/r9k/ - ROBOT∞

> 1:25

> Even real robots are bullied by chads

Typically 20% unemployment is the point where there is social upheaval/unrest/revolutions. Maybe by the time it hits, we'll all get state-issued Vives and free basic income and be happy enough.

>>111643

War is a great way to lower that unemployment figure, and on planet with limited resources there are lot of interests that would support such action…

Alternatively, depopulation is also an option. Homelessness can also be tolerated in society, and humans are fairly easy to starve out…

So if robots take all the shit jobs, keeping in mind the people who were fired, who is gonna buy all the shit robot produce? Since the world would be unemployed there would be no reason for robots to work.

>>111666

I legitimately think if we ever get to that phase. The elite of the elite would kek 80-90% of the population save for their families and good goys and rule the world in a feudal society. With them being godkings

>>111675

Well it's either that, fully automated luxury communism, or we try really really hard to make technology stop advancing.

>>111676

> fully automated luxury communism

Bullshit. We'll be left to starve so the elites get more of the benefits. Communism is a farce that will fuck us all as its just not good for the economy to them. We'll all get bombed or poisoned.

>>111647

And we the non-elites will be the first in-line to be busted. No amount of pseudo-intellectual offerings will protect us from this shit. Only the absolute highest will get to stick around and get the good benefits while anyone who is just below absolute high will get fucked beyond all reasoning.

>>111686

The only way out of this mess in the long run is to reap the resources available to us beyond our own planet. We could get so many kinds of metals in huge quantities that they would no longer be scarce. Construction of large space habitats at lagrangian points would also be necessary, like O'Neill cylinders. It would require big mass drivers in space, robotic space construction, and a shitload of money. A really cheap source of safe energy would also be needed or majorly helpful at least. Hopefully fusion power starts being useful, otherwise we will inevitably go mostly fission for better or worse.

>>111686

>Bullshit.

Hey man, I said it's an option, not a particularly likely option. My money's on what you said, or the governments trying really hard to stop technology from advancing.

well, we have created a society which no longer need us to work.

To me we have 2 possibilities : either an IA will rise and take controle, (welcome to the Matrix) either we manage to overcome it, and we end the necessity of working (by creating a universal basic income) since there is enough ressource for everyone on earth

>>111640

Robotic take over is probably farther away than we think. Machines come with their own problems. Those automated checkouts for example are an issue, maybe even more so than hiring an employee, because so many people use them to shoplift.

>>111643

>Typically 20% unemployment is the point where there is social upheaval/unrest/revolutions.

Aren't we past that point? Unemployment statistics are dodgy, but like 38% of people 16 and older aren't working. http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

>>111702

The second option is our best chance.

>>111733

The amount of shoplifting pales in comparison to the cost of wages. Why haven't they ripped them out if a person watching a row of machines from the end is not sufficient? Outsource that shit to a security firm through a camera, get some cctv going (ala England, where they just let you riot and then come for you in your bed after getting you on camera), no advances in facial recognition are needed, all that is needed is the will.

What stop robots stocking the shelves is the public liability of robots moving around in the same space with the public. But you don't need robots to stack shelves just pajeets and beaners.

>>111733

Different metric, "unemployment" usually refers to people out of work who have looked in the past four weeks. If you've given up they've massaged you out of the statistics.

>>111640

>$20,000

never gonna happen, even a standard forklift cost about $300,000. an autonomous bipedal robot is never gonna be that cheap.

will there still be jobs in robot factories?

or will robots also be made by robots?

>>111954

> even a standard forklift cost about $300,000

Are you in a third world country or something?

http://www.buyerzone.com/industrial/forklifts/ar-prices-forklifts/