The Shifting Tide of Employment – The Sci-Fi Future is Already Here · 8:43pm Sep 6th, 2019
Alright, I’m gonna preface this with the note that I hadn’t planned on writing this post today, but employment and job-related issues are on my mind since my part time job is, well, no longer any-time. Which means financially, I’m about to hit … well, I wouldn’t call it a speed bump. How about a guardrail? Or just the ditch?
Basically, I really appreciate those book sales, Kindle Unlimited reads, and Patreon Supporters right now. In the meantime, I’m digging around for similar part-time work or gigs and selling off a few unneeded items.
That’s all I’ll say on the matter, but it has put the context of this post in mind. Which has been one I’ve been meaning to write for a while now. Because, well, what was Science Fiction a decade ago is right now becoming Science Fact (or already is), and in some cases I worry too many aren’t noticing.
All right, I’ll back up. What really sparked the genesis of this post was a post I read about six-seven months ago on someone else’s site that was, though I don’t remember the exact title, basically “Automation is a Paper Tiger.” This article, from a fellow Sci-Fi author, mind you, was basically a giant opinion piece against automation (and in this context, we mean the broad-scale rollout of AIs and robots to replace most human workers).
If you’re thinking ahead and wondering “Hey, what happens to all those workers?” you’re on the right track. But let me get back to that.
This was, the article writer declared, impossible. Not only was it decades, maybe centuries away, it was a pipe dream. Companies will always need human employees, and robots couldn’t possibly do a job that a human did. They offered examples of jobs they (and commentators) believed were impossible for a machine to take over, like trucking (18-wheeler shipping). They were adamant that it was all just fearmonging, that no one had any cause to be worried about their job disappearing, it was all hearsay, etc etc.
I believe they were wrong. Actually, no, they are wrong. Why? Well, for starters, some of the very jobs they offered as examples of jobs that couldn’t be replaced by robots? Well …
Yeah, they’re already being replaced.
Interesting stuff, as always. I was just waiting for this to end with something along the lines of “yeah, guess what’s doing that part time job I just stopped doing?”
Good luck with the job hunt, my friend.
5117131
My old employers aren't savvy enough for that. They let us go, but they haven't picked up anyone new. They're just hoping the few people left can keep things going.
Because PROFITS!
Thanks though. I'm looking.
Heh, I robot...
I have been watching driverless trucks in surface mines here in Aus for the last 5 years... trials long done, full on production in two mines already for over 4 years... match that with the even older driverless trains that transport the ore and you have a very large reduction in workers required and the flow-on associated reductions in support staff required as well. One mine that, when proposed, was projected to create over 1100 new jobs has now instead only created just over 200 jobs with 35 of those in Perth instead of the Pilbara.
To your fellow sci-fi writer I would say that the 'fi' ain't so 'fi' anymore and the 'sci' has long since overtaken their awareness of the level of automation and job erosion in the world.
Again, good luck with the job hunt.
#googleAndrewYang
When workers own the means of production, automation mean more leisure. When the bourgeoisie own the means of production, automation means more misery.
5117174
Andrew Yang is a capitalist shill. We need socialism.
Butlerian Jihad when? Or at least an AdMech-style ban on Abominable Intelligences and careful selection of allowed technologies?
O/T: I'll second this comment on the main blog:
The first two are readable, but retroactively mangle the "feel" of the first one. After that, things go off a cliff. Just stop after the original.
One potential way to help adapt to the large-scale adoption of a roboticised workforce is to change the definition of full-time employment. Think about it - if half the work is being done by robots, then full-time work could be changed to about 20 hours/week (with full-time salaries). Obviously, the higher-ups won't like that idea, preferring to cut staff payments in half. But I've already noticed a few places around the world are heading in that direction anyway.
Some company in New Zeland trialed a 4 day working week, taking Wednesday (I think it was Wednesday) off completely. Productivity actually increased, probably because the employees apreciated the opportunity to destress, spend time with family/friends/videogames/netflix/whatever, while still being paid for full time work. At the end of the trial, the CEO decided to continue with the 4 day week.
One comment on the other blog made me think of writing a short story called Hobbyist, which follows a man doing a task that looks an awful lot like the work of today but it's really just a hobby to him. Maybe preface it with that one quote from Tom Sawyer about how a man would gladly pay money for the privilege of driving a horse and buggy...
Sorry to hear about the job vanishing. I hope something else crops up soon, or else that the Jungle beta goes quickly and the book sales go through the roof.
I recall reading about a study recently where people were far more upset over the prospect of losing their jobs to another human than they were about losing the same job to a robot (or to software). They were still upset about other people losing jobs to automation, but it just didn't hold the same sting when it was their own job disappearing. Humans are funny things, it seems.
5117169
Turns out, Skynet delivers pink slips, and when the Terminator says "I'll be back" it's because he knows you're going to place a pizza order.
5117188
There's a definite fear that automation could result in a new sort of feudalism.
5117170
Yeah, I was watching a video a few months ago about robotic dockworkers that was both incredible ... And alarming. Because all those jobs are now robots, but we've not figured out what to do with those people who don't work anymore.
On the one hand, it's amazing. Mining, to go to your example, is dangerous. Robots mining? No human lives at risk! Yes!
But that also means no mining jobs for humans. Hmm ...
5117198
Nah, I just read Dune and was content. I kind of hope we don't take that route though. We need automation, personally, to expand as a species. Dune is noticably less advanced in a lot of places.
5117323
I'm in full agreement with this. Reduction of work hours, but with the same pay. Robots mean we'll need to reconsider how money and hours are valued.
5117435
Got a link? I'll read that.
Humans are weird. Maybe it's because we know a robot is progress on some level, but losing our job to a human is just "hey, this person does this better than you."
5117575
The story doesn't exist... yet. It might soon, though, if I can pick a good career to research and hobbyize.
5117575
Actually, the higher risk and precision tasks are still human done in these mines as, for now, it is the lower risk roles of driving the convoys of trucks going to/from the processing plant and the open cut hole which are robotic along with the trains from the processing plant to the ports a few thousand kilometres away. This means that the reduction in human risk is minimal so the upsides are also minimal compared to the downsides... much smaller camp populations lead to higher isolation impacts due to reduced camp facilities (smaller population means reduced facilities provided by the employer and also lower remuneration). This combined with increased job pressure and insecurity means mental stress and dissatisfaction have increased many fold. These camps so far have been far less enjoyable places to visit and work compared to the older larger sites. Technologically more interesting and so on but you definitely feel more drained and exhausted when you leave.
5117323
Unfortunately for every small operation with this mindset in a niche market, there are hundreds who just say "Well, if you want a job then you'd better be willing to work for lower conditions and do more unpaid hours than the next person in line or else we'll just employ them"... and yes, I am seeing this in quite a few industries, it is not just hyperbole. The trend is to devalue people's work through process driven management and subcontracting, and then combining this with simple rules of the economics of supply and demand. Simplify someone's role on paper and then 'imply' that now anyone can replace you with minimal training/experience and you instantly engender a fear of losing one's job and reduce the likelihood that they'll expect better conditions/pay.. The other issue is that robotics predominantly displaces lower and mid-skill roles meaning that the people thus displaced have less likelihood to be able to takeup the supposed new high skill roles servicing the robotic workforce... you see where this leads of course...