Humans Need Not Apply

Humans Need Not Apply

Every human used to have to hunt or gather to survive. But humans are smart…ly lazy so we made tools to make our work easier. From sticks, to plows, to tractors we’ve gone from everyone needing to make food to, modern agriculture with almost no one needing to make food — and yet, we still have abundance. Of course, it’s not just farming, it’s
everything. We’ve spent the last several thousand years building tools to reduce physical
labor of all kinds. These are mechanical muscles. Stronger, more reliable, and more tireless
than human muscles ever could be. And that’s a good thing. Replacing human labor
with mechanical muscles frees people to specialize and that leaves everyone better off – even those
still doing physical labor. This is how economies grow and standards of living rise. Some people have specialized to be programmers
and engineers whose job is to build mechanical minds. Just as mechanical muscles made human
labor less in demand so are mechanical minds making human brain labor less in demand. This is an economic revolution. You may think
we’ve been here before, but we haven’t. This time is different. ## Physical Labor When you think of automation, you probably
think of this: giant, custom-built, expensive, efficient, but really dumb robots blind to
the world and their own work. They were a scary kind of automation but they haven’t
taken over the world because they’re only cost effective in narrow situations. But they’re the old kind of automation, this
is the new kind. Meet Baxter. Unlike these things which require skilled
operators and technicians and millions of dollars, Baxter has vision and can learn what
you want him to do by watching you do it. And he costs less than the average annual
salary of a human worker. Unlike his older brothers he isn’t pre-programmed for one specific
job, he can do whatever work is within the reach of his arms. Baxter is what might be
thought of as a general purpose robot and general purpose is a big deal. Think computers, they too started out as highly
custom and highly expensive, but when cheap-ish general-purpose computers appeared they quickly
became vital to everything. A general-purpose computer can just as easily
calculate change or assign seats on an airplane or play a game or do anything just by swapping
its software. And this huge demand for computers of all kinds is what makes them both more
powerful and cheaper every year. Baxter today is the computer of the 1980s.
He’s not the apex but the beginning. Even if Baxter is slow his hourly cost is pennies
worth of electricity while his meat-based competition costs minimum wage. A tenth the
speed is still cost effective when it’s a hundredth the price. And while Baxter isn’t
as smart as some of the other things we will talk about, he’s smart enough to take over
many low-skill jobs. And we’ve already seen how dumber robots than
Baxter can replace jobs. In new supermarkets what used to be 30 humans is now one human
overseeing 30 cashier robots. Or take the hundreds of thousand baristas employed
world-wide? There’s a barista robot coming for them. Sure maybe your guy makes the double-mocha-whatever
just perfect and you’d never trust anyone else — but millions of people don’t care
and just want a decent cup of coffee. Oh, and by the way this robot is actually a giant
network of robots that remembers who you are and how you like your coffee no matter where
you are. Pretty convenient. We think of technological change as the fancy
new expensive stuff, but the real change comes from last decade’s stuff getting cheaper and
faster. That’s what’s happening to robots now. And because their mechanical minds are
capable of decision making they are out-competing humans for jobs in a way no pure mechanical
muscle ever could. ## Luddite Horses Imagine a pair of horses in the early 1900s
talking about technology. One worries all these new mechanical muscles will make horses
unnecessary. The other reminds him that everything so far
has made their lives easier — remember all that farm work? Remember running from coast-to-coast
delivering mail? Remember riding into battle? All terrible. These city jobs are pretty cushy, and with so many humans in the cities there will be more jobs for horses than ever. Even if this car thingy takes off – he might say – there will be new jobs for horses we can’t imagine. But you, dear viewer, from beyond 2000 know
what happened — there are still working horses, but nothing like before. The horse population
peaked in 1915 — from that point on it was nothing but down. There isn’t a rule of economics that says
better technology makes more better jobs for horses. It sounds shockingly dumb to even
say that out loud, but swap horses for humans and suddenly people think it sounds about
right. As mechanical muscles pushed horses out of
the economy, mechanical minds will do the same to humans. Not immediately, not everywhere,
but in large enough numbers and soon enough that it’s going to be a huge problem if we
are not prepared. And we are not prepared. You, like the second horse, may look at the
state of technology now and think it can’t possibly replace your job. But technology
gets better, cheaper, and faster at a rate biology can’t match. Just as the car was the beginning of the end
