Ross Mayfield; The Coming Tech Backlash; In That Certain Blog at possibly entitled Shift (too much cobranding), sponsored by Newco, but centrally hosted at Medium; 2017-01-03.
Teaser: Tech innovation is killing jobs, not foreign scapegoats, and revolt after Trump will be Luddite
Summary: The tech industry played an influential role in the outcome of the US Presidential election. Not just in providing the medium for Fake News and propaganda. The root cause is job destruction by Automation — that drove a base of dissatisfied rust-belt voters to support Trump. Job destruction is accelerating, and if Tech doesn’t get ahead of this problem, there will be a significant populist backlash against the industry and it’s ability to progress.
Ross Mayfield is CEO & Co-founder, Pingpad; ex-LinkedIn, SlideShare, Socialtext, RateXchange.
tl;dr → The future is foretold. The hipster socialism. A startup is promoted. Robots bad. Need Jobs for the unpublished classes. the lede is buried. The working classes need Slack addon, Pingpad, that create jobs; a bot-augmented wiki knowledge base.
tl;dr → There is nothing to fear. The world is big, the effect is small. Anyway, all KPIs are stagnating, not amplifying. And the olds; there are too many old people. The robots will make [the youngs] rich. Say “No” to UBI.
“Oxford University researchers have estimated that 47 percent…”, as opined in Wired, 2015-04.
<quote>Maybe this could be a good drinking game: Every time an article cites the Oxford study, you have to drink a shot of Jack Daniels.</quote>
techno-utopians/dystopians, a self-conscious class of persons.
Technological change has always been gradual and always will be
mostAll of these techno-utopians/dystopians base their “predictions” on the continuation of Moore’s law
which in its ending stages now.
That is because, historically, there is no relationship between higher productivity and unemployment.
All the Baby Boomers will retire, and there is nobody and no wealth to care for them; [we] will want need the machines for that.
… human needs are far from being satisfied.
Of Labor-Intensive Technology-Insensitive Occupations
dental laboratory technicians
social science research assistants
<snide>uttered with out irony</snide>
Chief Executive Officers (CEOs), as an occupation, as a self-conscious class
<snide>again, uttered with out irony</snide>
<quote>Our needs are very large and it is farfetched to think technology will eliminate the need for work.</quote>i>
<quote>But one innovation that is absolutely not needed is UBI (Universal Basic Income), which some have suggested as a reponse to technological progress, and which has to rank as one of the dumbest ideas of all time. </quote>
Carl Benedikt Frey, staff, Oxford University.
professor, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).
CEO, Rethink Robotics
Bill Gates, boffo.
Benoit Hamon, candidate for president, Socialist Party, France.
Marvin Minsky, a scientist, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).
Gordon Moore, co-founder, Intel.
Nil NilsonNils John Nilsson
a scientist, domain of Artificial Intelligence (AI),
the pace of technical change is accelerating
the pace of technical change is accelerating
and the only constant is change, see it works!
labor economist Gail Garfield Schwartz
out of work
in a generation
jobs will be eliminated,
jobs will be eliminated worldwide by 2020 by robotics and AI.
Oxford researchers Michael A. Osborne and Carl Benedikt Frey
sex workers could be out of work
[who are these people?]
incumbent on policymakers
slow down to a more manageable pace of change.
to where only the change is only constant! Wheee!
a tax on robots
Social Security taxes.
Social Security taxes, on robots.
This is an idea that has been championed by luminaries such as
French Socialist presidential candidate Benoit Hamon
the wealth creates benefits for the shareholders
the social contribution
<quote><snip/>the social contributions on the whole of the added value and not just on the work<quote>, attributed ot Benoit Hamon.
Universal Basic Income (UBI)
the risk of a U.S. worker losing their job,
the risk of a U.S. worker losing their job from a shutdown or downsizing.
4th Industrial Revolution
predictions by experts?
“predictions” were made in the 1970’s and 80’s.
the machine with human intelligence
the machine with human intelligence within the next three to eight years
MIT scientist Marvin Minsky
The prediction about 20 percent of the workforce out of work was made in 1982.
give up on full employment,
The call to give up on full employment.
someone can’t distinguish between millions and billions.
winning the lottery,
chance of winning the lottery,
almost as much chance of winning the lottery as…
your CEO is incompetent.
<quote>Maybe robots replacing CEO’s is the answer to job security.</quote>
The Study. That. Shows.
the Oxford study by Osborne and Frey,
the Oxford study by Osborne and Frey that warns…
the Oxford study,
coverage of the Oxford study.
a bottle of Jack Daniels,
to wager a bottle of Jack Daniels.
702 occupational categories,
all 702 occupational categories,
neglected to examine all 702 occupational categories
task measures from the Department of Labor,
task measures from the Department of Labor, which assessed occupations based on factors…
task measures from the Department of Labor, which assessed occupations based on factors such as how much manual dexterity…
task measures from the Department of Labor, which assessed occupations based on factors such as how much manual dexterity and social perceptiveness [as occupational requirements].
destined for the trash heap…
destined for the trash heap of techno-history.
their methodology produces nonsense.
going the way of the buggy whip maker
the magic robot chair
instead of fretting…
instead of fretting about … killing jobs,
instead of fretting about tech killing jobs.
instead be worrying…
instead be worrying about … productivity …,
instead be worrying about … productivity growth rates …
instead be worrying about … raise productivity growth rates …
instead be worrying about … raise productivity growth rates, which have been at all-time lows over the last decade.
instead be worrying about … going to raise productivity growth rates, which have been at all-time lows over the last decade.
instead be worrying about how the heck are we ever going to raise productivity growth rates, which have been at all-time lows over the last decade.
<wow!> <paf!> </wow!>
the robot assault
MIT professor and CEO of Rethink Robotics Rodney Brooks
misled by suitcase words.
category errors in fungibility of capabilities.
category errors comparable to seeing the rise of more efficient internal combustion engines …
category errors comparable to seeing the rise of more efficient internal combustion engines and jumping to the conclusion that warp drives are just around the corner.
Beam me up, Scotty.
Moore’s law, (sic) Moore’s Law),
the continuation of Moore’s Law.
Intel’s co-founder [Gordon Moore]
The nature of exponentials
is that you push them out and eventually disaster happens.” Disaster will happen long before
the alluring robot in Ex Machina.
There’s another reason to calm down.
This is pretty obvious if you just think about it.
Productivity leads to lower prices and/or higher wages.
This money gets spent.
That spending creates jobs.
we are to panic,
if we are to panic …
if we are to panic, and panic can be a good thing.
the massive retirement,
the massive retirement of baby boomers.
a generational war,
a generational war where …
a generational war where either the old people or the younger workers will win.
working-age people, old people,
the ratio of working-age people to old people.
increasing productivity to raise incomes,
keep increasing productivity to raise incomes.
American household today,
the average American household today.
increased their incomes,
productivity gains increased their incomes …
productivity gains increased their incomes from $60K to $240K.
a few simple-living hippies.
We examine how susceptible jobs are to computerisation. To assess this, we begin by implementing a novel methodology to estimate the probability of computerisation for 702 detailed occupations, using a Gaussian process classifier. Based on these estimates, we examine expected impacts of future computerisation on US labour market outcomes, with the primary objective of analysing the number of jobs at risk and the relationship between an occupation’s probability of computerisation, wages and educational attainment. According to our estimates, about 47 percent of total US employment is at risk. We further provide evidence that wages and educational attainment exhibit a strong negative relationship with an occupation’s probability of computerisation.