20 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
20 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

The solution to low birth rates in industrialized countries? Robots

by writeaway
17 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
    • |
While many countries solve their low birth rates through immigration, here's one alternative answer to the looming labor shortages of the future:

Robotics is the future and self-training robots are crucial to reaching a fully automated industrial 'turning point' for most advanced countries.

The big question is whether they complement and boost productivity enough to enable economies to pay for social benefits.
  • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
    I heard that one of the reasons the govs of many industrialized countries are so willing to accept new immigrants is the low birth rate.
    Signature

    "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10401812].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tagiscom
      Yes, thankfully l am in the minority artist category, so l am relatively safe?

      But the video was a bit of a crock, l recently heard about the so called perfect driverless car, that stopped in front of head on traffic, and the occupant died, due to head on collisions.

      This is a bit like auto navigation, it does stuff up, and do seriously dumb things.

      All machines stuff and do seriously dumb things eventually, unless they can self diagnose, then until the self diagnostic stuffs up, they are fine?

      Maybe they need several self diagnostics, and hope that l rare bug, doesn't stuff up the lot?

      In office and other low risk environments this is fine, but driving a car with a family taking a nap, only a matter of time before it gets confused and they go for a swim?

      Driverless cars are fine just as long as they are not forced upon us. I would use it in peak hour, since it is stop, start traffic, but on a freeway, probably not!


      Signature
      Archimedes Forum, Sign up l won't bite
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10401850].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author seasoned
        Originally Posted by tagiscom View Post

        Yes, thankfully l am in the minority artist category, so l am relatively safe?
        HOW do you figure? MINORITY? SO WHAT!?!?!? ARTIST? They have been redefining the term for a LONG time! It now effectively says NOTHING about the "artist". It is a meaningless term.

        But the video was a bit of a crock, l recently heard about the so called perfect driverless car, that stopped in front of head on traffic, and the occupant died, due to head on collisions.
        VERY MUCH a crock! The "perfect driverless car" likely had collision avoidance. ANYONE will tell you that the BEST way to avoid something getting closer, without the iinformation most machines could not properly assess, is to STOP. Of course, you COULD drive around, if you knew enough, but that has its OWN problems. People, and perhaps every living creature on this planet, has a lot of amazing INSTINCTS, for want of another word, that they are STILL trying to program into robots, etc... They have come FAR, but still not far enough.

        This is a bit like auto navigation, it does stuff up, and do seriously dumb things.
        Just last thursday I was told to go AWAY from where I wanted to go. Even when RIGHT, they can be off by over half a block. ALSO, coverage is not 100%. And I haven't even gotten into the data problems, like the famous IPHONE one that happened a couple years ago.

        All machines stuff and do seriously dumb things eventually, unless they can self diagnose, then until the self diagnostic stuffs up, they are fine?
        A lot of THAT is garbage! With me, the microsoft windows autodiagnose stuff is FLAT OUT WRONG 90% of the time! About 8% of the time, it fails and may make things WORSE! That leaves about 2% of the time that it actually WORKS! If your life were on the line, that is BAD!

        In office and other low risk environments this is fine, but driving a car with a family taking a nap, only a matter of time before it gets confused and they go for a swim?

        Driverless cars are fine just as long as they are not forced upon us. I would use it in peak hour, since it is stop, start traffic, but on a freeway, probably not!
        They have had automatic transmissions, auto cruise, etc.... They are OFF by default, subject to a lot of driver action and/or easily disabled. WHY? Because you can't just ASSUME!

        Steve
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10402135].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
        Banned
        Originally Posted by tagiscom View Post

        l recently heard about the so called perfect driverless car, that stopped in front of head on traffic, and the occupant died, due to head on collisions.
        Nothing in life is perfect, but driverless cars are coming soon and will will have their fair share of early adopters.

        That said, can you source this fatality claim? I follow this subject very closely and am not aware of this incident. Would just like to keep apprised of all the facts on this subject while I bide my time awaiting the purchase of my Apple car. :-)

        Cheers. - Frank
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10402280].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
          [DELETED]
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10402434].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
            Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

            I'm not really a student of history, but....
            My guess is that at the beginning of the industrial revolution, workers were claiming;

            "Those new sewing machines will put a million women out of work. It's the end of mankind"
            "That assembly line thing? Death to millions of jobs. We are doomed"
            "Refrigeration? What about the ice man? Millions out of work. It's the beginning of the end"
            "Tractors? Farm equipment? It's the end of farming"

            Machines are just robots that don't look like us.
            We'll just see better machines, that still need designed, programmed, upgraded, serviced, sold...the same as every other machine.