for the horse so now does the car show us the shape of things to come. ## Automobiles Self-driving cars aren’t the future: they’re
here and they work. Self-driving cars have travelled hundreds of thousands of miles up
and down the California coast and through cities — all without human intervention. The question is not if they’ll replaces cars,
but how quickly. They don’t need to be perfect, they just need to be better than us. Humans
drivers, by the way, kill 40,000 people a year with cars just in the United States.
Given that self-driving cars don’t blink, don’t text while driving, don’t get sleepy
or stupid, it’s easy to see them being better than humans because they already are. Now to describe self-driving cars as cars
at all is like calling the first cars mechanical horses. Cars in all their forms are so much
more than horses that using the name limits your thinking about what they can even do.
Lets call self-driving cars what they really are: Autos: the solution to the transport-objects-from-point-A-to-point-B
problem. Traditional cars happen to be human sized to transport humans but tiny autos can
work in warehouses and gigantic autos can work in pit mines. Moving stuff around is
who knows how many jobs but the transportation industry in the United States employs about
three million people. Extrapolating world-wide that’s something like 70 million jobs at
a minimum. These jobs are over. The usual argument is that unions will prevent
it. But history is filled with workers who fought technology that would replace them
and the workers always lose. Economics always wins and there are huge incentives across
wildly diverse industries to adopt autos. For many transportation companies, humans
are about a third their total costs. That’s just the straight salary costs. Humans sleeping
in their long haul trucks costs time and money. Accidents cost money. Carelessness costs money.
If you think insurance companies will be against it, guess what? Their perfect driver is one
who pays their small premiums and never gets into an accident. The autos are coming and they’re the first
place where most people will really see the robots changing society. But there are many
other places in the economy where the same thing is happening, just less visibly. So it goes with autos, so it goes for everything. ## The Shape of Things to Come It’s easy to look at Autos and Baxters and
think: technology has always gotten rid of low-skill jobs we don’t want people doing
anyway. They’ll get more skilled and do better educated jobs — like they’ve always done. Even ignoring the problem of pushing a hundred-million
additional people through higher education, white-collar work is no safe haven either.
If your job is sitting in front of a screen and typing and clicking — like maybe you’re
supposed to be doing right now — the bots are coming for you too, buddy. Software bots are both intangible and way
faster and cheaper than physical robots. Given that white collar workers are, from a company’s
perspective, both more expensive and more numerous — the incentive to automate their
work is greater than low skilled work. And that’s just what automation engineers
are for. These are skilled programmers whose entire job is to replace your job with a software
bot. You may think even the world’s smartest automation
engineer could never make a bot to do your job — and you may be right — but the cutting
edge of programming isn’t super-smart programmers writing bots, it’s super-smart programmers
writing bots that teach themselves how to do things the programmer could never teach
them to do. How that works is well beyond the scope of
this video, but the bottom line is there are limited ways to show a bot a bunch of stuff
to do, show the bot a bunch of correctly done stuff, and it can figure out how to do the
job to be done. Even with just a goal and no knowledge of how
to do it the bots can still learn. Take the stock market which, in many ways, is no longer
a human endeavor. It’s mostly bots that taught themselves to trade stocks, trading stocks
with other bots that taught themselves. As a result, the floor of the New York Stock
exchange isn’t filled with traders doing their day jobs anymore, it’s largely a TV set. So bots have learned the market and bots have
learned to write. If you’ve picked up a newspaper lately you’ve probably already read a story
written by a bot. There are companies that teach bots to write anything: sports
stories, TPS reports, even say, those quarterly reports that you write at work. Paper work, decision making, writing — a
lot of human work falls into that category and the demand for human metal labor is these
areas is on the way down. But surely the professions are safe from bots? Yes? ## Professional Bots When you think ‘lawyer’ it’s easy to think
of trials. But the bulk of lawyering is actually drafting legal documents, predicting the likely
outcome and impact of lawsuits, and something called ‘discovery’ which is where boxes of
paperwork gets dumped on the lawyers and they need to find the pattern or the one out-of-place
transaction among it all. This can be bot work. Discovery, in particular,
is already not a human job in many law firms. Not because there isn’t paperwork to go through,
there’s more of it than ever, but because clever research bots shift through millions
of emails and memos and accounts in hours not weeks — crushing human researchers in
