How Will Automation Affect Different US Cities? (northwestern.edu) 98
Casino dealers and fishermen are both likely to be replaced by machines in coming years. So which city will lose more of its human workforce -- Las Vegas, the country's gambling capital, or Boston, a major fishing hub? From a research: People tend to assume that automation will affect every locale in the same, homogeneous way, says Hyejin Youn, an assistant professor of management and organization at Kellogg. "They have never thought of how this is unequally distributed across cities, across regions in the U.S." It is a high-stakes question. The knowledge that certain places will lose more jobs could allow workers and industries to better prepare for the change and could help city leaders ensure their local economies are poised to rebound. In new research, Youn and colleagues seek to understand how machines will disrupt the economies of individual cities. By carefully analyzing the workforces of American metropolitan areas, the team calculated what portion of jobs in each area is likely to be automated in coming decades. You can run your city's name, and also the job position you're curious about here.
Boston? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Boston is a major fishing hub? Is this the 1800s?
Boston is home to many large fish processing and preparation businesses. If you're in the midwest and you're eating lobster or cod then it probably passed through Boston. These are the jobs that can be automated away.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
There's also the question of whether the folks at Kellog have ever been on a commercial fishing vessel. I haven't been around boats much for about 50 years, But I think that the jobs in the fishing industry might be a bit more complex than they think.
Re: (Score:2)
Boston is home to many large fish processing and preparation businesses. If you're in the midwest and you're eating lobster or cod then it probably passed through Boston.
Ah, Boston. Home of Legal Seafood and illegal prices.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Any city/state that raises its minimum wage is going to be on the front line of automation.
... and those that don't raise the MW will only be six months behind. Much of the cost of automation is in R&D. Once the kiosks are developed and being manufactured, they will be deployed everywhere.
Any fast food job in California that can be automated will be automated.
I live in California. The McDonalds nearest me already has ordering kiosks. Tap what you want, swipe your card, and wait for your number to be called when your order is ready. No human interaction at all. My estimate is that about half the customers use them.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Casino dealers likely won't go away anytime soon as the gamblers who play tables like the human element, otherwise they'd all be only using the video poker machines and such that have already existed for decades now.
I live in California. The McDonalds nearest me already has ordering kiosks. Tap what you want, swipe your card, and wait for your number to be called when your order is ready. No human interaction at all. My estimate is that about half the customers use them.
I've seen those kiosks at a few around here in the Midwest, I've not seen anyone using them so far as it's much quicker to just go to the register and say "Number 4, large", pay and be done with it. I was surprised that I couldn't just to that when I did try one of those kiosks, it wanted me to
Re:Simple Answer (Score:4, Insightful)
Casino dealers likely won't go away anytime soon as the gamblers who play tables like the human element, otherwise they'd all be only using the video poker machines and such that have already existed for decades now.
I agree with this. It seems like a rather glaring flaw in TFA. People like people, and as such, the service industry will exist for a very long time. People like waiters, bar tenders, dealers, etc. should continue to do pretty well. OTOH, the people in the service industry that you don't see, are in real danger. People don't care about people they don't see, such as line cooks and dish washers.
Re: (Score:2)
When you hit a losing streak with a dealer, this dealer is unlucky for you.
THAT is why Casinos, in spite of trying to change it for decades, still employ dealers.
Re: (Score:2)
When you hit a losing streak on a machine, this machine might be rigged. When you hit a losing streak with a dealer, this dealer is unlucky for you.
Since most poker tables have automated shuffling and the dealer just distributes the cards, then this difference will eventually fade. Oh, wait, a single cut is the "random" input the dealer makes. Other than that, the dealer has no input in which cards go to which player. But yes, currently, the dealer is blamed for bad hands.
I don't think many people blame the dealer at Pai Gow, and that's a glaring example of the difference between manual shuffle and automated, despite there being a dealer present to c
Re: (Score:2)
Since most poker tables have automated shuffling and the dealer just distributes the cards, then this difference will eventually fade.
Shallow thinking.
The dealer still cuts the deck in those places. Ask yourself why it was so easy for you to to be so astonishingly wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
The dealer still cuts the deck in those places. Ask yourself why it was so easy for you to to be so astonishingly wrong.
I guess you didn't read my explicit comment that the dealer cuts the cards after taking them out of the auto-shuffler at a poker table. Ask yourself why you don't read the entire comment before replying.
For Pai Gow, which was my example, no, sorry, the dealer does not cut the cards. The shuffler shuffles the desk and spits out packets of seven cards seven times. The dealer may do a wash or hand-riffle prior to putting the deck into the shuffler to make it look like he's doing something to randomize the o
Re: (Score:2)
More speculative nonsense (Score:1)
I can't take anything that uses, 'might', 'will likely', or 'could' as its basis seriously. Those words have been used to describe a great many things that had exactly zero impact on anything whatsoever over a great many decades. Millennial alert.
