Will Robots Take Our Jobs?
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 09. 2017
- In short, yes they will, continuing the trend of humans working less. This video was sponsored by "Robot-Proof" written by Northeastern University's President, Joseph E. Aoun. Learn more here: goo.gl/hqBDLA
When I think about robots taking our jobs, I am neither of the opinion that we need to panic amidst the imminent robopocalypse, nor am I confident there will always be work for everyone. Instead I think we will see something similar to previous revolutions (e.g. agricultural and industrial). That is, ultimately everyone will be better off, working fewer hours and doing tasks more suited to people than to machines (thanks to widespread automation), but during the transition there will be discomfort. This discomfort arises when people who have been working particular jobs for most of their lives find themselves out of work, or find their jobs don't even exist anymore. Then education and retraining is the challenge, something that's not easily accomplished and something our educational system is not setup to do.
That’s how you make a sponsored video. Actual thoughtful content that stands on its own.
whoa, hi there Sonny :D
It is called content marketing.
3:57 That security guard shaking his head
smh
Yep i Saw that to he was like “Jesus Chris ”
Samovar maker unfortunately he'll soon lose his job too😪
lol i dont know why
I imagine he sees way too many selfie sticks to expect that this one is held by a smart person.
I recently made a video asking the question 'When robots can do creative jobs, what will humans have left?'
Can you share the link?
When robots do creative jobs we could all play RaId ShAdOw LeGeNds.
I don’t think they will
Creative jobs are more likely things you do as a hobby
If a robot does the job 100% accurate and perfekt but a human doesn’t
People maybe still tend to pay more for the human creation. Why? Because it is unique
@@kevinfritsch2620 well it depends on type of creativity. If its art, music etc ai would take time and there are different outcomes.
But creativity in science would really change world. And if programmed and planned in right way. Its would be best invention by human.
Eventually perhaps there may be no real jobs left, leaving us with free time to do whatever we want, including creative activities. Maybe living creatures could still do creative jobs for a living branding their products as "made by living soul" :P
Did anyone else notice...?
1:50 - The attendant is saying that sooner or later robots will replace us in jobs because they're more efficient. (Exit sign in background).
1:59 - Derek begins talking about how robots are getting faster and better than us while sitting in front of a sign that says "BETTER FASTER FOOD".
3:00 - Derek is talking about number of employees vs company value while passing a Parking Garage which is typically used by people while they are working.
3:29 - Derek explains the drastic increase in unemployed males aged 25-54 since the 1960's then pans across a vacant storefront.
3:40 - "All jobs are at risk of being automated within the next few decades." Shows traffic signal at crosswalk. A job that used to be done by a human, but has long since been automated.
3:50 - "It's easy to see how this could lead to a downward trajectory for society." Passes a "One Way" sign that is pointed behind him.
4:17 - Derek talks about the Luddites destroying machines for taking their jobs while walking past machines that while operated by humans, took many human jobs.
6:07 - "The other factor here is the new jobs that will be created." Public Parking sign in background.
6:25 - Derek talks about the difficulties ahead of him as he pursued his career then passes a sign that reads "Curb Lane Closed Ahead".
7:17 - Derek says that the people who will be able to take advantage of these changing opportunities are those who have the right education. He then passes a sign that features an "Early Bird" deal.
7:30 - Derek says "So, for the future..." Then pans left to show a "Road Work Ahead" sign.
7:55 - Derek is talking about educational futurism and how colleges need to innovate in order to prepare students for the future. He's passing a bank which is a place where you financially prepare for the future.
And there are lots of other subtle coincidences throughout the video that I just don't have the time to sit and type out.
Derek @2veritasium is either a film making genius or this video is absolutely brimming with coincidental symbolism.
Or you just picking things out of context maybe...
I see three things going on here that combine to create the effect you so brilliantly explained.
1) Humans a pattern recognising organisms. We draw connections between things and there are lots of elements in the videos to feed that process. So I'm calling that skillfully recognised coincidence.
2) We are not conscious of most of our pattern recognising abilities. But they do effect the choices we make, the subjects that come to mind next, the words we choose. It is very likely that someone will talk about a concept that relates to something they saw, but didn't notice. I think this must have happened to some extent during the video.
3) No matter how logical we think we are, we do a lot of things by feel, by our emotional reactions. We like patterns and things fitting together. Derek would have made a lot of choices when editing this video down, and it is likely that the stuff on the cutting room floor has less of these coincidences, because at a non-conscious level, they would have been less attractive material.
But you are right, he does have some film making genius going on for him. This is a great phrase for describing those who trust their unconscious, go with the gut feeling decisions, and come up with a product that has a lot more depth and connections than they consciously put into it.
Necrojoker or maybe he is with the Illuminati
He wanted to be a filmmaker remember? It's a combination of skill in framing the shots and luck to have occurrences and places that fit into the storyline to work with in each scene.
Face in the clouds
7:05 what a nice lady.
Ha Nguyen
Video-Bombed! lol
Tbh I am surprised there is noone that woudl like begin to follow him all the way, when they see his do thing vlogs xD
Haha
Lol’d
3:56 man in the background disapproves of Derek.
Loved the dude just shaking his head like "Young folk these days talking to their gyro cameras and shit..."
Short Answer: Probably.
I work front office for a Primary Care Doctor.
PLEASE TAKE MY JOB, ROBOTS!
Renagadde IKR I mean all we have to do control the robots it not like they got to eat😂 they can literally do everything like building houses now everyone got free house and lambo and not be in debt but it all depends on the government
7:05 *waves back*
so what's the bad part of me working only 15 hours a week?! it's a dream come true! fuck work...
The bad part is that companies don't employ more people to work less hours, they simply employ less people that work the same amount.
yes and no. there is a trend in the company where i work for - people tend to work less hours, just because they find it insulting to travel 2 hours a day and then spend 8 more working for someone else. why aren't we all insulted by the obvious waste of our lifetime. i start to understand older people who have not left anything behind them except ... workhours.
Jelle van M. Yes. I think it will be fundamental to make sure the middle class actually gain the wealth (for fairness, and so that they want to work less) and maybe there should be limits to work-hours.
there is no fairness in the middle class to gain whatever. we agree to work for a salary, we agree to pay taxes, we suffer from unemployment, etc. nothing is given or taken without a reason. trust me, i lived in a communist country and there is a reason that this system is only theoretical and not practical :D one thing that i agree on however is the fact that people are generally underpaid. salaries could easily be higher. this can only be regulated by the government, but again...it is a bit unnatural to intervene in such a private issue. again, what if the salaries are increased and the effect is zero. this topic is as long as the human history...
boredom
I've just realised how well you must have written and memorised all these talks beforehand, so these wouldn't be seen as all over the place ramblings when you record them on the street!
This wave of automation isn't going to create many "new" jobs at all.. You simply don't need as many people to make/manage these new automation technologies/industries.
It's going to force people to rethink the value of "work" and rethink what a "job" is.. Somehow we're going to have to make it possible for people to live comfortably, while doing things which may not be capable of earning them a paycheck, but are still productive and/or important rolls in society. This may require us to look at Unconditional Basic Income systems, or other methods to deal with the issue, but either way we deal with it, we can't ignore this rapidly approaching reality.
Exactly!
tey took our jerbs
MPcrazyscience thy took dee durrr!!!
dey terp de deeeerr!?
MPcrazyscience durka duuurrr
tuk arrr jaaaaaaa
This is what I was looking for when I scrolled down to the comments.
robots taking our job shouldnt be a bad thing.
Unless you become jobless and won't be able to make a living
Sayuas thats why i say shouldnt. just as it is now we make enough resources for everyone to live comfortably. robots taking our works should mean that we no longer have to work to get our needs met, and we can each focus on having a fulfilling life.
Keep in mind that, if you can't add anything to society, society migh consider that it should do nothing for you. It's impossible to say that all future societies will be completely uncorrupted, and that they will never take the power for themselves.
If that situation would arise, you would at best be living far worse than you seem to imply (and probably wouldn't know it).
The transition is a (temporary) bad thing because our policies doesn't really address the issue very well of the people who get phased out in the mean time. If we fix that, it won't be a problem. The conundrum is that fixing the problem will undeniably result in some massive welfare standard like basic income.
Joaquin and if only large multinational companies take over all automation system the why would they let u live comfortably----u think they will make everything free of cost---NO u will become poor while they feed off your healthy lifestyle
The real question is: "Will Jobs Take Our Robots?"
Yea
I really like your videos because they are informative and the way you walk and talk makes us feel like we're having a conversation and not sitting in the office
Lifelong learning at universities? At these tuition prices?? Of course the president of a university would think that is a good idea.
You could learn your entire life in a university. Do only things you like. Eat healthy local delicious food. Have full mobility and communication. Full healthcare for all your needs. Housing that is suitable for you and travel the world. Without ever working a job. Without anyone on earth having to do anything else.
The only thing you could not do, was have hundreds or thousands of people working for you, to get money from their labor, so that you can buy yachts, private jets, politicians, countries and planets. So guess who does not want you to believe that the first is possible.
+liquidminds But does that make people happy? Just giving them what they want? Are the richest people in the world content with how much money they have, or do they want more? Alexander wept when there were no nations left to conquer. I like videogames, vacations, days off every now and then but what makes me happy in the long term is going to my job, making an honest living, and eating a meal at night knowing that I earned it.
Not what they "want". what they NEED. So that everything they want can be the focus of their work.
Your story is exactly the point. If you work hard but can hardly sustain your life with it, you will be unsatisfied. If you work hard but make a good living, you're happy.
But even if you happened to lose your job, you should be able to get by somehow.
As you said. the richest don't get happier with more billions, but a honest, earned wage, that's something that doesn't cost millions and brings a lot.
What happened to sciencium????
Nikhil Garg
It was taken over by a lazy robot.
Green Silver 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂fml then
Nikhil Garg
Maybe he didn't have any food ideas for shorter videos? Hopefully that channel will be used more in the future.
Great video Derek, it's always a pleasure watching your stuff! Is this hardware video stabilization?
You can see the guard's disapproval here 3:57
I'm at Northeastern right now, and hearing Aoun's name filled me with joy. The man is a meme legend
at some point robots will have all jobs and we will live in a Wall-e space ship type world.
WE NEED MORE VIDEOS DEREK!! Please upload more often!
Thanks for creating and sharing this content. I have young children and I was thinking about them throughout the video. The point you make about being adaptable and agile cannot go unheard. That is true today and even more so tomorrow. Thanks again.
Hopefully; It will mean infinite wealth for everyone. We don't want jobs, we wants the goods and services jobs produce.
No it’s not like that, few hundred trillionares will infinite wealth and we will live in mercy of them
And in next few hundred years even those trillionare job will be taken by robots due to their high intelligence and human’s future will be in mercy of AI ! Do u want to that future?
@@joshuabenedictj All of these trillionaires and A.I.s are creating goods and services for humanity. What is there to be scared of? Not having a job, because goods and services are so cheap? Someone else getting rich doesn't make someone else poorer.
