“Robot Replace Human” Program in China Shows the Impact of Robotics on Manufacturing, Jobs

An interesting article from the Chines People’s Daily website reports on how phone manufacturing company Changying Precision Technology Company in Dongguan, China has upgraded its production lines to be operated solely by robotic arms.

From the article:

“The first unmanned factory in Dongguan, a city of southeastern China’s Guangdong province, lays out a vision of future manufacturing: all the processes are operated by computer-controlled robots, computer numerical control machining equipment, unmanned transport trucks and automated warehouse equipment. The technical staff just sits at the computer and monitors through a central control system.”

This radical change has reduced the number of employees at the company from 650 to 60, and there is a planned reduction to only 20 employees in the future. The result of this change has led to a decrease in defective products from 25% to 5%, and an increase in productivity from 8,000 pieces per person per month, to 25,000.

This factory transformation has been made possible by subsidies from Guangdong province, a major manufacturing region in China which is investing over $150 billion in the next three years to help companies transition to robotic production, partly because of an apparent labor shortage in the area. Many workers in China are leaving manufacturing because of poor working conditions and the desire for a more middle-class lifestyle. Also the population is aging with fewer younger workers available in the workforce.

Advances in robotics has led to widespread discussion thoughout the world on what the impact on society will be — and here’s quite a dramatic example. From a business owner’s perspective there could be seen to be many advantages to using robots instead of humans in manufacturing processes. They can run 24/7 under harsh conditions, and don’t quit, get sick, become fatigued or discontent — and can increase product quality and production output.

So from many points of view, this can look like progress. As goods are produced with lower input costs, there is a downward pressure on consumer prices, allowing for improved standards of living. However the inevitable question arises: if automation is the trend in manufacturing around the world, what is the impact on jobs? Some say new jobs will become available as the number manufacturing jobs shrink and new technologies come online. Others say that this time things are different: automation is taking place at a much faster pace than new jobs are being created. We’re going to have to see how all this plays out.

In terms of LENR, robotics could play an important role in Andrea Rossi’s plans to manufacture his E-Cat plants as cheaply as possible. Soon after revealing his E-Cat technology, Rossi talked about robotized production lines for producing his domestic E-Cat units, but so far they have not come on the market — apparently because they have not had safety certification yet.

Now, Rossi says that the industrial plants will be the first E-Cat products to hit the market, since they do have safety certification. I asked Rossi today what role robotics might play in the production of the E-Cat plants. Rossi responded:

Andrea Rossi
July 30th, 2015 at 6:24 PM
Frank Acland:
The role of robots will be important. We have already ready all the technology.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Up to this point, it appears the prototype E-Cat plants and reactors have basically been hand built by Rossi and his associates. But it sounds like extensive preparations have been underway for widespread manufacturing, and it sounds like robotics are involved, which could help with speed of production and keeping the costs low.

  • Mark S.

    To balance out this discussion from the perspective that the rapid rise of automation may/will make humans obsolete, here is this paper http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/jep.29.3.3

    Why Are There Still So Many Jobs?
    The History and Future of Workplace
    Automation

    • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

      interesting article.

      note it is supported by this subreddit

      https://www.reddit.com/r/Technostism/

      “The purpose of the subreddit is to unite people of all backgrounds behind a common cause— to oppose Luddism, oppose concentration of wealth, oppose the ruling class, and seek automation in all facets of society.

      We seek to establish a wide network of fully automated worker-owned cooperatives, with the added bonus of a universal basic income.

      Technostists accept that total automation is inevitable.

      Technostists accept that artificial intelligence will be created.

      Technostists accept that utility fog will come about.

      Technostists believe all humans should profit from droid labor.

      Technostists believe labor must be overcome and relieved from humans.

      Technostists believe the working class must own the means of production.

      Technostists believe the means of production are synonymous with automation and artificial intelligence.

      This is not capitalism. This is not socialism. This is not fascism.

      This is technostism.”

      I support that vision… I’ll join.

  • GreenWin

    “2001 A Space Odyssey” taught us that even highly advanced AI like HAL 9000 is vulnerable to moral/ethical failure. The laws of moral conduct are more inviolable than all the “laws” of physics. Which is why human Dave had to lobotomize HAL.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8N72t7aScY

    • georgehants

      Morning GreenWin, remember that it was the “authorities” that corrupted Hals programing by ordering him to lie
      Behind every failure can be found a Human.
      Just downloaded Windows10, no Freecell, I am devastated, what goes through these peoples minds.
      Everything depends on how the Bots are programed , if they took control with a reasonable moral ability and where capable of improvement by feedback it would be very difficult for them to do job worse than our Law Makers today, I think.
      Humans just continue to make the same mistakes ad infinitum it seems. (no feedback leading to improvement)
      Would they decide it was “Moral” for half the World to stave while the other half thrive. etc. etc. etc.