terms of not just cost and time but, most importantly, accuracy. Bots don’t get sleepy
reading through a million emails. But that’s the simple stuff: IBM has a bot
named Watson: you may have seen him on TV destroy humans at Jeopardy — but that was
just a fun side project for him. Watson’s day-job is to be the best doctor
in the world: to understand what people say in their own words and give back accurate
diagnoses. And he’s already doing that at Slone-Kettering, giving guidance on lung cancer
treatments. Just as Auto don’t need to be perfect — they
just need to make fewer mistakes than humans — the same goes for doctor bots. Human doctors are by no means perfect — the
frequency and severity of misdiagnoses are terrifying — and human doctors are severely
limited in dealing with a human’s complicated medical history. Understanding every drug
and every drug’s interaction with every other drug is beyond the scope of human knowability. Especially when there are research robots
whose whole job it is to test thousands of new drugs at a time. And human doctors can only improve through their
own experiences. Doctor bots can learn from the experiences of every doctor bot. Can read
the latest in medical research and keep track of everything that happens to all their patients
world-wide and make correlations that would be impossible to find otherwise. Not all doctors will go away, but when the doctor
bots are comparable to humans and they’re only as far away as your phone — the need
for general doctors will be less. So professionals, white-collar workers and
low-skill workers all have things to worry about from automation. But perhaps you are unfazed because
you’re a special creative snowflake. Well guess what? You’re not that special. ## Creative Bots Creativity may feel like magic, but it isn’t.
The brain is a complicated machine — perhaps the most complicated machine in the whole
universe — but that hasn’t stopped us from trying to simulate it. There is this notion that just as mechanical
muscles allowed us to move into thinking jobs that mechanical minds will allow us to
move into creative work. But even if we assume the human mind is magically creative — it’s
not, but just for the sake of argument — artistic creativity isn’t what the majority of jobs
depend on. The number of writers and poets and directors and actors and artists who actually
make a living doing their work is a tiny, tiny portion of the labor force. And given
that these are professions dependent on popularity they’ll always be a very small
portion of the population. There can’t be such a thing as a poem and painting
based economy. Oh, by the way, this music in the background
that you’re listening to? It was written by a bot. Her name is Emily Howell and she can
write an infinite amount of new music all day for free. And people can’t tell the difference between her and human composers when put to a blind test. Talking about artificial creativity gets weird
fast — what does that even mean? But it’s nonetheless a developing field. People used to think that playing chess was
a uniquely creative human skill that machines could never do right up until they beat the
best of us. And so it will go for all human talents. ## Conclusion Right: this may have been a lot to take
in, and you might want to reject it — it’s easy to be cynical of the endless and idiotic
predictions of futures that never are. So that’s why it’s important to emphasize again that
this stuff isn’t science fiction. The robots are here right now. There is a terrifying
amount of working automation in labs and warehouses around the world. We have been through economic revolutions
before, but the robot revolution is different. Horses aren’t unemployed now because they
got lazy as a species, they’re unemployable. There’s little work a horse can do that do
to pay for its housing and hay. And many bright, perfectly capable humans
will find themselves the new horse: unemployable through no fault of their own. But if you still think new jobs will save
us: here is one final point to consider. The US census in 1776 tracked only a few kinds
of jobs. Now there are hundreds of kinds of jobs, but the new ones are not a significant
part of the labor force. Here’s the list of jobs ranked by the number
of people who perform them – it’s a sobering list with the transportation industry at the
top. Continuing downward, all of this work existed in some form a hundred years ago and almost
all of them are targets for automation. Only when we get to number 33 on the list is there
finally something new. Don’t that every barista or white collar worker need lose their job before things are a problem. The unemployment rate during the great depression
was 25%. This list above is 45% of the workforce. Just
what we’ve talked about today, the stuff that already works, can push us over that number
pretty soon. And given that even in our modern technological wonderland new kinds of work
aren’t a significant portion of the economy, this is a big problem. This video isn’t about how automation is bad
— rather that automation is inevitable. It’s a tool to produce abundance for little effort.
We need to start thinking now about what to do when large sections of the population are
unemployable — through no fault of their own. What to do in a future where, for most
jobs, humans need not apply.