Re: (Score:2)
I''m just amazed that people think this is something new. Since the industrial revolution technology has been replacing jobs. It's not like it's a new invention.
Ridiculous data (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Automated doesn't mean "get replaced by an android". It just means that you'll need less people to do the same work due to advances in automation. Your robot may not clean the whole house, but it will let house cleaners clean a house faster, with less people. It's certainly easy to just say that we don't have the technology now, but in 20 years given advancements in robotics and automation ... I'd put my money on the human not doing the brunt of the work in cleaning a house.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
We've already got industrial robots that can learn tasks by watching humans do them. Its not hard to imagine wealthy people buying something like that for their homes in 15 years,
So the rich people will wind up with robots intended to clean their homes and all the robot will do is watch TV and eat bon-bons? What rich person is going to show a robot how to clean? (Yes, that's facetious. Undocumented workers will still have a job teaching the robots, albeit short-term jobs.)
You seem to be one of those people who is stridently confident in their ignorance.
I simply think back to what technology was like 20 years ago and realize that a lot of things we have today weren't imagined then. Like "Alexa, turn on my bedroom light". Like a Raspberry Pi that has more compute p
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
We do not have 'AI', we have 'pseudo-intelligence'
According to my dictionary, one of the synonyms for "pseudo" is "artificial".
Re: (Score:2)
TFA says that Market Research Analysts and Marketing Specialists have a 61% risk of being automated. How about that?
Something is seriously wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
Something is seriously wrong with our civilization when robots taking over dull, repetitive tasks leads to an overall worse quality of life.
Re: (Score:2)
Since everything will be automated, there will be no real use for income. Everything will be dirt cheap because labor costs will go to zero.
Right, because that's how it's always worked throughout human history - the rich decide that they don't need the poor, so all the wealthy people suddenly become altruists, and everybody is happy.
Re:Something is seriously wrong (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I make less than $20k/year, yet am extremely wealthy by 1900's standards, probably 1980's standards by most measures.
Right, so despite technological advances bringing the cost of labor down, your dollar today doesn't go nearly as far as it did before said technological innovation, thus furthering my point - actual cost of labor has fuck-all to do with the cost of goods sold.
Re:Something is seriously wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
In 1972 (because I couldn't find 1980 prices), a refrigerator would have cost me 21% of my income, while today it costs 3.7% of my income while using 1/3rd the amount of energy. And the $ ammounts do not include the intangible increases in quality (better for the environment, safer, less energy useage).
TVs are junk (Score:3)
Chinese slave labor has made electronics cheap. I just read a story where a US boat went down in a storm and it causally mentioned that the Chinese lose a boat every other day (along with it's crew). Then there's Cancer Villages. And smog so bad you can't go jogging. That's why your TVs are
Re: (Score:1)
Also how much is decent quality food that's not full of pesticides, cellulose, and water?
The water levels in meats are completely insane these days.
Likewise, many home utility items last under 25% as long as they used to.
The guy above mentions a TV set. My friend has a CRT Tv Set which is over 20 years old. I have a dishwasher and a water heater that are both over 20 years old. Today's water heaters last about 9 years. Today's dishwashers breakdown in less than that.
Four years ago, the capacitor on my
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Also -
a refrigerator that was built 30 years ago was built to last, and in fact many 1970-1980 model refrigerators are still in use today (like mine, for example, that was built in 1985 according to the tag).
Conversely, a new refrigerator is the victim of planned obsolescence, and is designed to fail catastrophically within the first 5-10 years of operation, requiring a new unit to be purchased.
So - even if the individual refrigerator models today are more efficient than older models, they still produce as
Re: (Score:2)
Inflation adjusted,
Translation: I'm going to selectively consider figures so that I sound better.
You want to make a legit comparison, how about considering real capital purchases, such as:
1) housing
2) automobiles
3) higher education
"China makes cheap crap" is not an argument (and to that end, the 26" CRT you bought in 1980 still works today, but the 32" ChinaVision LCD is going to crap out 30 days after the 2 year warranty is up).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, because we all know how everyone will always pass on their own savings to a consumer instead of just using it as a money-grab for themselves.
Costs won't go down... the rich will just get richer faster.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You will always be able to trade a day of your labor for a day of someone elses.
The liberals dont get that because they dont believe in the free part of a free market. They will introduce a red herring such as "but the rich..."
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Something is seriously wrong (Score:4, Insightful)
People of below average intelligence - you know, 50% of the population - have no problem with dull, repetitive tasks. In fact, they find learning new things to be a difficult chore. It is only the intelligent people who delight in learning. Because they're good at it, duh. How does an intelligent person overlook such obvious facts?
If you don't have a job, you don't have a place in society. You're not contributing. This is very destructive to the human soul, and people will start killing themselves because they don't know why they're alive. It's not like instead of a job people are going to start going to see independent films and creating art all day. That's just what a very small segment of the intelligent population - the ones high in creativity and trait openness - wishes they could do. They don't speak for humanity, this is painfully obvious to any observer.
