hippy like me. an rx will prolly help with that.

[Warpy]

51. I used the leaf itself in edibles

and found that eating it at suppertime gave me a super mellow evening, a good night's sleep, and a reasonably clear head in the morning.

If you overshoot, you'll be snoring at 6:30 PM.

Dosage is problematic since leaf potency can vary widely batch to batch, although MM growers are working hard on consistency. I'd start out with a corner of a brownie per batch to find out how strong it is and increase/decrease from there.

[F4lconF16]

55. Dosage control usually isn't as bad as you expect it to be.

There's a bunch of good ways that I've found to work. I also have some different methods for making smoking/vaping much easier on the lungs. I'll post them in a bit, just got off shift so I need to sleep, but this way I'll remember.

[MindPilot]

22. What if it has a smaller one that comes out of the center?

Like the creature in Alien?

[Posteritatis]

26. "and lesser fleas have lesser fleas, and so ad infinitum..."

Bush robots (no relation) would be kinda cool, actually.

[GeorgeGist]

23. Slinky with brain.

[edhopper]

24. I for one

welcome our new robot overlords.

[Cleita]

25. HAL! Is that you?

[pinboy3niner]

27. The spice!

[0rganism]

32. looks like a potentially incredible tool

something like that could make daily life a lot easier for people who need to move things precisely through confined spaces - HVAC, electricians, industrial techs, etc. Longer versions could be useful for search & rescue in difficult situations - collapsed buildings, mine disasters. yeah it looks kind of creepy at first, but so do a lot of people...

i'd like to see the calibration routine for that robot.

[ThoughtCriminal]

33. Call Robo-Rooter when you flush your towel!

And we can also help with an impacted bowel!
Robo-Rooter!

[Warpy]

43. Looks like the design was based on the eels

combined with a self retracting Slinky toy. It looks like something that would be very useful in hostile environments like damaged nuclear plants to assess the damage, places that would kill humans instantly.

This is a neat design that doesn't creep me out at all.

[lunatica]

45. It reminds me of the curious water column in the movie Abyss

And of the remote machine in War of The Worlds.

I like that it moves so smoothly. I can see many uses for it. It could be a camera in outer space, or on another planet. It can also go through winding caves, etc. I think it's really cool.

[AZ Progressive]

46. Looks like this thing from War of the Worlds

[hunter]

49. The second generation of intelligent robots, robots designed by robots, not people...

... probably won't look anything like us, nor our most exotic machines, like caterpillar arm there.

First Generation:

Second? Who knows?

With any luck they won't hate us, which is often more than we can expect from our own fellow human beings.

[MineralMan]

53. The future of sex toys is assured.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

54. Would it seem less scary if it were circumcised?

[JI7]

61. are you scared of SNakes ?

the way it moves almost seems like it can be alive. if it was covered with something resembling a living creature it would probably freak me out to see it move.