@@ronpaulrevered But in many cases it will cause inequality, do u think those trillions will just give you money every month, no. Yes some new jobs will be created at first but as time passes those also will be taken
@@joshuabenedictj Inequality isn't a problem either. I don't care if someone makes more money than me. How much money someone makes is none of my business. Do you care? You seem to forget that producers of goods and services need someone to buy those goods and services, so if A.I. is going to "take" everybodies job, then it's going to be because A.I. is cheaper labor and if people have less money, then the prices of the goods and services that are being produced more cheaply will have to be offered cheaper to chase less money held by consumers. This "A.I. will take your job" narrative is pure non-sense.
Rarely ever does technology completely replace jobs, rather it allows workers to be way more productive, drastically reducing the cost of what they are making. That lower cost increases demand for the product just as drastically, this not only makes up for jobs last but increases wages. People thought ATMs and online banking were going to replace tellers, but they really made banking and branches much cheaper, increasing demand for banking and now there are even more teller jobs and they're much better paying.
This isn't true across the board, though. Robotic chefs could put a lot of fast food employees out of work, as the only mandated human interaction would premise on maintenance.
[citation needed]
+Travis Wald
> People thought ATMs and online banking were going to replace tellers
ATMs did replace tellers. The number of tellers per branch went down. What confuses the issue is that the number of bank branches increased disproportionately to hide that effect. People incorrectly attribute the increase in branches to ATMs making them cheaper, but that doesn't make sense. The number of tellers overall went up, so banks were paying more in labor costs.
The real reason for the increased number of branches was not due to ATMs, but because "The Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 removed many of the restrictions on opening bank branches across state lines," according to the Federal Reserve.
www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2016/12/17/automation-has-created-more-jobs-in-the-past-but-will-it-now/
The idea that automation will not impact employment because the automation will reduce costs that will lead to increased demand is proved incorrect by the agriculture industry. It use to employ 90%+ of the population. Now it is just ~2%. The fact is that peak demand exists, and once it is met, extra job growth in that area is increasingly difficult. Luckily we had untapped potential areas of employment to absorb the agricultural job losses. Jobs first moved to manufacturing, and when automation took hold there they moved to services.
The problem is there isn't a lot of room left after services. Most of the new employment areas require fewer and fewer people. High tech services lead to a winner-takes-all, best will survive situation. In general, Google is our one search engine. Facebook is our one social platform. In addition, servicing more customers in those platforms requires ridiculously fewer employees than previous areas like manufacturing. For example, GM would have to hire far more people to make 1 million more cars, than Google needs to add 1 million more people doing searches.
I went back to school last year specifically to get training in a field more "robot proof" than my previous career in the food service industry. Currently working on a psychology BA.
Great mind you have Derek. Hope to meet you in Brazil. Do you have plans to come here?
Last time i was this early robots still haven't taken my job
3:57 LOL
He's like "dang crazy white folk, talking to their cameras n shit"
Dem wer neva kangz lik uz..
White boi talking to camera...Jeez what times we live in
Dude took my jerb.
yes, mate!
Instructive video thanks.
Could you please tell me which camera support aid are you using?
Thanks in advance
Loved the perfect timing of outro rolling in and depressurizing sound from bus ❤
Better education and supplemental income(from our extremely efficient economy). But we also need to start accepting that a lot of people won't need to work because they are fine with a small income or because with any amount of education they will never be able to compete with the hordes of better workers/ entrepreneurs. The need for new products feels infinite but that doesn't mean our almost infinite amount of people will fill those holes.
efficient, you say?! no.
The way AI is going, even highly skilled and highly educated humans won't be able to compete with automata.
Aaron L There is no such thing as "our economy".
Rob Mckennie Absolutely. If you put a chimp into a room long enough with a typewriter it can write shakespeare. Yes a person could do it in a lot less time, but what if I have a thousand, a million, or a billion chimpanzees with a billion typewriters?
That's the thing about digital automation and machine learning. They can brute force problems in a way that humans simply cannot compete with. Maybe that's not the case today, tomorrow or in the next decade, but technology is getting there.
Humans will be losing any and every job that would be paid purely because an employer wants the work done. Maybe not work of passion, but unless other common people have a way to pay for it it won't sustain any kind of life.
Automation is not a bad thing, it just needs to be guided and controlled so that it doesn't absolutely screw anyone that doesn't own a share in it.
There's a Loop? Sorry, but I'm afraid that's not how machine learning works. If it was brute force, it wouldn't work. You could have as many chimps randomly typing on a typwriter as there are particles in the entire observable universe, doing that for the entire history of the universe up until now, you still wouldn't expect to get Hamlet out of it. Not even ONCE. Apart from that, I mostly agree with you (I just wanted to point out how complex machines actually are and how they don't "brute force" anything).
I always feel awkward in these types of videos like how I would if I was recording myself walking through the city.
Nice video, Derek. And thanks for the book recommandation.
the security guard at 3:57 shaking his head is brilliant!
Well in that case, education better become free for everyone.
Well if Automation starts seriously creeping up on the economy on us education should become more flexible like Veritasium mentioned in the video. "So for the future the key is going to be can you get the right education that will make you adaptable and agile because you probably aren't going to do one thing for the rest of your life, and you probsbly shouldn't have just one skillset". I might've butchered some words, but for the most part thtas what he said. I would love for education to be free, but I think thats asking alot from politicians and lawmakers; we also have to take into consideration how we're going to pay for it. So in my opinion a better goal would be to make education more accesible and flexible. If that means making it cheaper more power to it. But it lesves room for ways to innovate the way we teach in a trsditional classroom. Keeping ththe parts that work and scrapping the ones that are irrelevant or are hurting thre education proccess. We should aim to adapt the way we teach to the careers of today and possibly the future. Though this is all my take in the matter and I have no credentials to back it up. nvm the fact that I'm commenting a paragraph on CZcams.
I mean, that's the whole idea.
This.