100 thoughts on “Humans Need Not Apply

  1. The horse argument is a fallacious straw man horses don't get paid to work and the work they do is limited and for humans which is key the point of economics is to efficiently allocate resources for human consumption and utility if most jobs were automated this would mean that 5 people could run a company which and a small business can become a large company overnight the can you imagine your local diner setting up new locations everywhere regularly because they don't need employees all this means is that human creativity will be allowed to increase like how it did in agricultural societies where the former hunters could farm and have time for developing grammar, math,philosophy and medicine vs hunter/gatherer societies that are still that way to this day imagine owning a house and making a fashion company in your basement with a hundred robots combined with 3d printer turning your designs into clothing overnight I just saw a video of a man who 3d printed a 4,000 dollar home for a family of four with 2 bedrooms a bathroom, living room, and a kitchen for 4 thousand dollars because he didn't need to hire a huge construction team he just printed it and his goal is to end homelessness and it might work think about a world where you can build a house for a few grand everything is cheaper and with all these jobs replaced humans will be forced to adapt and be creative this could be the closest humans get to a post scarcity society where basic needs are made mechanically and humans can focus on literature, gaming, tech design, etc we as a species will reach a state of peek efficiency.

  2. If bots dominate jobs this early then lots of people will go down to poverty. But if say a few centuries have past and somehow the bots are doing all of our work then we could just live in a virtual paradise.

  3. How old is this vid?
    They showed Atlas stumbling over some terrain while fully wired….I think Atlas is doing backflips now FULLY autonomous ie no wires. This thing is moving very fast.🌴

  4. I don't think the horse analogy is good one. A better analogy would be this:
    Horses – "Let's create cars so we don't have to work for the humans anymore."
    creates cars
    "Yay! Now we can frolick in the fields all day!"
    The horses didn't lose their jobs. They never wanted those jobs to begin with. Instead of looking at the robot revolution as a threat, we should see it as an opportunity to quit meaningless jobs and do things we enjoy and find meaningful instead. UBI (Universal Basic Income) is the answer and turns the robot revolution from a threat to an opportunity.

  5. Uh how bout we instead just make a genetically modified species that is to dumb to resist to do all our manual work? If they misbehave we can just shoot them

  6. As per any documentary, they only give you an argument from one side.
    The horse analogy was a real bad one as horses have never created jobs in the first place, so of course they will eventually be put out of the workforce, except in very specific niche markets; they never adapt their skill set as they are animals.

    I would strongly suggest firstly that anyone who thinks we are super close to robots running everything to watch some robot fail compilations. When a new tech is marketed, the people who market them only show the best of what these techs have to offer, so of course it is rosy and flattering, none of the bad things or mess ups these robots do.

    Secondly, the arguments professed in this video are almost word for word the same as the Luddites during the Industrial Revolution and the arguments against them apply now just as they did then. The Luddites believed that through the automation of mills, fields and mines that all the workers would be replaced. Yes the low skill low income workers were replaced with better jobs. (Now people don't have to hand shuck corn, and can have a machine do it more efficiently. No one wants to hand shuck corn anyway). The result? Now instead of having 8 possible foods to eat all year, every year, you can eat foods from all over the world. Now instead of having only 2 pairs of clothes and 1 pair of boots, you can have dozens.
    The new jobs as a result of innovation no one saw coming. Now you needed oil to run the machines, much more coal and minerals to be mined to build the machines, people and factories to build the machines, people to load and ship the machines, people to craft the machines, new men on the streets to patrol to protect the machines and so on. So of course it's hard to imagine new jobs taking off and replacing the old ones. Could you imagine the internet 10 years before it was invented?

