Submitted by Callitaloss t3_10oyudd in singularity
Reply to comment by the68thdimension in A McDonald’s location has opened in White Settlement, TX, that is almost entirely automated. Since it opened in December 2022, public opinion is mixed. Many are excited but many others are concerned about the impact this could have on millions of low-wage service workers. by Callitaloss
>and it creates other jobs elsewhere around machine design, installation and upkeep
I hate it when people say this because just looking at the numbers shows this isn't an answer. Let's say you replaced 40 people (remember it is multiple shifts and so on).
There use to be network engineer jobs everywhere. There is no longer network engineer jobs hardly anywhere anymore. The reason is, after things are installed, you don't need to keep the person. So a lot of times today it is someone contracted among a large area.
The upkeep, unless if these things are breaking down every day. You have a small group over a large area that fixed this stuff up. And then what happen with computers is as the prices went down. Instead of hiring people to fix the parts. They are now replacing the entire computer and far less people are involved.
Like if you are replacing them 30 people and still have to keep even half for fixing and what not. This would make it more expensive because now you have down time and so on.
And then the design bit. Someone working at mc d likely doesn't have the background or ability to do design work. Did you know mc d is one of the biggest disability employers in the world? They even train their managers on this not to be nice. Sometimes they tell the managers this is the best the disabled person can get, and due to this they will stick around and jump through more crap because there is no other choice other than homeless or death. Litterally!!!
Anyways, even when you look at a normal person. Designing and so on now takes degrees in robotic or mechanical engineering. Meaning now the person has to magically over not have done a major degree, have the debt with that, and so on. And then even if they did. How many designers do you really need?
Oh and it is likely by then you can simply tell an AI your problem, your budget, and so on. And it will give you several designs, the software, and so on
Tldr the math doesn't add up to make your statement remotely true. Many people will be hurt by this
Now don't get me wrong. I 100% want this to happen. It more and more forces us to ubi and maybe a cashless society. But your statement wasn't factual
TL/DR: It doesn't take 100,000 people to design, install, and maintain robots that do the work of 100,000 people.
lol. This.
Likely if you were to replace 100,00 people. with the manager included you would need 5 people to keep up the system. The manager, 2 day shift, 2 night shift. And it is likely those 5 will actually cover a system that replaced half a million or more depending on distance and what not.
And even then their jobs will be replaced as it will be cheaper having robots installing, fixing, etc other robots and an AI control unit controlling it all.
> It doesn't take
Because it already took much more, starting with making first transistor, or even maybe making first tool thousands years ago, or ...
It's like charlie's dad in willy wonka getting replaced by a robot and then getting a job repairing the robot. After the robot is repaired there isn't much more to do.
I was thinking of that exact thing. I can't remember if it showed him having other workers around him when he was working before the robots, but I'm sure it showed just him fixing things or maybe a much smaller team.
​
Anyone who says robots will make more jobs is saying screw all the other people.
The average number of people working for a fast food restaurant is 17-something (per shift)
Kitchen staff isn't automated yet. Also someone needs to be there to keep things civil to prevent vandalism and what not. Someone needs to clean.
So say 7 people prepare the food, 3 people throw trash out and keep the restaurant clean and other things. And 1 person is a manager. So we still need 11 out of 17
Also keep in mind these productivity boosts have been happening all the time, like today's fast food workers are significantly more productive than fast food workers of 2005. They need less people per restaurant vs 2005. Yet despite this there are more of these workers employed today in the US vs 2005.
That's not that they wouldn't be automated eventually, but let's not exaggerate - at this point it could be in this experimental phase for years just like Amazon go did. They promised thousands of stores and instead 7 years later we have only 30 tiny stores that almost nobody uses.
You're looking at today. Look at flippy the robot. The one that cooks burgers. Also vending machines that make pizza and stuff.
It's likely all employees will be replaced at some point and then for security you would use security robots or a handful of people over a number of stores.
You wrote a whole lot of words for nothing, man, I agree with you. I never said the jobs were replaced 1:1, nor that the same people working at McDonalds would get those jobs. How about before taking the absence of words negating something as an argument for that thing, and then writing an essay about it ... you just ask for clarification?
In any case, nothing you said negates my point about UBS.
>In any case, nothing you said negates my point about UBS.
I was just getting into the part where you're factually incorrect.
>I never said the jobs were replaced 1:1, nor that the same people working at McDonalds would get those jobs.
Then what was the point of the comment?
> Then what was the point of the comment?
Because it’s worthwhile to point out the nuance of the situation: it’s not that these jobs are lost and that’s it, but rather these jobs are lost but some others are opened up elsewhere.
It’s still a net negative loss of number of jobs, yes, but it’s not as bad as it’s made out by some.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments