The Future and Software, interesting read

Forums › Off topic › The Future and Software, interesting read

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

6657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3477

Trusted

#1778652 9-May-2017 18:17

Reminds me a bit of studying the Industrial Revolution. Everyone then was afraid of being replaced by a machine. Did that happen? No it didn't.

I reckon the same will occur here. There are jobs that haven't been invented yet. Some will disappear and other will replace them. People will need different skills.

Also for a country like New Zealand some of this automation will be difficult to implement, here I'm thinking of self drive truck, taxis buses. The technology is currently based around dense populations where it will work very well. I'm less sure how some of it will stack up in many parts of New Zealand where we don't have dense populations.

For quite a while at least humans will still be cheaper. One good example is pilot-less aircraft, the technology and the manpower to run that technology is more expensive than paying pilots to sit up the front.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

DaveB

1139 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 456
Inactive user

#1778674 9-May-2017 19:00

Technofreak:

For quite a while at least humans will still be cheaper. One good example is pilot-less aircraft, the technology and the manpower to run that technology is more expensive than paying pilots to sit up the front.

Ummm ......... not quite correct there. Do a search of Google for pilotless aircraft from 2012. The only thing holding this back is the current "low success" marketing perspective. Think of the money airlines could save once this is in effect, but also think about the lawsuit if things were to go wrong? But also think about our lazy way of easily accepting the terms and conditions without reading them when we purchase online.

Pilotless aircraft are closer than you dare think and certainly we be part of my 12 year old son's overseas experience before he is 20 years old.

Technofreak

6657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3477

Trusted

#1778755 9-May-2017 20:50

DaveB:

Technofreak:

For quite a while at least humans will still be cheaper. One good example is pilot-less aircraft, the technology and the manpower to run that technology is more expensive than paying pilots to sit up the front.

Ummm ......... not quite correct there. Do a search of Google for pilotless aircraft from 2012. The only thing holding this back is the current "low success" marketing perspective. Think of the money airlines could save once this is in effect, but also think about the lawsuit if things were to go wrong? But also think about our lazy way of easily accepting the terms and conditions without reading them when we purchase online.

Pilotless aircraft are closer than you dare think and certainly we be part of my 12 year old son's overseas experience before he is 20 years old.

Most of those pilotless aircraft need someone on the ground to operate it and in some cases a safety pilot on board. For many aircraft while it's technically possible to fly it remotely it's not necessarily cheaper especially when you add in the cost of technology.

All this talk of one person controlling several tens of aircraft is just wishful thinking. Air Traffic controllers can't handle that many piloted aircraft now. Which brings me to anther point, ATC will become automated long before pilotless aircraft take to the skies in any great numbers.

I wouldn't be so certain of pilotless passenger aircraft happening within 8 years. The certification process alone will take up a significant amount of time and as yet other than drones the pilotless aircraft is still very much experimental. Systems reliability (I'm talking about all aircraft systems, powerplant, pressurisation, anti ice and deice systems, electrical generation systems, etc, not just remote control systems) and communications security will need to improve significantly beforehand as well.

It's dealing with the situations caused by faulty systems and equipment that a pilot earns his money. There's nothing like Johnny on the spot for sorting things out. Just think of events like Sully and the A320 into the Hudson River or Apollo 13 to name two very high profile examples. There's plenty of less dramatic events requiring a Johnny on the spot occurring every day that don't event make the news.

As you allude to there is a low success rate from a marketing perspective. For that reason alone it will be a very long time until pilotless aircraft gain any traction regardless of technology.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1778775 9-May-2017 21:09

Technofreak:

Reminds me a bit of studying the Industrial Revolution. Everyone then was afraid of being replaced by a machine. Did that happen? No it didn't.

I reckon the same will occur here. There are jobs that haven't been invented yet. Some will disappear and other will replace them. People will need different skills.

Also for a country like New Zealand some of this automation will be difficult to implement, here I'm thinking of self drive truck, taxis buses. The technology is currently based around dense populations where it will work very well. I'm less sure how some of it will stack up in many parts of New Zealand where we don't have dense populations.