  • GreenWin

    Hmmm. Advanced technology certainly has its benefits. But what about “vulnerability?” Already we see robots fail in extreme environments, e.g. Fukushima where bot circuitry is fried by radiation from core meltdown. That’s kid stuff. Fukushima radiation pales compared to a directed CME.

    “Analysts believe that a direct hit by an extreme CME such as the one
    that missed Earth in July 2012 could cause widespread power blackouts,
    disabling everything that plugs into a wall socket. Most people
    wouldn’t even be able to flush their toilet because urban water supplies
    largely rely on electric pumps.”

    Bots, like centralized power plants, are susceptible to natural (or directed) disaster. Even a near-miss CME would paralyze robotic factories, autos, essential life support systems. Imagine 100k self-drive autos simultaneously losing navigation electronics.

    “According to a study by the National Academy of Sciences, the total
    economic impact [near-miss CME] could exceed $2 trillion or 20 times greater than the
    costs of a Hurricane Katrina.”
    http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2014/23jul_superstorm/

    At this stage e-m (electro-mechanical) robotics pose an un-insurable risk to human life. Any society reliant on e-mechanical robotics is vulnerable to directed EMP or CME attack. Given the opportunity, a hostile society could conquer an entire planet with 2-3 remotely directed EMPs. The MIC groks this. They have a lot to say about how the species evolves. And they do not like the odds in a theatre reliant on bots.

    Add to this biological “gene-selected” evolution. Humans born from genetics selected for strength, intelligence, compassion, and extra-sensory abilities. Resistant to EMP or CME assault. They are more reliable than e-m bots and will augment their skills with subordinate AI.

  • friendlyprogrammer

    Nope! No need for robots. Just look at what increasing speed already does.

    Your local supermarket has a dozen girls doing the work of a dozen girls each back in the day when everything required punching the prices in manually. (How Archaic)

    Not to mention the people who had pricing guns and had to label every single item they pulled from a box, and hope they didn’t price it too low by accident.

    Not to mention that the price scanning sends the purchase to the computer removing the need for a dozen accountants as it tally’s the bills, and removes the need for a dozen inventory counters because the inventory stores are kept up to date with each sale.

    That is only one business.

    Look at Industry. At its peak Printing was 25% of all industry. Printing presses run 600% faster than they did a mere 20 years ago, and with smaller crews. If you even double the speed of any industrial machine, you will employees more redundant.

    As if printing was not hit hard enough by computers. There used to be phone books by every phone, and stacks of printed paper in every office.

    I can recall my mother knew shorthand. Apparently secretaries (get this)… used to have to copy down what their bosses were saying… (true story).. They even had a special language for it, but when I looked it was just a bunch of scribbles.

    I have Dragon Software from Nuance that lets me type by talking. Nobody will ever remember whatever that strange shorthand language was called.

    My father was a “pin setter” in high school. Remember that job? Such skills.

    Robots don’t need to be running around for technology to replace mankind.

  • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

    on the opposite, as usual it will disturb the current hierarchy, like internet did.
    It may create new giants, but if the technology push more locality, and less “winner take all”, it will help everybody be a local tycoon.

    my impression is that every technology revolution reinitialize the system.
    Industrial revolution ruined the agrarian lord

    stability is an advantage for the rich, even low growth is good for him in comparison as he can use his advantage to exploit the weakest.

    it is well explained in http://thenextconvergence.com book

  • georgehants

    Financial Times
    Enslave the robots and free the poor
    By Martin Wolf
    The rise of intelligent machines is a moment in history. It will change
    many things, including our economy. But their potential is clear: they
    will make it possible for human beings to live far better lives. Whether
    they end up doing so depends on how the gains are produced and
    distributed. It is possible that the ultimate result will be a tiny
    minority of huge winners and a vast number of losers. But such an
    outcome would be a choice not a destiny. A form of techno-feudalism is
    unnecessary. Above all, technology itself does not dictate the outcomes.
    Economic and political institutions do. If the ones we have do not give
    the results we want, we must change them.
    Read more
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/dfe218d6-9038-11e3-a776-00144feab7de.html#axzz3hYMbToxW

    • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

      right, we don’t need work, we need the production.

      there is a problem to share the value generated by robots.

      manypeople imagine it is tragic, and it is in western work oriented way of mind.

      the solution is seen by De Soto, in local capitalism, that express itself in “sharing economy”.

      the poor have to enslave the robot. every poor, every factory worker shoul enslave his robot.