There's so much wrong here it's hard to unpack (Score:3)
First is the implicit notion that people have to be contributing to society to feel fulfilled. Bullshit. The upper class is full of layabouts, so much so we've got a term for it (the Idle Rich) and I don't see them offing themselves. People will watch TV, sports, drink and hang out with friends and be perfectly happy. Hell, our ancestors had _more_ free time than we did since they spent a lot of it just waiting for crops to grow.
Then there's the subtext that people who can't contribute don't
Re: (Score:2)
b. Read my post again. Crops don't grow in the winter.
c. Again, read my post again. The subtext is in the phrase "If you don't have a job, you don't have a place in society". It's there whether you realize it or not. It's even more powerful if you _don't_ realize it since it's hit you subconsciously; e.g. without you even knowing it.
d. Insults are
Re: (Score:2)
Not only that. Training isn't free.
If you pay $6k for a skill and then lose the job within 2 years, you are in debt and can't retrain.
We need basic income, universal health care, and free education (that includes trade school). Not *debt*.
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't have a job, you don't have a place in society. You're not contributing. This is very destructive to the human soul, and people will start killing themselves because they don't know why they're alive.
Contributing to what? My bosses vacation plans? The 'economy'? I don't think I would kill myself over something so petty.
Re: (Score:2)
Something is seriously wrong with our civilization when robots taking over dull, repetitive tasks leads to an overall worse quality of life.
Something is seriously wrong with our civilization when people read some journalist spouting an opinion, and accept it as objective truth rather than some stupid economic fallacy.
There is no reason to believe that automation is leading to a "worse quality of life".
Re: (Score:3)
Now consider the role of machine learning. With or without a human dealer, machines might learn to recognize certain subtle human reactions that indicate things. Like when the sucker is about to give up and leave the table. What responses by the dealer are statistically more likely to keep him at the table losing more of his mortgage payment money.
Re: (Score:2)
Some dealers are pushy on the high house edge side bets.
Re: (Score:2)
This is just OPINION (Score:2)
Casino dealers and fishermen are both likely to be replaced by machines in coming years.
That's just someone's opinion. Nothing to see here..
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
the only thing new is the video poker machines replacing some of the slot machines.
You are wrong. Casinos love automation. It gets rid of one of their biggest expenses AND security problems. Dealers handle cards and money. Mishandling either one can be theft or simple mistake, but either one costs money. And people to watch the people makes the cost even higher. (I was playing poker one night and everyone at the table misread a hand, including the dealer. About twenty minutes later a floor came by, told me that security had detected the mistake, and gave me $20.) One time a dealer at Pai
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I obviously don't gamble ...
Obviously, and thus your knowledge of casinos, why people go there, and why they gamble isn't very great. Thank you for adding your opinions.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'll simply say this: not everyone will "eventually lose". There are people who make their livings gambling. When I play Pai Gow, I typically come out ahead, and I'm hardly a pro.
But you certainly are the superior person because you understand so much about the casinos and would never fall for their scam. That's what you are
Re: (Score:2)
Will? (Score:2)
AI Rate of Change (Score:2)
HorseDung to CarSmog, 50 years it took to dislodge a 4 legged beast in the automobile revolution. (https://thetyee,ca/News?2013/03/06/Horse-Dung-Big-Shift/ ) The computer revolution took 30 yrs. to get to ' the rest of us'.
PeoplePace to BlackBoxAI automation will dislodge our 2 legged friends in the transition. It'll take a scale of systems engineering witnessed in the Computer revolution AND dislodge humans at scale as the Horseless Carriage dislodged beasts to their greener pastures. Yay for the horse th
Re: (Score:1)
What everyone misses, is that in the new scenario we are the horses.
Re: (Score:2)
Robot Casino Dealers? (Score:2)
Do people really want to play cards with a robot dealer? It seems a little impersonal to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Do people really want to play cards with a robot dealer? It seems a little impersonal to me.
While it may seem impersonal, the growth of online poker should tell you something.
Also, if you can't find a poker table with a human dealer, will you chose not to play? The casino will control what is available.
Re: (Score:2)
Where I play, the most common reason that any poker table is not in use is because they don't have a dealer for it. If they don't have to pay someone to come in to deal, they can open a table at almost no cost. Any time there would have been a waiting list of four or more people, they simply open a table w
Thinking Wrong (Score:2)
Have ytou seen humans? (Score:1)
All these folks loose their jobs? (Score:2)
And where's the jobs to replace them? And who's going to hire "retrained" folks in their 40s and 50s and 60s?
I see, so all the folks who lose their jobs should leave everything behind, and go die under a bridge.
Or perhaps we need a basic minimum national income, a reverse income tax. Of course, I realize that's anti-efficience...
"Efficiency, n. the speed and frictionlessness that money flows from poor people to rich people", New York 2140, Kim Stanley Robinson