Re: Robotic nation

From: ABlainey@aol.com
Date: Thu Jul 24 2003 - 16:37:08 MDT

  • Next message: Emlyn O'regan: "RE: Fermi "Paradox""

    In a message dated 24/07/2003 15:58:04 GMT Daylight Time,
    puglisi@arcetri.astro.it writes:

    >
    > American society has no way to deal with a situation where half of the
    > workers are unemployed. During the Great Depression at its very worst, 25%
    > of the population was unemployed. The robotic future will be twice as bad,
    > and it will be permanent."
    >
    > Ciao,
    > Alfio
    >
    >

    I thought about this very problem years ago when I was working as a machine
    setter. I saw many people made redundant, when there positions were taken by
    bigger, better more cost effective machines. Luckily for me, I was a setter and
    also as multiskilled as I could possibly be. So I was simply moved around to
    service the new machines and run whatever old manual pieces of hardware that
    were left. That was until the entire factory was shut down and replaced by a new
    one half way around the world, run by a far cheaper workforce.
    Back then I spent many hours sitting and watching the machines, tirelessly
    milling, turning and grinding away. 90% of my working day involved just sitting
    and watching in case something went wrong or the metal masters needed feeding.
    In one eight hour shift, I would watch six machines turn out tens of
    thousands of components. I often wondered how many people it would have taken to
    produce the same in years gone by.
    It forced me to think about what my future had in store and the direction
    manufacturing was taking.
    It didnt take much to realise that the only people in the future that would
    have a job, would be the people that owned the machines. In that, I saw one
    possible solution for the average Joe worker.
    If Joe owned a machine. He could supply the services of said machine to a
    company, rather than his sevices directly. In addition to this, he would be
    responsible for the maintenance and running of the machine. The company pays for
    either the hours the machine runs or the amount of work done, for example the
    quantity of units produced.

    This may seem like a stupid idea at first and very difficult to manage.
    However it isn't very far from the system that is already in place in many
    factories. The machines are rented from one company, The workers stand around watching
    and feeding and they are also payed a productivity bonus.

    I never did work out the nitty gritty of this system where the workers own
    the machines as I left manufacturing and became an IT consultant. Which
    irronically has placed me in a very similar position.

    Alex



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jul 24 2003 - 16:46:34 MDT