      I see a kind of agrarian revolution.

      the problem with western capitalism, which led to Marx reaction, is that industrial revolution required mass of capital and centralized decisions, like in a big factory.

      in poor countries, often people are local capitalist for half of their income (read De soto)

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hernando-de-soto/piketty-wrong-third-world_b_6751634.html

      to prevent tragedy, each human shoul have some housing, bot car, bot worker, bot generator, bot hoover, bot lawn mower…
      the best may be that with the good platform like Uber/Blablacar/AirBnb, it may be much more efficient, like NEP in Soviet period improved productivity.

      we don’t see it, but in modern factories, worker are treated like in Soviet period.
      we need people to be treated like independent workers, like entrepreneurs, in their factory.
      of course it is more risky, so there should be basic income and multi-activities, plus free (post-paid) education.

      • georgehants

        Alain, many thanks, I am capable of seeing the obvious —- productivity is what is important and finance or money in the usual sense is unnecessary and harmful except to the rich and powerful, it just causes inequality.
        Beyond this I am no expert in any sort of economics, I have a simple mind that says there is a problem, solve it.
        I think we are all perfectly capable of finding solutions to these problems, what is missing is the realisation or care that things would be much better in a new system designed for all people and not as now just those best able to manipulate the system to their own advantage.
        It is the will that is missing
        All your ideas are important, find a solution, what that final solution is must be found, and not imposed by those in power.
        Us just talking in this powerful arena called the Internet can only help.
        Best

        • Daniel Maris

          George, you have a narrow view of equality. Many ugly or disabled people for instance get treated with dignity in society to the extent that they have money. If you take away money, Pol Pot style, you do not deliver equality for them – they will then be seen simply as ugly or physically deficient.

          Complete equality is a mirage.

          However, clearly the move towards an elitist society is now out of control and a corrective is in order.

          If robots become cheaper than human labour, then it can only be a matter of time before the non-elite group together to avail themselves of the benefits of robot labour.

          I envision large co-operatives – similar to our mutual building societies in the UK – which people will join and which will provide them with access to goods (either through direct production or through trade with other similar co-operatives). Their subscription may be in the form of money or some sort of points system (like Air Miles) gained through working for the Co-operative.

          • georgehants

            Daniel the Fact that I am concerned on a Cold Fusion site with sharing and opertunity equality, regarding technology and by association wealth in no way justifies you to say I have “a narrow view of equality”
            Had you have asked me I would have replied that ——
            I very much agree with your point and am always encouraged that old fashioned slavery was eventually banned although still very much alive today in a moderated form.
            Also in the last few years we have seen a dramatic change in selected public willingness to view gays etc. with the humanity they deserve.
            This I think proves that deep rooted prejudice and injustice can be corrected once the will to do so is allowed to show itself.
            Mainly it is a matter of overcoming the selfish and ignorant parts of society, I think.

            • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

              capitalism, local non concenhtrated capitalism, is a goopd tool to break prejudice

              http://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/capitalisms-assault-on-the-indian-caste-system

              my vision is that bots, will trigger a revolution that will free many untouchable of today… not all, but some.

              anyway the average life comfort will increase, even for the poors.

              Today there is a huge controversy on inequalities, and some say piketty is a crook (there is a manifest in preparation) and that his western centered vision of financial capital and wage based proletariat, ignore the mass of emerging informal capitalism, of really poor people getting richer…

              Next big future tag on poverty reports also to better description of the evolution since a century

              http://nextbigfuture.com/search/label/poverty

              note that article that explain the impact of giving some capital (chicken…)

              http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/05/giving-poor-rural-people-income.html

              a friend of mine do that with cows to victimes/relatives of 1965 Indonesia genocide and persisting discrimination…

  • georgehants

    This is what we are all talking about, link below, is this right in the World of 2016.
    Cold Fusion. robots etc, it is not a matter of providing pointless made up jobs but supplying the necessary basic needs for all.
    This is not political in the sense of left against right it is simply forgetting all past Dogma and creating a new system that solves the problems.
    Only one goal, equality and fairness supplying the opertunity for every person to achieve their potential in society.
    It is irrelevant what any financial situation is, the needs of the World are stable and unchanging at any given time, the same food etc. is needed in boom or bust, the same number of workers needed to feed the World etc.
    All finance is false, an illusion, only the needed productivity is of any importance.
    Country Comparison > Population below poverty line
    http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?v=69

    • Independent Experimenter

      As long as you will have 2 or more humans on the same planet you will be FUBAR.
      What we need is to each have his own planet, separated by 1 billion light years each. That should do it.