For quite a while at least humans will still be cheaper. One good example is pilot-less aircraft, the technology and the manpower to run that technology is more expensive than paying pilots to sit up the front.

I think comparing the Industrial Revolution is naive.

The stuff I pasted on my OP is compelling. Its not science fiction. The growth in technology is like the left side of a Bell Curve. While it wont happen overnight, it will happen.

In fact it would be better of it happened overnight, say scheduled for 16 Oct 2018, then we plan for it. But as its slow, humans will evolve, slow. The decreasing employment will be seen as a short term trend. Govt wont go against it as they wont get elected if they plan for tax take growth to cater for increasing unemployment. Recession, slow growth, Govt has a poor budget. I am actually surprised that in a tech forum I am seeing a trend of "it'll be ok"

It will be seen by some as futuristic. Jetsons like. Re read the article. Humans are a key part of the financial chain. Same as many chains. The food chain. The need for the moon and rotating Earth to allow the Great Water Channel to operate, otherwise it stops and the oceans are stagnant. As in oil is needed to lubricate the engine, and cashflow is needed to lubricate the business. Should humans be largely removed from the economy, that causes a hole.

In past centuries that means war to survive. In todays world that means politics to survive, although that is false. It just needs a tune up to what we are used to. Work = wages= employers profits = taxes from all, and so on. The wages will be the missing part.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1778780 9-May-2017 21:17

Technofreak:

DaveB:

Technofreak:

For quite a while at least humans will still be cheaper. One good example is pilot-less aircraft, the technology and the manpower to run that technology is more expensive than paying pilots to sit up the front.

Ummm ......... not quite correct there. Do a search of Google for pilotless aircraft from 2012. The only thing holding this back is the current "low success" marketing perspective. Think of the money airlines could save once this is in effect, but also think about the lawsuit if things were to go wrong? But also think about our lazy way of easily accepting the terms and conditions without reading them when we purchase online.

Pilotless aircraft are closer than you dare think and certainly we be part of my 12 year old son's overseas experience before he is 20 years old.

Most of those pilotless aircraft need someone on the ground to operate it and in some cases a safety pilot on board. For many aircraft while it's technically possible to fly it remotely it's not necessarily cheaper especially when you add in the cost of technology.

All this talk of one person controlling several tens of aircraft is just wishful thinking. Air Traffic controllers can't handle that many piloted aircraft now. Which brings me to anther point, ATC will become automated long before pilotless aircraft take to the skies in any great numbers.

I wouldn't be so certain of pilotless passenger aircraft happening within 8 years. The certification process alone will take up a significant amount of time and as yet other than drones the pilotless aircraft is still very much experimental. Systems reliability (I'm talking about all aircraft systems, powerplant, pressurisation, anti ice and deice systems, electrical generation systems, etc, not just remote control systems) and communications security will need to improve significantly beforehand as well.

It's dealing with the situations caused by faulty systems and equipment that a pilot earns his money. There's nothing like Johnny on the spot for sorting things out. Just think of events like Sully and the A320 into the Hudson River or Apollo 13 to name two very high profile examples. There's plenty of less dramatic events requiring a Johnny on the spot occurring every day that don't event make the news.

As you allude to there is a low success rate from a marketing perspective. For that reason alone it will be a very long time until pilotless aircraft gain any traction regardless of technology.

I agree. For pilotless aircraft, that would take decades for OSH, technology and the public to be on side. Even if there public got onside tomorrow.

But what about the points in the article? Futuristc? Or not?

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16318

Lifetime subscriber

#1778784 9-May-2017 21:24

I am surprised that the author is so firm about the time frame, which is quite short. Other than that I am utterly fascinated. I assume he must know what he is talking about.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1778799 9-May-2017 21:53

Rikkitic:

I am surprised that the author is so firm about the time frame, which is quite short. Other than that I am utterly fascinated. I assume he must know what he is talking about.