Ultimately we have to ask ourselves what the goal is of all this progress we are making.
Maybe a few hours a week on average(likely irregular and projects instead of steady times) is where we are headed. Experts in various fields where we still want humans.
Hey Derek! Can you share what setup do you use to record this stable and well focused video? Love the vids!
Hey, so amazing to see you walking around DC!! Welcome 😎
So... do you disagree with CGP Grey? He provided counter-arguments to a lot of this, and I know you'll have watched his video.
The "new jobs" like yours are a huge minority. Most of the jobs people do today have existed in some form for a century, and they're all ripe for automation. So this is totally different. No amount of adaptability is going to fix that. There aren't enough new jobs coming.
The desire for creative media isn't strong enough to sustain an entirely creative economy. That isn't going to be a thing. There's already more material out there than I could ever consume.
The only way we're going to avoid disaster is if we accept that the profits of large automating companies must be spread among the populus as a universal basic income (or similar). That would mean everyone could work fewer hours and still sustain themselves. This pattern could continue, with UBI getting larger to maintain living standards until people barely have to work at all.
Of course the logical conclusion of all of this is more of a communist society, because capitalism just doesn't work in those conditions. Which is a little ironic. Capitalism leading to inevitable communism?
+David Wood It's not that ironic really in fact it is kinda inevitable and always was, capitalism is very good at efficiently allocating scarce resources be that labour or material resources. Transition to a post scarcity civilisation was always inherently bound to undermine the vary basis of value in a capitalist which is scarcity, it's pretty easy to see where this is going first capitalism is going to fall by the wayside as the labour allocator it will still function as the physical resource allocator for a time with people spending their UBI with the companies that produce the best value products which in turn of course allows them to buy more resources. But even that will have to change in time tech is going to progress eventually to the point that our access to energy and resources is going to grow exponentially likely even faster than the population hell you start harvesting even a fraction of the energy just our own star puts out and you suddenly can have populations in the trillions to quadrillions and give each of them several hundred thousand TWh of energy credits per year to use as they please ie like the current global supply of primary energy *EACH*. At the point where you can literally give individuals command of the sort of resources of our current entire civilisation claiming with a straight face that we really need to try to enforce scarcity with a credits system just starts to sound goddamn ridiculous.
Fair enough that's getting probably a few centuries in the future yet but it's again pretty much inevitable short of being a flat Earther that believes the rest of the universe is some mural on their delusional sky it's really hard to come up with a good argument why the ever present quest to seek out new resources, new places to expand to etc wont inevitably lead to looking seriously at the near unlimited supplies of energy and resource beyond the thin layer of this little ball we rely on for absolutely everything currently.
Most of our jobs have existed for a century, but almost none of them existed before the industrial revolution.
Benjamin Brooks exactly
It's fine to disagree on a prediction.
I don't have a problem with him disagreeing, but I wish he had told us why. Basically, he gave some arguments, most of which had been thoroughly countered in CGPGrey's video on this topic. So most people who have seen both videos would immediately disregard this one and assume CGPGrey is right. It felt like an earlier part of the conversation. If, on the other hand, he'd directly addressed those counter-arguments, then I would have been very interested in hearing that.
Please do a video on blockchain technology!!!!! :D :)
I like this format. I love cities and places :)
Nicely explained... moral is - we should be able to adopt the situation ...
Robots will be the best at everything :)
Well yeah they are programmed but if robots take all jobs it will cause horrible things
How about us? We are good at something.
But it doesn't make sence to replace all jobs by robots though. Companies need as many costumers as possible, but when most people in the world are unemployed, where will the profits keep coming from? Companies can't survive on only what the rich buy. I expect that this will be compareable to climate change in the sense that companies will keep autimating jobs because it's profitable to them until the point that all collapses in to shit and the world economy crashes.
If your competitors go cheap and replace all the staff with AI you won't stay in business employing costly humans for the better good of the community.
There will need to be a universal wage. I think Scotland is already trailing it. People will be paid simply to enjoy themselves. Because without a universal wage the system will soon collapse.
I don't see how a universal wage would ever work though. Where would that money come from? If it comes from the governement, that means you're getting paid from tax money, tax money that the population and corporations pay. That means that the governement gives a certain amount of money so that you are able to buy things but they will only get 21% of that amount back because the rest goes to the corporations. So they're losing money. And if it's the corporations that give you the wage, how would that work? The corporation gives you money so you can go buy things from other companies? There's no guarantee that you'll buy from them. And if for some reason you do buy all of your stuff from them they'll still lose money because 21% goes to the governement.
_"And if for some reason you do buy all of your stuff from them they'll still lose money because 21% goes to the governement."_
That's incorrect. Money does not disappear it circulates. Corporations, interest, wages, costs, etc all circulate around in an endless flow. The only issue is when too much money pools outside of the public sector via a foreign trade imbalance (or rich people/corps hording cash).
GovNET + PubNET + ForeignNET = 0 (an accounting identity as the monetary system is debt based [money gets created simultaneously with debt])
Say 21% goes to the government. Well then that 21% will go back into the economy and 21% will go back to the corps. Then 21% of this 21% will go back to the government. Then 21% of 21% of 21% will go back to the corporation. This continues onward and it's also happening for the other 79% but in different ways (depending on how the people spend/invest their money). The only way for the system to have issues is if the ForeignNET is running negative while the GovNET is running positive or the ForeignNET is running too far negative. The Public Sector can't run negative like a government can in its own currency.
Unless money is leaking out of a nation (say it's being used in some far off economy) then it simply circulates. Governments raising taxes simply means that the government controls more of the private sector which does have the ability to cause issues.
Man I love these walky talky philosophical videos!
I like your mindset. Good stuff.
with robots and technology taking over jobs, companies gain more profit due to efficiency in building the products and not paying a fixed salary of employees. What I am worried about is if less people make money because of unemployment who would buy the commodities?....for example, if cars were made by people those employees can contribute to the economy like purchasing a car... but if their jobs are replaced by machines they can no longer pay for those cars.... so in the short term companies are making a profit, but in the long run, wouldn't they be hurting themselves?
That s exactly my point.
I almost jumped with joy when a saw a new upload from this channel! I was thinking about thus channel the last few days and I've been anticipating a new video. So excited! By the way I was trying to buy some merchandise from your shop but there wasn't anything lol. Time to restock 😋😋😊😊🚀🚀⚗⚗🔬🔬🔭🔭🤖🤖💖💖
I hope the thumbs up are as fake as this bot's post.
will robots take over our comments section too?
why are you everywhere ffs
Lil Fuckwit Everywhere like where? I have comments after I watched a video so I voice it. Many people do that too. I'm surprised my comments are not lost in the sea of comments. May be you should ask why you can see my comments instead of why am I everywhere.
Lol, what shop?
quick question; I see that you have a thing that you hold which you put the camera on to get all the shakyness out of the recording. What do you call such a thing?
Excellent videos by the way, all of them are.
This guy's videos make me think and feel in a weird cool way.
I am going into A.I. so when robots take over my job, I did my job correctly, and I am done :)
I will save you 9 mins. - Yes
Nobody wants to get pregnant from robot sea men, dude.
Also: if robots do replace us, then the rich gets richer and the poor gets poorer
Anthony Flores: Don't be ridiculous
Thanks 😂
The description already did it.!
Your camera is so steady! How do you do that?
Btw: super interesting topic!
In a university subject we were discussing the future of jobs, The more a job has hard skills such as coding, doctors etc. and the more the job is creative and involving interpersonal skills, the less likely the jobs were to be automated. Jobs involving complex situations and requiring creative problem-solving skills and high levels of contact with clients. Similar to how factory workers in manufactuting got replaced with technicians that would service the machines that they were replaced by.
Universities?
Well, the technology has come for them as well.
You can replace like 50% (or more) university degrees with online education, for much lower price already.
Instead of getting in a debt to be indoctrinated with BS, you can get a useful knowledge for free online.
Technically you can automate the entire education from kindergarten to PhD. It would be easy too as it is far easier to perfect a single curriculum with the single best suited teacher to speak and act as "guide". Doing it that way will help to produce the best quality education that takes into account so many different variables that are simply ignored in today's systems and best part of it would be everyone gets the same quality (humans can't ruin the end product with their involvement). With a good enough tracking to identify troubled and slow learners you can never have a situation where someone is truly left behind since "same expectation to all doesn't exist as it would be individualistic". Do all the lessons modular enough and you can just update only specific parts of the overall system while keeping things that were not affected the same. This helps to keep up with new discoveries and always up to date without rolling out a completely new curriculum every single time something really minor changes. Basically RIP universities if this were to happen - it is likely unis will just focus on science and less on teaching since they are not needed any more. Academia basically fucks off from education and it can be a good thing.
With VR becoming more useful you can also automate really difficult practical education as well. It would save so much money and time as well. If Universities had an interest in actually creating a future like education system from 21st century then universities would lose all the money they get from "teaching". So it makes sense they haven't even bothered and politicians are too dumb to care either way so what you got is stagnation and shitty education.
Elite schools can boast how good it all is, but reality is theirs is just flavored shit while rest get just normal shit. Nobody gets the best of the best since to get best of the best you really need a computer to do it so there is laziness (no humans involved at the end product basically) and different variables (most if not all) are actually taken into account.
There's a difference between online education and automated education. I've taken several classes online, some good and some absolutely horrible, worse than useless. The good ones were the ones with enough good teachers and TAs that could respond to questions and misunderstandings, but even those only work for the people who have crazy motivation, and enough time to dive deeply into stuff on their own. And discussions with TAs in online class forums will always be slower than seeing and talking with them in person.
P.S. Have you seen Derek's video "This will revolutionize education"? It brings up some good points about this and it matches my experience at least.
People should hope all jobs are taken by machines, life shouldn't be about work, it should be about innovating
Machines can do that too. A society where machines do everything would be one of relaxation and escapism.
Life without work is a dull life life and how motivated will people be to be innovative? I think only a small percentage of the population would actually strive to be innovative.
Scientists from the past had more time on their hands because they didn't have TV to distract them... Reading and studying was their form of entertainment...
Keep in mind that, if you can't add anything to society, society migh consider that it should do nothing for you. It's impossible to say that all future societies will be completely uncorrupted, and that they will never take the power for themselves.
If that situation would arise, you would at best be living far worse than you seem to imply (and probably wouldn't know it).
Spare Time and the multinational companies will give services for free because life isnt about money huh?
Hi Derek! How do you get your videos to look so smooth while you're walking? Is it just a good holder (gorillapod?) and software stabilisation? Just wondering, sorry for commenting something that has so little to do with the actual topic of your video!
The food is a lot like the old Auto-Mat in the 60's and 70's.Great videos by the way.
We need to be free from all jobs
and be unemployed...great
while I agree with the basic promise, I think people are massively overestimating not only WHEN level 5 autonomous driving will come (I think it will take (much) longer than the mentioned 5 years), but also forget, that just because the technology exists that doesn’t mean the adoption rate will be instant.
(just look at electric cars, solar/nuclear power, hell, look at manufacturing robots that have been around for decades)
This is nothing new. We have a S-curve model to describe the life cycle of technology adoption.
Robot/AI are a game-changing technology, and its S-curve by-far is the biggest since the industrial revolution.
For decades, we're at the base of its S-curve. And once it takes off, there's no telling how fast it'll go and how many would be left behind in the dust.
I've been saying 2020 will be when fully autonomous cars become a reality and I see no reason to change that prediction. That isn't to say that those autonomous cars will be able to function everywhere. People like to counter autonomous cars by using edge cases of remote areas with harsh weather and driving conditions. While that is true, it is also true that not many people live there. Where the population is, is also where autonomous cars will hit first. That is all that is needed for autonomous cars to make a significant impact on the economy and our lives.
As for adoption, that is going to be near instantaneous once autonomous cars are a reality. That is for two concurrent trends. First is the rise of Uber and their business model. They, and competitors will immediately adopt fleets of self driving cars that will rival and eventually beat the cost of owning a car. Once the cost gets that low, the used car market will tank. That will in turn make the blue book value of existing cars take a dive. For most people it'll cost less to junk their car and use a service than to pay for any sizable repair.
You'll hear talk about cars being kept for an average of 10 years, and that is why autonomous cars will have a slow adoption rate. The flaw in that analysis is that those 10 year estimates are based on the current situation where there is no viable alternative to owning a car, and the price of getting another one is prohibitively high. People don't want to keep their cars 10 years. They have to keep their cars 10 years. That truism will change when a self driving taxi fleet can offer an inexpensive timely door-to-door service.
The second reason for quick autonomous car adoption is the switch to electric cars. As battery prices fall, electric cars will be better than gas cars in every way. Fleets of autonomous cars will best be able to make use of these cars. For example customers won't care about the charge time or travel distance per charge when they take a different car for every trip with an autonomous taxi service. It'll be up to the service to make sure each car has enough power to make a requested trip. The ability of autonomous taxi services to best use electric cars will be one of the major reasons why they'll be able to offer their services for less than a person would pay to own a normal gas car.
Tesla said by the end of this year, not in 5. It's probably not going to happen but I'm hoping it will.
+Calvin Page
> Tesla said by the end of this year, not in 5. It's probably not going to happen but I'm hoping it will.
Google too gave a prediction of 2017, but I've always assumed delays would happen. I think 2020 is a nice round number to expect for self driving cars to become a reality. If that prediction is off, it will only be by a couple of years. That's a good enough margin of error for any major technical innovation prediction.
+Ken Mathis True though one thing to bear in mind with Tesla also is that the hardware in terms of sensors and all the actuator etc to operate in autonomous mode are already in current Tesla vehicles, only thing they are lacking is the software complete with the required regulatory permissions to allow that software to operate autonomously on public roads. Course they have software updating facilities for their vehicles so as soon as they get the green light they can make thousands of existing vehicles autonomous overnight.
Awesome video as always Derek.
I am very hopeful for the day when humans will no longer be the largest point of failure for vehicles.
Relay jobs, like cashiers, and similar service jobs, will be exciting to watch change.
Derek - nice piece of work. What do you think about the proposed "Air Ubers"? Air taxi services without pilots... if manifested it will naturally eventually extend to airline flights, and space flight. Of course we've been doing robotic space flight and exploration for a very long time - from Voyager (and earlier) to the Buran (Russian Space Shuttle - uncrewed during only flight(s)). Not to mention the cargo drones on the boards from the likes of Amazon and others.
"we just need more education" is a horrendously bad take when we're by far the most educated society in history and yet most people are employed well below their skill level with no real wealth with which to start a business
My thoughts exactly, educating people is not going to address the real issue of wealth distribution.
Wealth distribution is a fallacy; wealth is not an apple pie that needs to be cut up fairly. Its an oven where you back more and more pies.
well, it's not a question of "more", it is however a question of "better" education.
It really depends on the situation. What matters is what do you mean by Education.You mean getting a getting is education or do you believe in getting skills at work without necessarily getting a document that says you know how to do x. Are most people really employed beyond their skill level? Maybe some are but I believe not most. I have meet some people that are in certain positions that do not even know how to do basic tasks that their post is in charge of or is unaware of particular things or do not know the basics of their occupations. If what you mean by education is the document that proves you have attained this , then yes , you are right we do not need those. But if what you mean by education is going to the work place, having seen machines, processes, then no, most people are not educated at all.
You are not most educated society. You are just most technologically advanced society. From the educational point of view you are much more lazy and stupid than people in XX century. You have technology which does everything for you and replaces your brain in complicated tasks.
Yes, folks can earn some money on Esty and similar platforms, but good luck making a living comparable to what a skilled machinist, or a low/mid level manager can make in today's economy ($75-$100,000). Out of all the people on Etsy, how many are making an above median income (in 2016, $56,000 in USD)? I would hazard to guess less than 10%. How about CZcamsrs? The latest numbers I can find have roughly 4,000 youtubers with more than 1,000,000 subscribers, and many of those with less than 500 videos. How many can make a living? If we are generous, and assume the number is 10,000, that is hardly "an industry".
Even if there ARE going to be jobs available, all of which require training, how are we going to get tens of millions of people retrained and settled into jobs, AND pay for all that training?
His answer is a case of Survivor Bias, and he should know that. He made a video several months ago about survivor bias where he specifically said that "successful" people will think the system (in this case, new jobs creating stuff on platforms like Etsy, CZcams, Patreon) works for most people when in reality there was a lot of luck involved and it doesn't work for most people. I think his point was that it's "possible" that this can work, not that it "will" work.
this video helped me with my debate. thanks so much
Such a beautiful city. Where did you film this?
Who says robots can't create? Try deep learning/AI
google dream? It can't.
kiryu nil it can't create from scratch, do your research.
Richard Eitz True, but can humans create from scratch?