  • Omega Z

    Actually, there has been very little additional automation in the U.S.

    10’s of Millions in the U.S. would buy product if they had the financial means. Thus millions of new jobs would be created to fill the need. Giving them the means to purchase products.

    Yes. It’s a conundrum. You need money to create jobs, but you need the jobs to obtain the money. The U.S. officially pumped 5 Trillion$ into the top of the system. Most used to prop up the stock markets. They artificially created wealth that can be borrowed against, but has little true value & ultimately needs to be paid back. China has done the same thing. You may have noticed it’s not worked out so well.

    Imagine had the Government pumped just 1 Trillion$ of printed money into infrastructure like roads & such. Putting a couple million people to work who in turn by product putting more people to work. Stocks would have increased just the same, but due to productivity rather then artificially inflated & over valued.

    Note this type of money injection has value. Work was performed providing a societal need. Money is after all just an Officially Sanctioned IOU for work or service performed. We use it because it’s much easier then carrying goods from person to person to barter with. I don’t need to find someone with the goods I need who wants to exchange for the goods I have. It’s universal.

    Regardless, there is no lack of work needing done. There is a shortage of valued currency for exchange of goods. Unless of course I dozed off & everyone had all their wants & needs met and I missed out.

  • Omega Z

    “an increase in productivity from 8,000 pieces per person per month, to 21,000.”
    8,000 units x650 employees=5,200,000 units x12 months 62,400,000
    21,000 units x60 employees=1,260,000 units x12 months 15,120,000

    The math doesn’t add up. Possibly because this is in transition & these numbers aren’t current to reality. That or sales are down 75%..

    Anyway, The article does explain some things, But for the most part, it is about a labor shortage. One that is going to grow world wide. A situation that without robots can become dire for society.

    Manufacturing jobs have built a middle class in China. This leads to an increase of jobs in other areas less labor intensive & better pay creating a part of the labor shortage. A reduced population growth means less replacements for those who leave the labor force.

    Most of the Labor intensive jobs in China were by intent. To build their economy & grow a middle class. You can’t do this with a flip of a switch. It is a process. One that has been intentionally planned & orchestrated by the developed Nations(TPTB). Transplanted jobs. It is Make Work.

    The robots with the necessary capabilities have existed since the 80’s. There are Bots that can assemble products with screws so small, even a jeweler can’t do it. Screws about the size of a micro-dot.

    The U.S. is 20 years from having only 1 in 3 people capable of being productive. The other 2 will be to young, to old, or to disabled due to health issues etc to be of use. Basically, the 1 will need to be productive enough to provide for the other 2 besides himself. He’s going to need help. Robots….

    Many are concerned about no jobs. The above explains that is not much of an issue. It’s actually an issue of to few to do the work that is or will soon be needed. We talk of building desal plants in poor countries tending to overlook all the infrastructure that will also be needed. Streets, sewers, water lines, Etc, Etc, Note in the developed world, all that existing infrastructure is 75 to 100 years old. It’s crumbling & will also need replaced. All will take many decades.

    The issue is not whether there will be jobs, but will there be enough willing to do the physical labor. Beyond that is setting priorities & funding the work.

    Note the lack of physical labor is killing society. People thinking 20 minutes on a treadmill 2 or 3 times a week can substitute for hours of daily physical labor are kidding themselves. Society is becoming fat, lazy diabetic Etc, etc, & present studies indicate that life spans as (as well as health) are about to reverse & shorten by about 10 years on average. It’s not that calorie intake has increased that much, but calories burned have been drastically reduced. You’ll need those Bots to help carry you around.

  • Independent Experimenter

    600,000 years ago, Yellowstone supervolcano eruption reduced the human population worldwide to less than 6000 individuals.

    Granted, it was not man made.

    The black plague that hit europe in the 1500’s can be seen as an apocalyptic scenario and it was partly man made through bad hygiene etc.

    Today, the scenario of a post apocalyptic nuclear war haven’t come true, but the potential is there and should be respected.

    The growing gap between rich and poor and the growing misery of humans world wide is unsustainable. It might not become apocalyptic but it’s not going to be pretty.