I am too, and also fascinated. When you read his thoughts, they are not futuristic, they are real. And this has been happening a long time, but like the left side of a Bell Curve its slow. Technology pushes things, but over time the technology pushes technology, I can see it ramping up in the future.

I bought 8 60mm external paling nails in the weekend. I had to buy 148, no issue. If I had a 3D printer and metal I could run them up myself. Now, its not the Star Trek Replicator to whip up medium rare streak and veges, but its not really that far off.

Technofreak

6657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3477

Trusted

#1778812 9-May-2017 22:00

tdgeek:

I think comparing the Industrial Revolution is naive.

The stuff I pasted on my OP is compelling. Its not science fiction. The growth in technology is like the left side of a Bell Curve. While it wont happen overnight, it will happen.

I think the Industrial Revolution is a very good parallel.

If you look back in history there are several quantum changes and enablers. For example making a fire, the wheel, radio communication, powered flight, the internet etc. Then there's other, what I call, intermediary enablers like the motor car, - no more stables in town to house your horse while you did business in town, no more farriers to shod the horses, or the telephone, and fax machines and see what they did to the telegraph industry, no more telegraph delivery boys, or the word processor - no more typing pools etc. However look how many are involved in IT these days. If you'd asked someone 30 or so years ago the thought of IT jobs as we know them today wouldn't have been a remote consideration.

I'd suggest so far as working habits go the Industrial Revolution and what the MD of Daimler Benz is talking about are both disrupters of a similar magnitude for their respective times.

While we should not sit back and say she'll be right I still think there's no need to panic about what employment opportunities there will be in the future.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1778820 9-May-2017 22:08

Technofreak:

tdgeek:

I think comparing the Industrial Revolution is naive.

The stuff I pasted on my OP is compelling. Its not science fiction. The growth in technology is like the left side of a Bell Curve. While it wont happen overnight, it will happen.

I think the Industrial Revolution is a very good parallel.

If you look back in history there are several quantum changes and enablers. For example making a fire, the wheel, radio communication, powered flight, the internet etc. Then there's other, what I call, intermediary enablers like the motor car, - no more stables in town to house your horse while you did business in town, no more farriers to shod the horses, or the telephone, and fax machines and see what they did to the telegraph industry, no more telegraph delivery boys, or the word processor - no more typing pools etc. However look how many are involved in IT these days. If you'd asked someone 30 or so years ago the thought of IT jobs as we know them today wouldn't have been a remote consideration.

I'd suggest so far as working habits go the Industrial Revolution and what the MD of Daimler Benz is talking about are both disrupters of a similar magnitude for their respective times.

While we should not sit back and say she'll be right I still think there's no need to panic about what employment opportunities there will be in the future.

Certainly no need to panic.

But I stand by my Bell Curve stance. Telephone, Tele machine whatever it was, you get short messages on the big machine. Tip of my tongue. Not Telegram, what businesses had in the 80's. 2400 baud, 9600 baud, 14.4, 28.8 56k, all took a while.

2000, ADSL, wow. 7616/768k . 17 years later its 1000/500. 10GB plan was $995 now Unlimited is about $80. Exponential. Segways are a dime a dozen, you see them on sports telecasts, and so on. Its happening faster and faster IMHO

Technofreak

6657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3477

Trusted

#1778827 9-May-2017 22:23

tdgeek:

Certainly no need to panic.

But I stand by my Bell Curve stance. Telephone, Tele machine whatever it was, you get short messages on the big machine. Tip of my tongue. Not Telegram, what businesses had in the 80's. 2400 baud, 9600 baud, 14.4, 28.8 56k, all took a while.

2000, ADSL, wow. 7616/768k . 17 years later its 1000/500. 10GB plan was $995 now Unlimited is about $80. Exponential. Segways are a dime a dozen, you see them on sports telecasts, and so on. Its happening faster and faster IMHO

Teleprinter old chap, I think that's what you're thinking of.

Agree change is happening at ever increasing rates, it has been forever. It's a natural cycle, inventions aid and enable further inventions.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1778868 10-May-2017 06:47

Technofreak:

tdgeek:

Certainly no need to panic.

But I stand by my Bell Curve stance. Telephone, Tele machine whatever it was, you get short messages on the big machine. Tip of my tongue. Not Telegram, what businesses had in the 80's. 2400 baud, 9600 baud, 14.4, 28.8 56k, all took a while.

2000, ADSL, wow. 7616/768k . 17 years later its 1000/500. 10GB plan was $995 now Unlimited is about $80. Exponential. Segways are a dime a dozen, you see them on sports telecasts, and so on. Its happening faster and faster IMHO

Teleprinter old chap, I think that's what you're thinking of.

Agree change is happening at ever increasing rates, it has been forever. It's a natural cycle, inventions aid and enable further inventions.

I guess what I see is that changes cause movement of labour, but automation, while causing some movement of labour (to manufacturing them and servicing/managing them) there is a permanent loss of labour.

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#1778874 10-May-2017 07:23

tdgeek:

The stuff I pasted on my OP is compelling. Its not science fiction. The growth in technology is like the left side of a Bell Curve. While it wont happen overnight, it will happen.

Bell curve is the wrong analogy... I think what you want is the J-curve or perhaps S-curve. There's a bit of a dip or delay whilst new technology is deployed, followed by a rapid increase.

One thing that's similar to the Industrial Revolution is that ICT technology is self-improving. Just like machines were made (lathes, etc) which made better machines (including better lathes), now we have computers being used to make better computers, and communications systems, and machines. I'd venture that the ICT positive feed back is much stronger and faster than the industrial positive feedback.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1778889 10-May-2017 08:18

frankv:

tdgeek:

The stuff I pasted on my OP is compelling. Its not science fiction. The growth in technology is like the left side of a Bell Curve. While it wont happen overnight, it will happen.

Bell curve is the wrong analogy... I think what you want is the J-curve or perhaps S-curve. There's a bit of a dip or delay whilst new technology is deployed, followed by a rapid increase.

One thing that's similar to the Industrial Revolution is that ICT technology is self-improving. Just like machines were made (lathes, etc) which made better machines (including better lathes), now we have computers being used to make better computers, and communications systems, and machines. I'd venture that the ICT positive feed back is much stronger and faster than the industrial positive feedback.

But the ICT feedback will be used to automate current industrial machines, not just improve them and make them more productive, and remove a lot of the human component. Computers are better than typewriters but you still needed the human. When a factory is near bereft of humans, that is the future problem. Already there are warehouses that have robots picking stock for despatch.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1778896 10-May-2017 08:40

The supposed main fear from the "AI revolution" won't be realised because the owners of the machines need a market for the products and services they make. You can't sell anything to impoverished masses - so one way or another, the spoils will have to be shared.

That's not going to be between the owners of the machines.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1778919 10-May-2017 09:15

Fred99:

The supposed main fear from the "AI revolution" won't be realised because the owners of the machines need a market for the products and services they make. You can't sell anything to impoverished masses - so one way or another, the spoils will have to be shared.

That's not going to be between the owners of the machines.

I agree. If the human factor is removed, that's a hole.

It would IMO be better if there was a lot of this, as that will show that there needs to be a restructure of the financial ecosystem, given that many humans are permanently unemployed. If it was a gradual change, which it would be, then what you get is slowly increasing unemployment, the Govt paying for it (not the taxpayer as the Govt will be reluctant to increase taxes), and the economy slides downwards. No one will want to act. Businesses that automate are happy, Govt wont want to upset them, or tax the workers more. There wont be a statement that the worker-machine-business relationship is changing and needs adapting. Wages for the remaining human jobs will decrease as too much supply of labour.

The Industrial Revolution and since has created jobs by increasing productivity and business activity. Population has grown, demand is there. Automation is different. It adds productivity and efficiency, but it retires humans. Factor in that it becomes more worthwhile to operate 24/7 as machines dont get wages and penal rates, that adds to the change.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6