Neither can humans. When humans create things, they base it off what they have already seen, what they have experienced and meld concepts and ideas together into novel ones. It doesn't come out of nowhere.
Rhannmah is exactly right. And guess what? That is exactly the concept of data science. Creation doesn't have to be from scratch. Even new improvements count.
four words: Fully Automated Luxury Communism
let's get machines to do all of the necessary work in society and if we collectively own the machines we all reap the rewards
Except that a fully automated, self-enhancing, self-maintaining and ever expanding robot economy will eventually compete with the limited resources that we have.
Humans will also become very vulnerable to the detrimental effects of any social breakdown (eg: large scale natural disaster) considering that the dependency to a robot economy would make vital survival skills essentially obsolete.
These never works because somene one will always try to double cross the rest.
We need a system in place to prevent corruption which is difficult
Those concerns look at this scenario backwards, assuming it will start as Josh describes and then fall apart somehow. That's not what will happen. What will happen is each type of machine will be owned by different private organizations that will fight and compete with each other while the public is slowly strangled to death. And since this will happen heterogeneously, in fits and starts, no one company will realize they're strangling their customer until their profit source is dead. Automation will be lead by unwitting cannibals. It's only in the aftermath, when we pick up the pieces, that Josh's scenario of collective ownership will be possible.
+Gel Mir Err hate to break this to you my friend but that ship has already well and truly sailed if you have any doubt whatsoever about that perhaps you should really pay more attention to the aftermath of natural disasters now, suffice to say that people don't go all hunter gatherer sourcing food from the land they loot the supermarket then panic when that runs out and they have no freaking idea where food comes from other than the supermarket shelf.
That was fun watching you stroll around my city.
Absolutely buying that book. This video was excellent. I love the sneaky shot of the Tesla Model X driving past.
*DEY TUUK ER JERBS!!!*
Der ker der!!!!
The guy at 3:58 is not impressed lol
A local university of technology has a small bus line operated by self-driving buses. They're not actual buses though, more like closets on wheels, and they drive on walkways very slowly, but they're still self-driving and accessible to the public. 'twas a great trip.
Very interesting and useful, thank you
Problem is... Robots will replace generally low skilled and maybe some high skilled jobs. Now you have estimated in the UK by 2025-2035 10 million jobless because of robots. What do you do with these people? Sure new jobs will be created for perhaps servicing new robots and admin etc. But how is the government going to retrain all 10 million of those people into a new job role? And how are those 10 million going to sustain themselves in the meanwhile? Unfortunately the answer is we won't be able to. And you say that everything will get cheaper the more production goes up. But if people can't work to earn money because they've been made jobless by robots. How are they going to buy the goods these companies now produce? Again simple answer is they won't. And as robots get better and more simple jobs get replaced and eventually high tier jobs get replaced more and more people will become unemployed. Now the only solution is for the government to put massive taxes on corporations that use robotic labour in order to provide for the public by essentially giving them a living benefit. Or abolish money and have robots take over jobs so that humans can live free to do what they want.
I think the real problem is money stagnation, money is pooling up in rich peoples pockets and clogging up the whole system, in my opinion money has to circulate in order to be useful. There should be a global law that makes it so that people and businesses cant hold on to enormous amounts of money for a prolonged period. Like that money should have expiration date at which point it has to be invested into something or used, otherwise it goes back to government/ inflation reduction(thus basically to poor people). This way the money would nonstop grow industry and cycle to people with lower wealth. This would mean overall more happy people, which in turn would result in less crime and violence.
If everything gets automated this will be ESSENTIAL, otherwise it will lead to oligarchy..
You got 90% of this in one take.
Respect.
Man, these new cameras, everything looks so artificially pristine.
I study engineering in Cybernetics and Robotics(at NTNU), i guess im the evil person who will automate jobs...
NorwegianVikingMods great you will be the person who will help to lower the costs of goods and services.
Look at it this way
No you are going to be one of the last people with a job
And he is also the person who WILL HAVE a job.
If you get employed that is. Most positions are already filled. Hopefully you get a job in your field.
I feel like that every day :-)
ATTENTIONSTEALER SPOTTED AT 7:05
Lmao doesn't even know who she is waving to.
It’s been 5 years, and we don’t even have a fully autonomous car 😂
Great talk, thanks !
Robots taking our jobs isn't a bad thing... if we change the system. In an automated future, money has no reason to exist. Robots could produce everything we need, without having to be paid. This would mean that everyone would have free access to resources.
If this sounds like communism, I'll remind you that communism did not propose any alternative to human labor. With this idea, machines will work for us, and no human will have to be in charge of anything. Machines can be used to make new machines and fix older ones as well.
🧜♀️-"Lord Overloaded
Ditto and agreed"
How about a robot as President of the United States?
Feynstein 100 why did you make 3 comments at once?
+Johan Increases the chances of one comment making it to the top :)
Feynstein 100 It actually decreases it, because everyone sees that this fucker is spamming comments to get top comment, so Im not gonna like his comments.
Johan Reviews Yeah, fuck this guy.
seems like US already has a programmed president!
Love this! Finally a speaker who understands economics, and doesn't fear mongers, yet is realistic enough to understand that the 50% jobs that we have now will vanish in 30 years.. 3 decades is looong enough to learn a new skill or adapt
whoa that self driving car prediction is a bold one
Derek I'm going to have to call neoliberal bullshit on the end of this video. To talk about the coming automation without mentioning the inevitable redistribution of income and power that will effect 99% of people is completely disingenuous. Education or personal development of a silicon-valley-esque 'Skill Stacks' are not strategies that exist apart from material means. Just look at the problem of student debt in America. These aren't problems of individual ethic these are problems of structure. As someone with a passion for science I hope you agree that systemic problems require systemic solutions.
The REAL problem here is that Capitalism's main object has always been worker insecurity - taking from the masses and giving to the few. Regardless of what his followers did, Karl Marx predicted what we are seeing now centuries ago. The same force which drives this rapid technological progress is the same force which leads to mass inequality of resources spatially. So lets talk about the problems of global capitalism (CLIMATE CHANGE, INEQUALITY) clearly and openly, instead of buying into the colossal fundamental attribution error that is the neoliberal world-view. Thank You.
Marxism is a seriously damaged ideology but I'm in agreement that wealth distribution will be a massive problem very soon, and it already kind of is in ways. I'm in an entry level economics course and it's really enlightened me to the way that the economy actually works, so I wanna know what you think the solution would be? Communism is a flawed ideology as it lends too much power to the government, while capitalism seems to be in favor of imbalance between the middle class and the richest as time progresses. Where is the solution?
I think it's important to recognize that modern capitalistic in the last 40 years (think Milton Friedman, neoliberalism) has deviated quite far from the established systems of the past, particularly the one Adam Smith envisioned. To this extent, I think whether you are a social democrat or a anti-imperialist libertarian the critique on globalism today is essentially the same. Simply demanding democratic representation in councils like the world bank, getting big money out of politics or moving away from two party systems could radically begin to fix these structural problems. Create regulations which protect the commons, and break up monopoly. It's not necessarily the size of government per say which is the problem but whose interests the government protects. I think we need to reconsider debt, the power of finance, and fiscal currency. Stuff like housing, food, water, healthcare, transportation, education and the environment are too important to be subject to an entirely free-market.
These are all causes people will have to fight for democratically. We can't just sit around telling each other that the rich will take care of everyone when 70% of the global population has become irrelevant to their profit due to automation. That would be to ignore all of history.
Not that there is just one course of action. It's just Derek's individualistic advice presumes there is no course of action!
rip humanity
I think there are a few important factors you overlooked in the video. Firstly, one can not accumulate wealth indefinitely over employing machines instead of humans because machines can not be exploited off their labor like humans and it is the exploitation that generates surplus. So eventually automation will seem growth inhibitory once competitive price is lowered and stabilized after a certain point and businesses will naturally stop investing in automation any further just like the previous times. Similar cycles of automation proliferation and inhibition (despite the absence of technological barriers) will continue to spiral as it has been spiraling throughout history since you can only under-pay humans, not machines. Secondly, unemployment and decreased income of working class people will eventually render the growth of the businesses worthless because the abundance of products will have no consumer who actually has the purchase capacity to buy them. This will also prompt businesses to put a halt on automation at some point to avoid being bancrupt. The only economic system that allows for automation based boundless (given finite resources) technological growth without market interference is a planned economy regulated by artificial intelligence.
Economics is ultimately about efficiency. We don't make pizza ourselves from scratch because it'd be very inefficient. In the far future, pretty much anything that involves manual labor or doesn't require creativity will be done more efficiently by machines. Meaning the workforce will shift from manual labor to intellectual labor, which might be a kind of artificial selection and favor smart people. Take that, Idiocracy.
I don't think a system that favors intellectual labor will favor smart people. I don't think it would favor people at all. AI will very rapidly outpace humans.
+Chet not in that regard. As long as humans are more intelligent than robots, that is.
+Ben That is possible. I guess only time will tell.
There's a problem with your argument and that is that it is suspected that intellectual jobs will in the future be the very jobs that get replaced by Machines because these jobs are typically better paid so you have more to win by replacing that human and if you get an artificial intelligence that can do a task you can simply copy it and get more labor force at more places without any extra cost as with a robot. All you need is computer and that is massproduced these Days so it doesn't get very expensive.
Economics is the study of human behaviour
One of the business class that I took explained that machine automation require a lot of upfront investment for a chance to have lowered labor cost. It is said to be inflexible as reducing the workforce when demand lowered will be much harder as you already invested the machine up front. Whoever decide to automate need to be certain that they will recoup the investment cost of the machine with the profit they get for automating before demand dwindles.
The entire education system needs an overhaul, not just universities. Right now the primary and secondary education system is designed to prepare students to work in a factory or office setting rather than to start their own businesses. this needs to be turned around if we want to prepare these students for the changes and one such way to turn it around is to institute a school choice voucher program so that the schools will be subject to competition and raise their standards by the criterion of the parents.
Yes, but human will find better jobs. If not then we fuck
I'll take the second option. I definitely prefer fucking to working.
Maybe the robots can make up new jobs for humans if we can't.
czcams.com/video/7Pq-S557XQU/video.html
Watch this
gogetabr1001 yeah, was almost writing out the horse analogy
If we still believe in jobs, when robots do all the work, we truly are.
So............a robot escort?
I'll show myself out
Feynstein 100 come back I think you've got something
+lazer Lmao thanks mate
Sexbots already exist. They're just taking their time to replace people.
Feynstein 100 you can get a creepily life like sexbot right now... no ai intelligence basically an automated bj or dildo.
very important issue currently in HRM, thanks!
7:07 Hello random person waving!
2 Things...
1: Did these people not see the stark irony in the questions you were asking them?
2: That guy shaking his head at @3:57 was great :D
This is a big part of why we created Kinvert. Schools aren't teaching creativity, problem solving, teamwork, and the tech skills needed to turn dreams in to reality. We help prepare kids for this very interesting and rapidly changing future they face.
Good video Derrek but it will be great if u upload a video about working of robots and components like a documentary that u did for higgs field
I've thought about this, and I've realised that the one thing robots can't do that is necessary for complete automation is assign new tasks, but as computers get more advanced, it doesn't seem unlikely that they'll be able to, including the parts where they upgrade themselves to better do tasks