Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

IdealAudience t1_jap72d3 wrote

Reply to comment by Sieventer in Figure: One robot for every human on the planet. by GodOfThunder101

I would guess something like 10 years to transition, at least,

remote control robo will probably beat unsupervised program in the field for many things .. at first .. increasingly with A.i. tips and hints and info and taking over more and more . . humans able to supervise 2, 4 .. jump in when necessary . 8. 20 .. .

But from home .. where-ever there's fast enough internet ..

- how many manual laborers and technicians does that = ? , globally ?

- when we can train virtually, and practice jobs, and stack 8 to a bot.. work from home 20 minutes when you feel like it, locally, globally, young, old, ugly, shy . .

​

Legions swarming to pick an orchard, locally or globally .. then zip to the next bunch of bots 1000 km away, while A group gets on a truck and drives down the road...

- if that doesn't = cheap or free food, we're doing it wrong.

Swarm to prepare and assemble a factory-made neighborhood .. if that doesn't = affordable or free housing, we're doing it wrong.

And so on.. heart surgery wherever .. repair .. clean any toxic junk ..

- increasingly a.i.

I'd join a union or co-op if I were you, and hire the same. It doesn't have to be dystopia.. though good is far from guaranteed.

11

EnomLee t1_japu1z5 wrote

Good call. If advancement in robotics outpaces artificial intelligence, remote operation by humans would be the best way to close the gap.

The downside would be that professions that previously were safe in their local cities or states would now have to compete at the national, or maybe even international level with other people. Why hire your local plumber or electrician when you can have the best plumbers and electricians in the country instead?

It would be a lot like watching local newspapers decline while the big national papers survive. Or watching video rental chains get replaced by online streaming. Or watching mom & pop stores driven out of business by big box stores and online shopping.

It's a big game of musical chairs, and every new innovation takes another seat out of the game.

6

blueSGL t1_jaq2ray wrote

> compete at the national, or maybe even international level

speed of light hasn't changed. Networks get better throughput but latency remains.

For work where you need to have dexterity and reflexes locally piloted will be better. (though not everything will need that level of feedback)

1

Stakbrok t1_japwn86 wrote

>- if that doesn't = cheap or free food, we're doing it wrong.

Free is impossible since there will always be costs no matter the efficiency. But I agree with cheap.

2

TheAnonFeels t1_jas33bv wrote

I don't think free is impossible. Might take some fudging of the definition... But like with the possibility of Fusion energy... The idea here is that electricity would become so cheap, it would be more costly to bill customers.

I can see a similar scenario happening with food, and the state power would have to take over production because if the profit goes away or becomes so minuscule that companies are dropping out of the agriculture business, it'll need to be bolstered somehow.

Either, A) State ran, free for everyone within reason. B) More farming subsidies. C) ??

we always get the "BuT tHaTs NoT fReE", so here: No but its free for the consumer to consume.

Then, not to mention, this will be happening to nearly every industry across the world.

2