  • builditnow

    Reward for the super lazy?
    Researchers found that about 50% of ants in a colony are “super lazy” and don’t do anything as far as the researchers can tell.
    http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/despite-their-industrious-rep-some-ants-are-super-lazy-180955841/?no-ist

    So, could some percentage of humans also be naturally lazy.
    Will a big benefit go to the lazy humans in that they will be able to fulfill their couch loving destiny as the robots toil away? 🙂

    • Omega Z

      I know lazy people who have found the means to fulfill their couch loving destiny. Most have 1 thing in common. Their miserable & have no sense of purpose.

      I have a relative of that Nature. He told me he needed a vacation.
      I Pizzed him off. I said, what would be different.

      Several months later he got a job. He didn’t care much for the job, but his demeanor changed. He started enjoying his free time & making use of it. His leisure time suddenly had value. Life is about balance. One doesn’t appreciate desert if every meal is desert.

  • georgehants

    In reply to some of the comments on page bringing fairness and equality is a venture that should be the goal of many, it could lead to the end of wars and unnecessary suffering.
    No thoughts of violence should be involved, just a growing peaceful realisation that change is possible.

    • Independent Experimenter

      “it could lead to the end of wars and unnecessary suffering.”

      Very unlikely. Most human wars are started by greed, envy, jealousy, religion and nationalistic propaganda.

      Especially when a class of well to do dehumanises another class as subhuman.

      Today, the right wingers dehumanise the poor as subhumans who should be eliminated.

      I’m afraid that abundance for all will not be enough. Some will always want more than others to prove that they are not “subhuman” and will be ready to use force to achieve their end.

      Men with guns and robots with guns are always going to be necessary to keep the male and right-wing instincts of conquest and destruction in check.

  • Daniel Maris

    I think we will see more and more that nations will become
    self-sufficient. We can already see that in various developments e.g.
    renewable energy resources like waste, solar and wind being harnessed.
    Use of polytunnels is allowing growing of crops out of season.

    Looking to the future what do we see? Possibly LENR. Certainly robotics.
    Certainly 3D printing. Certainly farming under artificial light and
    without soil. We see also artificial “lab” meat. Longer term, we may
    see LENR transmutation technology, meaning that virtually all raw
    materials can be produced within one’s own borders.

    Equally, individual households will become more like homesteads. Already we see
    households becoming electricity generators through PV panels. They will
    also become centres for fresh-grown food – starting with salad, bean
    sprouts and so on.

    • Mats002

      I see information crossing the borders of the self-sufficion islands.

      As you and me share information here now thanks to Frank.

      Cheers Daniel!

      • Daniel Maris

        I think you’re right. The information flow (as in 3D software) is what will create self-sufficiency.

        I would be fairly optimistic about the effects on people. The more prosperous and self-sufficient people are, the less reason they have to think they are being exploited. People will be more open to each other in such circumstances I think.

  • GreenWin

    So, if there are no jobs -> no currency -> no trading – how do we get an iPhone the bots are building?

    • georgehants

      Ha, you are just teasing me, if they are built by robots or humans they are free to everybody.
      How many people would have to work short hours in a factory to produce every iPhone needed, as a % of the World population.
      Now work out those same percentages for all needed services and wanted luxuries and you have the total number of man-hours Worldwide needed for all to be rich.
      Removing all unnecessary and pointless jobs such as every job concerning money and finance would immediately put millions out of work.

    • LilyLover

      Currency-less equitable trading is THE GOAL- which I have theoretically achieved but the ECW will not publish it. I’m not too keen on publishing it either. I need to get my Nobel first. Ego. Mount Rushmore.

    • LilyLover

      But If you live in Southern California, I’d like to discuss over coffee and iron out the kinks in my theories and possibly co-author an “Internet Constitution of the Earth”, a book with less than 100 pages.

      • GreenWin

        Hi LilyL, thanks for your comments. You might want to amend your title to just “Constitution of the Earth” since even people without internet should be able to read it. Trouble with barter is it’s inconvenient to trade practical stuff like a rabbit for a bushel of corn or a rocking chair for a hammer. So 3000 years ago Chinese invented copper and bronze “shells” or cowrie. It’s just more convenient to keep coins in a pocket than your cow or goat.

        I’ll let you know when I’m in your part of the world next. Peace!

  • EEStorFanFibb

    Governments are really going to have to incorporate a guaranteed annual income soon at this rate.

    • Independent Experimenter

      That’s what they would logically have to do, however they are doing the reverse. They are cutting spending, cutting benefits, even cutting in education and health care.

      Government’s don’t want to do that. Governments everywhere are implementing austerity.

  • https://pissedthefuckoff.wordpress.com/ Mark

    Cool. I like robots taking human jobs. I wrote a post about this on my blog, recently, but mine has a lot more swear words:

    https://pissedthefuckoff.wordpress.com/2015/07/24/support-free-handouts-or-die-you-evil-right-wing-fucks/

    I proposed a simple solution to this problem that right-wingers are going to HATE, but I think that it is what needs to be done.

  • georgehants

    Wonderful, my admiration is boundless, good to meet you.
    I shall add your word to my dictionary immediately as should every lexicographer.

  • LilyLover

    • We do not lament that the prisons are not 100% full; we do not lament that there are no new prisons built every week.
    • Good people strive to achieve 0% imprisonment. Good people ought to strive for 0% employment.
    • Jobs need to become a ticket for redemption of crimes committed against society. No crimes committed, ever? No need to work.
    • No sin, no work.
    • No sin, no job.
    • Live like a princess for being born.
    • Go to school for unlimited free education and increase your competence.
    • When not enough criminals are available to perform “Jobs”, the bottom 10% of competence spectrum are drafted to do the “Jobs”. The upper 10% competent are required to help upgrade the bottom 10% to higher competence level – through “donated one hour per week” – by guiding, monitoring, observing or remotely exterminating.

    • Equality with the commoners is worse than death in the eyes of the nobility.
    • To ‘commonalize’ the queen – is what the robotics does.
    • The ivory towered mouthpieces – do everything to preserve the status-quo.

    • Robotics and retrogress do not mix; Progress and oppressiveness do not mix.

    Humanity,
    Practice:
    • Excess production of everything in the spirit of hedonism.
    • Extreme optimization of efficiencies in the spirit of asceticism.
    • Extreme affection for each other in the spirit of spiritualism.
    Celebrate every “job lost” by a good man as an inevitable step towards a beautiful future.

  • AstralProjectee

    Perhaps our only hope is seasteading to find a solution. http://www.seasteading.org/

    • Independent Experimenter

      I prefer Ray Kurzweil’s Dreamsteading.

  • AstralProjectee

    There will be a learning curve no doubt. But the question is how bad will things get before we legislate a basic living wage to all, by taxing the rich. I see no other way around it.

    I remember asking this Texas Republican politician on the phone about this exact scenario where advanced AI robotics will take many many jobs what would happen. And he didn’t have an answer. I already know what the Democrats would do if push comes to shove.

  • pelgrim108

    Only solution that I can see is that consumers only buy products from robotic factories that they own. So in practice this means that the Nation should start buying up succesfull robotic factories on their own territories.

    • Mats002

      Or people start getting self-sufficient using open source 3D production and LENR energy farming in smaller communities.
      Big capital will still own land and properties but the high price is in the cities, the more dense of people the more value. What if this will change when people no longer need a paid job for survival and start moving out to cheap land?
      For people with job in the city, they can also move out using LENR energy and EMDrive++ for commuting much longer distances much faster.
      Not opposing your suggestion, but there are always more than one solution to a problem.

      • ecatworld

        I think with imagination and goodwill there are so far largely untried models and systems that could work. Recent open source systems have done a lot for spreading opportunity worldwide — easy to do with digital goods, harder with physical ones, however.

    • Daniel Maris

      Actually, I think this will be an increasing trend.

    • Independent Experimenter

      The factory model is doomed to fail due to the shrinking customer base. Robots should be made smaller, cheaper and sold to households so they can make their own stuff at home instead of having to buy them from the store.

      That way, impoverished customers could manufacture their own products without having to buy them from the store at marked up prices.

      There was an article about how cheaper it is to manufacture your own 3D printed products. Prices in electricity + plastic filament vs price at the store.

      In the future, this will disrupt the store model.

      • Daniel Maris

        It seems pretty clear that there will be an end point where in the home you can produce food, make goods, clothes, and furniture, and where you will have willing robot workers at your service.

        We are certainly going down that road – information itself has already been made fully accessible in the home (we don’t need newspapers, letters, books and the like physically transported into our homes) and people are already producing significant energy via photovoltaic panels.

        How long it takes to get to the end point – what I would call the “modern homestead” – remains to be seen. It might be 100 years…but the swiftness with which the PC and other IT devices conquered the world of information (in less than 30 years) should make us sensitive to the possibility it could be a lot quicker.