    Thirdly, no one knew the internet was coming and now it employs millions of jobs. The smart phone now has millions of people creating software and apps for this new piece of hardware. None of these jobs existed a few years ago. Yes, some people will be replaced in the easier fields like farming, but when you have less people working on a farm, you can have more brains free for innovation of new tech. Most kids the age of 5 right now will likely do a job that doesn't even exist yet. Most likely what we will see as a result of this, most people will have multiple small jobs such as making apps in their spare time and have a more lucrative field aside from it, which means there will be much less global businesses and most businesses will be smaller. We are already seeing a shift of men leaving the corporate world to do just that; work for themselves.
    – There are most likely several new sciences that will arise in the near future that don't exist yet as well. As we delve into what we don't know and try to discover the truth within all these sciences, more specializations will need to arise to compensate within the existing and new science fields.

    Fourth, I noticed oddly that this video does not talk about any of the newer innovations in education that are up and coming. Old universities and colleges as well as media for news and information are dying to make way for new ways of consuming these platforms and the new ways in which people will gain their skills. Take micro-colleges for instance. Most of them teach courses that are only 18-24 months long that focuses only on the information necessary for the skill and the students can skip the general education/indoctrination courses. Old colleges are leaving not because of any automation but because the model is defunct. People will have to get used to the way techs will change as these techs will change much more rapidly than ever before.

    Fifth, this was touched on in the video, but not to the extent it should have. In the medical field, yes we will use better tools of diagnosis, but do you honestly believe that any Human would take the advice and information spewn from a machine for their total health? Or do you think that nurses for the infirm will disappear with harsh robots that do not have feelings nor can they take the feelings of their patience into account? My hometown of Las Vegas is a perfect example of this as the casinos have recently tried to replace the Humans with more automation which has been met with backlash to the point where they have to rehire humans into the positions, because that lack of the human touch leaves most people feeling cold and desiring never to come back to that establishment. Hospitality and Medical care always have to have that human element. There will always be a personal element to any technology which is why drones, even though they are unmanned in the military will still have a human behind the device probably forever.
    Edit: And as an additional argument, there's many more modes of transportation untapped yet. Scifi shows always depict flying cars and that will have to be developed by the Human brain, because a robot can only do things that are inputted. Innovation comes from us. It has to be dreamed up. And the tech to making a flying car will come from non-existent tech (An explosion energy engine will not have the power to actually lift a car without wings).
    – And I really doubt we are even hundreds of years from making a realistic Human robot as in order to actually make the machine, we would have to totally understand what makes us Human in the first place and that is a far way off yet.

    Sixth, the only reason there is a 1% of rich people and not a 10% or 15% is the artificial environment the banking system has created to force only a handful to collect wealth. That system is close to being dissolved as it has already started in much of the west. Italy just got rid of its central bank for instance. More affluence will increase the needs and wants that must be fulfilled (See next point under, seventh).
    If no one is working and everyone is on welfare, money would be worthless because it can only have worth if it is in everyone's hands. If only a handful of elite have money, it would necessarily become defunct and we would have to live in a Star Trek type world, which I doubt we are anywhere close to yet.
    – All innovation and pushes in technology are driven by two things, military application and profitability. If you have no profitability as no one has money to trade with, that would force the end of the technology revolution.

    Seventh, as technology advances, some of the old ways of doing things will pop up again and many will be able to find work within these types of jobs. The movie upgrade is an excellent view on this with the main character being an old school car mechanic. The tech advances always push forward to new innovation, they rarely if ever go backwards to innovate old tech. An old school mechanic or someone who hand crafts medieval weapons will probably earn the equivalent of a six figure salary now as I predict there will be more affluence in the future, not less.

    On the subject of automation always wins against unions, I would say as it always should. The idea that legislation or a union is going to succeed in stopping innovation is laughable. Of course they always lose. If a company has a new innovation, everyone else also has to adapt to keep up. It's what animals and Humans do. We have to adapt or go out of business.

    Despite my remarks, I still think this is a pretty good video, it just doesn't address the other side of the coin much at all, and paints a fairly bleak future that comes off a bit like fear mongering. People have been predicting the end of the world since the beginning of it.