            It may mean that some people will need to learn new skills, but it's been like that for over a century.
            You don't look like us, as I suspected, your a machine.

            The machine's up to now have been largely dumb assisting devices helping us in heavy lifting, cooking. washing, cleaning etc.

            This will eventually be replaced by machines that can fulfil nearly all aspects of our home and working life.Individual machine entities doing the cooking, cleaning, shopping, maintenance at home and running pertinent aspects of businesses.

            At my College in A/P we have only about 10 people running all aspects of paying the vendor bills, student reimbursements etc. Using computers and software (aka, a machine) we are able to take care of paying the bills from 7 large campuses (plus satellite ones) that cater for 93 thousand students,

            Think of if we had to do that manually, how many people we would need.

            Your talking about the first revolution, the second is yet to fully come, but it's not that far off.

            I'm glad to hear about the fall off in reproduction. Perhaps we will not have to eventually enforce it. Going down to one billion people will need to happen soon, it's the max that the planets resources can sustain.

            PS. Thanks for deleting your post yet again, you should have the courage of your convictions. How many convictions have you had?
            Signature

            Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10402461].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author David Beroff
              Originally Posted by writeaway View Post

              The solution to low birth rates in industrialized countries?
              You make it sound like this is a problem.

              Originally Posted by writeaway View Post

              ...here's one alternative answer...
              Thanks for posting this video. I'd been looking for it for a while; could never remember enough keywords to find it.

              Originally Posted by tagiscom View Post

              ...so called perfect driverless car...
              There certainly will be accidents, no doubt; some will be awful. (And I wonder about liability issues; lawyers will have a field day.)

              But considering how many accidents are caused by people, I think the big picture will be more lives saved. (Of course, that's no consolation when a loved one is killed by Goo... um, Alphabet.)

              Originally Posted by lanfear63 View Post

              I'm glad to hear about the fall off in reproduction. Perhaps we will not have to eventually enforce it. Going down to one billion people will need to happen soon, it's the max that the planets resources can sustain.
              We may not agree on the actual number, but certainly there's a resource problem. But a birth rate drop in first-world countries isn't going to be sufficient; the UN says we're headed toward about nine billion, with most of the growth in Africa. (Source)
              Signature
              Put MY voice on YOUR video: AwesomeAmericanAudio.com
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10402526].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    Self training robot = ( > Minimum Tolerance < Maximum Tolerance ).

    Keeping something between the lines isn't complicated.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10401842].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Frank Donovan
    Originally Posted by writeaway View Post

    While many countries solve their low birth rates through immigration, here's one alternative answer to the looming labor shortages of the future:
    Robotics is the future and self-training robots are crucial to reaching a fully automated industrial 'turning point' for most advanced countries.
    The big question is whether they complement and boost productivity enough to enable economies to pay for social benefits.
    Growing up, I remember the prevailing view that increased automation would result in all of us enjoying three-day work weeks long before the twenty-first century arrived. Wonder how that story panned out.

    A much more likely scenario is that we won't be able to sustain continuous industrialization - with or without robots - given the current population numbers, but that sooner or later, some natural or man-made catastrophe (or a combo of both) will probably reduce the global population to a more manageable level.

    .
    Signature


    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10401862].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kurt
    Re: The solution to low birth rates in industrialized countries? Robots


    I didn't realize robots could become pregnant. This will really throw a wrench into Claude's "love" life.
    Signature
    Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
    Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10402594].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
      Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

      Re: The solution to low birth rates in industrialized countries? Robots


      I didn't realize robots could become pregnant. This will really throw a wrench into Claude's "love" life.
      You don't know that, He might enjoy hearing the patter of tiny cogs.
      Signature

      Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10402630].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ohotel1
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10402644].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author lanfear63
      Originally Posted by ohotel1 View Post

      i don't think about huhm.
      Huhm was disappointed, he thinks about you a lot.
      Signature

      Feel The Power Of The Mark Side

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10402650].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tagiscom
      Quote:
      Originally Posted by tagiscom
      Yes, thankfully l am in the minority artist category, so l am relatively safe?

      HOW do you figure? MINORITY? SO WHAT!?!?!? ARTIST? They have been redefining the term for a LONG time! It now effectively says NOTHING about the "artist". It is a meaningless term.

      Ok, well, artist as in churning out work for a graphics hub site, a machine could minic the repetitive stuff, but create something new, from scratch, probably not?

      Quote:
      But the video was a bit of a crock, l recently heard about the so called perfect driverless car, that stopped in front of head on traffic, and the occupant died, due to head on collisions.
      VERY MUCH a crock! The "perfect driverless car" likely had collision avoidance. ANYONE will tell you that the BEST way to avoid something getting closer, without the iinformation most machines could not properly assess, is to STOP. Of course, you COULD drive around, if you knew enough, but that has its OWN problems. People, and perhaps every living creature on this planet, has a lot of amazing INSTINCTS, for want of another word, that they are STILL trying to program into robots, etc... They have come FAR, but still not far enough.

      Yep!

      Quote:
      This is a bit like auto navigation, it does stuff up, and do seriously dumb things.
      Just last thursday I was told to go AWAY from where I wanted to go. Even when RIGHT, they can be off by over half a block. ALSO, coverage is not 100%. And I haven't even gotten into the data problems, like the famous IPHONE one that happened a couple years ago.

      Yes, l have heard of navigation telling people to drive into a river, to reach their destination?

      Quote:
      All machines stuff and do seriously dumb things eventually, unless they can self diagnose, then until the self diagnostic stuffs up, they are fine?
      A lot of THAT is garbage! With me, the microsoft windows autodiagnose stuff is FLAT OUT WRONG 90% of the time! About 8% of the time, it fails and may make things WORSE! That leaves about 2% of the time that it actually WORKS! If your life were on the line, that is BAD!

      Well, l was referring to a robot with a new OS, not Microsoft crap. So the backup worked, at least til it stuffed up?

      Quote:
      In office and other low risk environments this is fine, but driving a car with a family taking a nap, only a matter of time before it gets confused and they go for a swim?

      Driverless cars are fine just as long as they are not forced upon us. I would use it in peak hour, since it is stop, start traffic, but on a freeway, probably not!

      They have had automatic transmissions, auto cruise, etc.... They are OFF by default, subject to a lot of driver action and/or easily disabled. WHY? Because you can't just ASSUME!

      Steve

      Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

      Nothing in life is perfect, but driverless cars are coming soon and will will have their fair share of early adopters.

      That said, can you source this fatality claim? I follow this subject very closely and am not aware of this incident. Would just like to keep apprised of all the facts on this subject while I bide my time awaiting the purchase of my Apple car. :-)

      Cheers. - Frank
      Google blames careless humans after first driverless car injury - Telegraph

      I heard it from somewhere, but it may have happened in au?



      Originally Posted by David Beroff View Post

      You make it sound like this is a problem.



      Thanks for posting this video. I'd been looking for it for a while; could never remember enough keywords to find it.



      There certainly will be accidents, no doubt; some will be awful. (And I wonder about liability issues; lawyers will have a field day.)

      But considering how many accidents are caused by people, I think the big picture will be more lives saved. (Of course, that's no consolation when a loved one is killed by Goo... um, Alphabet.)



      We may not agree on the actual number, but certainly there's a resource problem. But a birth rate drop in first-world countries isn't going to be sufficient; the UN says we're headed toward about nine billion, with most of the growth in Africa. (Source)

      Yes, l thought of that as well, but humans do do dumb things, and kill off themselves in the process.

      So do machines, so there needs to be common sense with automation?

      But if l heard of a family totally trusting their car on a long trip back and it got confused because a thunderstorn overhead that messed with the satellite part, and drive their car into a dam, l would cringe!

      Signature
      Archimedes Forum, Sign up l won't bite
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10402663].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
        Banned
        Originally Posted by tagiscom View Post

        Google blames careless humans after first driverless car injury - Telegraph

        I heard it from somewhere, but it may have happened in au?
        Wow! One accident. Time to shut this project down.

        I wonder what are chances of ever getting men to Mars would be had they cancelled the space program after the first tragedy?

        Cheers. - Frank
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10402671].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
        Banned
        Originally Posted by tagiscom View Post

        But if l heard of a family totally trusting their car on a long trip back and it got confused because a thunderstorn overhead that messed with the satellite part, and drive their car into a dam, l would cringe!
        I can't speak to your artistic abilities, but it appears that you missed your calling as a fiction writer. A vivid imagination is a vital prerequisite for success in that field. :-)

        Cheers. - Frank
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10402694].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author David Beroff
        Originally Posted by tagiscom View Post

        Just last thursday I was told to go AWAY from where I wanted to go. Even when RIGHT, they can be off by over half a block. ALSO, coverage is not 100%....

        Yes, l have heard of navigation telling people to drive into a river, to reach their destination?...

        But if l heard of a family totally trusting their car on a long trip back and it got confused because a thunderstorn overhead that messed with the satellite part, and drive their car into a dam, l would cringe!
        [Sorry if I'm not attributing quotes correctly here; that post was a tad confusing.]

        I think it'd be a good idea here to separate out the GPS system from self-driving cars.

        Yes, GPS has a higher error rate, because the underlying map data is sometimes wrong, as well as the reception/accuracy issue mentioned above.

        But self-driving cars would only use GPS as a guide, not an absolute, just as humans should, (but sometimes don't). They have spinning cameras that capture a far better picture of what ground conditions actually are, and I'm pretty certain that the driving-into-a-lake situation is not going to be a common accident root cause (if at all).
        Signature
        Put MY voice on YOUR video: AwesomeAmericanAudio.com
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10402896].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author tagiscom
          Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

          Wow! One accident. Time to shut this project down.

          I wonder what are chances of ever getting men to Mars would be had they cancelled the space program after the first tragedy?

          Cheers. - Frank
          Well, unless a million people were going to Mars, probably not?

          Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

          I can't speak to your artistic abilities, but it appears that you missed your calling as a fiction writer. A vivid imagination is a vital prerequisite for success in that field. :-)

          Cheers. - Frank
          Darnit, and l was just admiring my Parker Bros Fiction Writer Diploma!

          Originally Posted by David Beroff View Post

          [Sorry if I'm not attributing quotes correctly here; that post was a tad confusing.]

          I think it'd be a good idea here to separate out the GPS system from self-driving cars.

          Yes, GPS has a higher error rate, because the underlying map data is sometimes wrong, as well as the reception/accuracy issue mentioned above.

          But self-driving cars would only use GPS as a guide, not an absolute, just as humans should, (but sometimes don't). They have spinning cameras that capture a far better picture of what ground conditions actually are, and I'm pretty certain that the driving-into-a-lake situation is not going to be a common accident root cause (if at all).
          Yes, sorry about the quote thing, but if l use the miltiquote button it removes the quote and gets even more confusing.

          But ok, the family are fast asleep and lighting hits the tree near the car, which disorientates the spinning camera and a bird that was in the tree hits the spinning camera, and disables it long enough for the steering wheel to go for the dam, thinking it was a roundabout?

          I mean we almost had a third world war in 1983 because the Russian satellites thought that an unusually reflective cloud was ICBM's from the US. And these satellites linked to their mainframe is supposed to be as secure as it gets, and it screwed up.

          Thankfully someone double checked it before launching everything!

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_S...alarm_incident

          No, doubt when Google releases it's first car, it will say, it is error free, 100% safe, blah, blah, then the fatalities will crop up.

          A bit like saying that online phone banking is 100% secure, and then we hear on the news that it isn't.

          Banks keep squawking that it is secure and hackers keep showing us that it isn't.


          If the most secure computer and satellite systems can screw up, then this can and will!

          If l had a car with this l would use it sparingly, and use cruise control for the freeways.

          Signature
          Archimedes Forum, Sign up l won't bite
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10402948].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kurt
    The last article I read on self driving cars was about 6 months ago. It reported that there were something like 6 documented accidents involving self driving cars in the US.

    Of those 6, 5 were the fault of the drivers of other vehicles.

    In the other one, the self driving car was being driven/controlled by a human and it was determined it was his fault.

    The article also reported that the biggest issue right now is with the self driving cars being too "polite". When they pull up to 4 way stops, they would wait for all the other cars, and the human drivers were too aggressive, resulting in the self driven car to get "stalled" at four way stop signs, yielding to all the other drivers.
    Signature
    Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
    Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10402700].message }}

Trending Topics