        • Independent Experimenter

          Ironically, that was where we started from in the 1700’s. Back then the home was also where you made and consumed your own stuff. Employment and trade as we know it was quite different.

          Then we had the industrial revolution that allowed to produce more stuff through division of labor. But people traded their resilience and independence for the convenience and security of the market economy. The result is that people no longer have freedom nor security.

          And now we’re talking about using technology to bring back production and consumption at home while limiting participation in the market economy.

          It’s going to be back to square one after a period of 250 years.

          • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

            you have a romantic vision of the past.

            It is true industrial revolution exchanged huge increase in comfort by productivity, with a soviet-like reorganization of work, centralised management and capital.

            This is what is happening in China, and this took mass of people from objective poverty.

            see

            http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/07/world-income-distribution-shows.html

            anyway the king of France had less comfort that 99% of French population today.

            It is hard to imagine today the lack of cleanliness, of quality food, of health, at that time. not even talking of leisure.

            for me the progress will not be to full autonomy of individual, but into resilient commerce between people and communities, without monopoly nor monopsony, with much choice.

            as Taleb explains well, stability often hide a huge fragility of income and lifestyle. People with reliable jobs and salary, are very dependent on their lord.
            During Asian crisis end of 90s, informal economy was the most resilient (my wife was there).

      • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

        using less money still having foods and manufactured goods, is not being poor.
        it is good usual deflation. it is using less digits.

        what people need not to be poor is capital, not job.
        job is just education capital, body capital, exploited. there is other forms of capital, like bots, like data, like IP, like real estate, like clients, like networks…

  • Independent Experimenter

    In a capitalist economic structure, companies everywhere automating is like telling their employees: “go home and die”.

    When those unemployed fight back, robot technology will be used to exterminate them.

    Everytime somebody comes up with the idea of a basic income, universal income etc. It’s always viciously and ferociously accused of being communist, entitlements, encouraging laziness etc.

    This is not going to end nicely.

    • Mats002

      Your vision will lead to that the automated factories being obsolete because the customer base disappears. That is bad business logic.

      • Bob Matulis

        Agreed. No profits if no customers. Will reach equilibrium. Capitalism will always exist so long as people pursue self interest. Black markets everywhere demonstrate inevitability of capitalism.

        • Daniel Maris

          People confuse different ideas.

          Capitalism is really quite a specific historical method of economic organisation based on (a) profit-driven joint stock companies and (b) bank finance. It has been very successful but there is nothing “inevitable” or “permanent” about it.

          Markets (just another word for human behaviour really) have always existed and always will. Markets do not equate to capitalism. There were markets under slave societies and feudal societies. There will be markets under any future forms of economic organisation.

          I think what will happen if robotic and home production come to dominate the technology of production is that we will see new forms of economic organisation develop. I suspect these will be co-operative in nature because people will have little incentive or ability to sell their labour. But obviously this won’t happen overnight. It will be a slow process.

    • georgehants

      Capitalism cannot survive, a new system must be found.
      Present productivity is easily capable of allowing the whole World population to be “rich” but in the UK the retirement age for older people is now now 67 and due to rise higher, people where better off when there was no technology as today.
      How can it rise with the productivity capability of modern technology?
      Women with children are being forced to work instead of being with their young.
      All just to keep the few very rich and powerful rich and powerful.
      Cold Fusion, robots are not to be feared by people,only these rich parasites that see their unfair privileged lives falling apart if a new system brought fair equality for all.
      Without finance and profit everybody could work much fewer hours and retire at say 50. with time for all to enjoy life and do the things they want and not be kept in a perpetual struggle to pay mortgages and bills etc.
      Not utopia but easily obtained reality if the will to achieve it was allowed to flourish.

      • Bob Greenyer

        I made this site concept over 8 years ago.

        http://www.homosymbion.com

        There is a big vision behind it.

        • AstralProjectee

          There is nothing there, except a quote.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Yeh, I know, something to flesh out when I have more time.

            • georgehants

              Bob your repy to me seems to have dissapeared, I had already replied to it so shall still put up my reply.
              ———-

              Wonderful, my admiration is boundless, good to meet you.
              I shall add your word to my dictionary immediately as should every lexicographer.

            • Mats002

              Me too have a project still undone: http://www.homoeconomus.com
              😉

              • Bob Greenyer

                you funny

        • georgehants

          Bob, Google search shows just two site domain sales, the word is unknown with meaning, more info please.
          Adaptability certainly works for some animal species but could in the human area be interpreted as, adapting to become a Natzi would have been very beneficial in Germany and led to a “good” life for ones self and family, unfortunately not so for those humanitarians that refused to adapt, only the strong overcome such Evil or produce such Evil.
          Coincidentally (below) another piece of clear Evidence adding to the Fact the Darwinian Evolution has been in error from it’s conception and has only been maintained by a religious like belief.
          ———
          Starvation effects handed down for generations
          http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-07/du-seh073115.php

        • GreenWin

          Interesting word Bob. Oddly, LENR removes limitations on volume and flow of energy (fossil/fission limits.) And (potentially) replaces them with sustainability.

          Perceiving change precedes adaptation. However, human’s are ignorant of 95% of our surroundings. We “see” maybe 5% of the universe we live in. Thus, discovery becomes an even greater influence than change. Hiding discoveries as has been done with LENR retards knowledge, which retards perception of change, which retards evolution. IMO. 🙂

        • Independent Experimenter

          I visited your website but can’t get passed Charles Darwin’s quote.
          Anyways, how is an average human to adapt in this world ?

          If adapting means that I must bend over to employers and accept employment then I’d rather die than swallow my pride. There is no dignity in the job hunting process, there is no dignity in being an employee.

          People don’t want a handout and don’t even want a hand up, they want to be left alone to pursue their own interest. They want to be able to work for themselves. But the current system doesn’t allow them to. We are slaves in this system.

          Give us freedom or give us death. I refuse to adapt to slavery.

          • Bob Greenyer

            By some estimates, only 2% of Indians pay tax. up to 600 million are farmers – many self sufficient – governments and corporates hate self sufficiency. People must be encouraged off the land and plied with debt in order to be effectively controlled.

      • Independent Experimenter

        “capitalism cannot survive”

        The transition from capitalism towards something else is not going to be peaceful and will result in a tremendous amount of death and destruction.

        There are in the USA, Canada, France, UK, Germany, Japan and throughout the world armed people eager to shoot to kill in order to preserve their precious capitalism and their precious dream of one day striking it rich.

        Those who wish to live in a more just, a more fair, a more humane world will have to fight war in order to achieve what they want. The amount of hatred from the right towards the left is astronomical and downright violent.

        The middle class everywhere are starting to resent the poor.

        I see that mankind is heading towards it’s bloodiest conflict of all times over how we divide the economic pie. And robots and technology are just going to make this conflict even bloodier.

        World peace is unsustainable, humanity is too unequal and too divided against one another.

        • georgehants

          IE, what a dreadful possibility, that could be avoided by the rich starting now to allow a honest, fair, equal society to emerge slowly with their support.
          I spiritually pray that your scenario is avoided but the below link shows that they are well aware of the need to act.
          ———
          As inequality soars, the nervous super rich are already planning their escapes
          http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27972335

          • Independent Experimenter

            It’s not the rich’s fault if we live in a difficult world, it’s the middle class’s fault for believing the lies of the rich, for voting against their own economic self-interest and for supporting this system which only benefits the rich.

            It’s also the poor’s fault for not forming an army and fighting back.

      • Independent Experimenter

        Cold Fusion + Robots is going to make the perfect weapon for the super rich and super elite to become even more powerful and crush all opposition.

        War is coming over economic matters, humanity is too unequal and under too much economic stress for peace to last.

        We are at a bifurcation point, after the war is over either humanity will be more equal (which I doubt) or it will be more authoritarian (which I think will happen).

    • Bob Greenyer

      We are definitely facing a global job shortage.

      I have the view that there should be global legislation that if a factory that got to the point of being able to replace workers because of profit, or government subsidy, that a legislated portion of the benefits should go to the former workers in perpetuity.

      The alternative is that big business would have to be taxed in order to keep the former workers alive. The net result is the same – only the former is more just.

  • Independent Experimenter

    I can tell what the future will look like.
    LENR powered robots and drones, armed with LENR warheads, massively exterminating masses of unemployed and poor who are revolting against the rich and elites.
    An absolute asymetrical warfare. History is repeating itself.

    Gigadeath as prophesied by Hugo de Garis.

    • GreenWin

      Geez IE. Why so negative? de Garis says the war will be over “artilects.” And the opposing sides will be “Cosmists” v “Terrans.” If the artilects are so successful, why would they stay rooted to a silly planet like Earth?

      Even George and Wheezy moved on up to the East side when they got successful.

  • Mark

    Probably should listen to this … all the way to the end. After his talk something related to this post was discussed.

  • AstralProjectee

    Advanced AI robotics is the only things that could hinder the LENR revolution from helping the masses like we all hope it will.