  7. cpg Gray .. Is trying to say if we think think the human mind is magically created By a God
    that's not right. I cannot agree more

  8. The only way how this is going to work out well is, well… you know the answer… some old guys have been arguing about it for a hundred years and til this day its still present, yet not recognized.

  9. 0:51 That would be fast Fourier transform on an AVR microcontroller. Last I checked AVR cores were too slow to do an FFT in realtime. What are you doing?
    1:32 Oh right. Baxter. Wasn't he that robot that was on display at that museum a few years ago? Before I worry about Baxter taking my job I'd like to see him beat me at Tic-Tac-Toe.

    3:20 that's a facebook joke
    3:24 that is a 3D rendering of an artist's impression of a rack server. No actual rack server has LAN ports on the front. No actual rack server has anything RESEMBLING an RCA jack. No actual rack server, much as I hate to admit it, has blinkenlights.
    4:37 Real data centers don't actually power on anywhere near that quickly and don't have anywhere near that many lights on them. And most don't power on one rack at a time. To me that looks like a movie set.
    8:00 PRIME NUMBERS IN C++. so scary. Couldn't you at least show us groups.h? Show some self respect!
    8:54 have you ever read something written by a neuralnet? about 1% of the time it's almost convincing but you can still tell something is off. About 30% of the time it's hilarious but obviously faked. The remaining 69% of the time it's utter gibberish
    10:12 seriously? YOU COPY PASTED IBM'S PROMOTIONAL MATERIAL? That's a bold move if you don't want to get a copyright strike.
    12:16 Perhaps that's why I found it so jarring and repetitive.

  10. Let's say for the sake of argument that 40% of the population is suddenly, in a single instant, fired or laid off.
    Suddenly, 40% of the population who was previously buying coffee from a robot barista no longer is.

    Thusly the robots limit themselves.

  11. My dad took pride in his job. The thought of automation depressed him. This is not a good things for society, so perhaps it will move slowly.

  12. automation is only cheap when there are mass consumers for what they are producing. if humans go out of job and cannot afford what automation is producing, i will say that automation is expensive, because the return of investment will be low. and i do not see any non-human consumer economy coming up so there will arrive a balance beyond with automation will be not cost effective.

  13. I agree but I disagree with your points. Human-like technology are made by us, we decide if they will take over or not. Imagine, robots in every supermarket, clothes store, mechanic shop, everywhere, now imagine that you're the owner of a supermarket with robots working for you, it will feel great to you that you don't have to spend much money from what you make. But after all that, do you think that you'd still be in business? If we become unemployed, who will buy products from robot operated businesses? Do you even think that the government will allow such stupid mistakes to come into play? Maybe I should be the part of Government who oversees this issue and eliminate it before it gets too far. As human we can protest against these issues, the more we decline to work with them the less robots will be manufactured to take jobs away from us. Now do YOU who read this, do you agree with me?

    Bots: We'll see about that, human.
    gamers: start a pokémon game
    battle sequence plays
    A wild BOT has appeared!
    YouTubers: >fight< /switch/ bag/ run
    YouTubers: >not so quality content (jacksfilms and the paul bros)< /quality content (PewDiePie)/ YouTube rewind/ back
    the wild bot fainted!
    you…tubers gain 289 XP.

  15. As companies replace everyone to increase production exponentially.
    Robots will make all of the things that nobody can buy, because they have no jobs.

  16. There is a big difference. I knew instantly that the music was written by a bot. No point to it. It was empty of direction, mere mindless variations on progressions. There was no sense of composition, which is exactly what bots will never be able to do. An artist without emotional attachment to his or her art isn't an artist. It's a bot. You give AI far too much credit. There is zero right brain in AI. There is no way to program it.
    I was born with it. It suffuses my every moment, but it can't be taught, or passed along, or coded. That's the nature of creativity.

  17. So, basically, we have to kill all the roboticists and programmers to stop them from recklessly destroying the economy in the pursuit of more advanced technology and starving us all?

  18. We make companies pay machines an income equivalent to human work. When they do, because machines do it better, that goes into universal base income.

  19. wouldnt the economic crash caused by no one having a job result in companies being unable to sell their wares due to no one being able to afford them cause the cost of bots to be more expensive then humans. I understand that this has happened before with the auto industry in particular but on the scale that you are describing it would cause the greatest economic crash in recorded history

  20. I actually recently got hired on as a Design Engineer and after learning how to do my job, my job is to automate it.

  21. Combine this with what is said in Rules for Rulers about the only reason why democracies exist and what you end up with is . . . democracy is inevitably going to go away and we are all going back to a dictatorship because we will no longer need to make people productive.

  22. Well, I think that when robots will take over the economy will become comonyst. Think about it, nowadays we pay people for they productivity, if robots do everything we won't need people to be productive so everyone will get how much resource he needs.

  23. Fun fact: the Baxter robot was a failure (there were more useful robots) from UR Robotics.

  24. You call it a robot uprising, I call it us raising our metal babies to supercede us and carry on our legacy! 😉

  25. This was the video that convinced me that pre-empted my belief that Universal Basic Income is critical for the economic survival of Americans (and ultimately all people).

    Andrew Yang is the only candidate addressing this very real concern.

  26. Ok did anyone see that as soon as he started talking about horses that there were a bottle of Elmer’s glue next to the stick figure

  27. Ya generation Z here and generation AA also all future generation we're here to say that

  28. The best solution is to embrace automation and automate almost everything while completely replacing the current "wage for labour" system to a "labour for fun" system while all our needs can be fulfilled for FREE by automation.

    But that won't happen… cuz companies still need to make money … FUCKKKK

  29. I think part of the appeal of creativity and art is knowing it came from another person and is a part of them connecting to a part of you. So why would humans create a demand for art created by machines?

  30. Ah, I feel secure in my position due to, well, me being a programmer.
    No one smart enough to be a programmer will be stupid enough to make a bot to program…

    We need to make an Accord covering this.

  31. In the 20th Century the great equation was E=mc2. In the 21st Century the great equation is: Technology + Greed = Unemployment. By the year 2100 A.D. the world unemployment rate will be 90% because employers now have the means to get rid of all human workers and pocket all wages previously paid out to employees. And, nothing can stop it. Nothing.

  32. There will be no utopia brought about by automation. Greed for money will interfere and cause a worldwide dystopia. The movies Soylent Green, Running Man and They Live are previews of the world that is already developing.

  33. The full automation won't happen because the robots are built to serve, and as soon as they stop serving they will be shut off. They are only used as long as it is useful. Sure, more jobs will be automated but not all jobs for the sake of jobs itself. Think about it, how can any CEO replace his whole company with bots if everyone else also did it? Then no one will be employed, everyone but the owners of the bots will be out of a job. The CEOs will then lose all of their money due to the subsequent economic collapse, and no one will have anything, the bots will be useless as they no longer serve a purpose (that purpose is us).

  34. But CGP Grey, what about teachers? Can robots truly replace the human-human mentor-student dynamic that is so vital for people? I mean, I guess you could use technological implants in human brains to make a scene in our minds that would emulator the perfect lesson, but in a world where robots can replace so much, then why educate humans to do things that robots can just do? I'm not saying this an option, this is very unpleasant for me, but would teachers of all types be in that (minimum I guess) 45%? I would not like our world to become a scenario similar to WALL-E.

  35. We still have 30 years left to solve this riddle, i believe we can make it but first we have to avoid killing our ass out of war with each other

  36. Here's what I don't get… If everyone is out of a job because automation took over everything, then who's gonna pay the owners of the automated systems for their services?

    If only rich people can afford a new car, then car sales will decline massively and the owners of the car industry will either lose a lot of money or have to massively increase the prices of cars meaning rich won't be that rich anymore since everything is so expensive meaning rich will eventually start struggling AND WHEN DOES IT STOP… Fuck this, I'm going back to the 60s

    Edit: nevermind, I'm black, so I'm just gonna stay here and suck it up…

  37. This is one of the many reasons why capitalism is not sustainable in the future, and needs to be abandoned.

    Forward comrades! Forward to fully automated luxury communism!

  38. Well, they can't replace teachers, right? Right?!
    Robot: Johnny. You forgot your homework again.
    Me: I promise it wont happen again, miss A.P.P.L.E-GATE.
    Robot: Errors have to be removed …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *