Universal Basic Income

Having spent decades in the banking industry, color me skeptical as to how well this will work in reality.
As an (admittedly a bit aged) example, here's something that I witnessed first hand.
I spent many years working in foreign exchange and money market trading rooms, and many of the standard trades between banks became fully automated.
This eliminated the need for many "voice" brokers, who verbally connected banks, set prices, etc

This was great until the next financial crisis hit. Pricing spreads ballooned as liquidity evaporated. The automated systems couldn't handle non-standard transactions, and there was a desperate scramble to find people who still knew how to do it person to person.

So yeah, I think it will be fine for "standard" transactions in normal markets. But the next crisis (think 2008 mortgage crisis, 2015 stock market melt down, Brexit, etc) I hope they still have some people around to step in 'cause the machines won't be able to handle what they haven't seen before.
 
mlesemann said:
Having spent decades in the banking industry, color me skeptical as to how well this will work in reality.
As an (admittedly a bit aged) example, here's something that I witnessed first hand.
I spent many years working in foreign exchange and money market trading rooms, and many of the standard trades between banks became fully automated.
This eliminated the need for many "voice" brokers, who verbally connected banks, set prices, etc

This was great until the next financial crisis hit. Pricing spreads ballooned as liquidity evaporated. The automated systems couldn't handle non-standard transactions, and there was a desperate scramble to find people who still knew how to do it person to person.

So yeah, I think it will be fine for "standard" transactions in normal markets. But the next crisis (think 2008 mortgage crisis, 2015 stock market melt down, Brexit, etc) I hope they still have some people around to step in 'cause the machines won't be able to handle what they haven't seen before.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Keeping a few humans around is really the key for all of this current-gen AI technology.
Although increasing productivity that eliminates even a mere 25% of available work/jobs would be devistating at a country wide level
 
sfoster said:
productivity that eliminates even a mere 25% of available work/jobs would be devistating at a country wide level
Click to expand...
Yes, but that's never what happens in reality. Trades, crafts and professions have been coming and going for millenia in response to society's response to inventions and changing mindsets. You'll never see a lamplighter doing his rounds in the streets of London today, but there's still a horde of hi-vis vest wearing guys (and a few gals) keeping the (shiny, new, electrically powered, LED) lights on.

Once upon a time, every company that aspired to be anything had a typing pool staffed by gals (never heard of a guy in the typing pool) tapping out written letters to customers, suppliers and service providers; nowadays, that space is occupied by guys and gals with a computer firing off e-mails to customers, suppliers and service providers, all of them employed as variations on the theme of "assistant".

The invention of the telegraph, and then e-mail, should have wiped out the raison d'être of the postal service, and yet here we are in 2024 with dozens of companies competing fiercely for the opportunity to carry your packages, envelopes and other consignments from A to B.

And to cap it all, several developed countries are struggling to find enough workers to fill a wide range of employment types, to the extent that they have "critical shortage" lists and apply less rigorous visa requirements to try to get people to fill the vacancies. Brexit demonstrated how a bunch of lunatics in charge of the asylum that is national government can do far more damage to the employment market than any disruptive technology. Not that I'm convinced a displaced American banker would want to re-train as a British senior-care worker, but hey ho ... !
 
CelticRambler said:
Yes, but that's never what happens in reality.
Click to expand...

Of course it does. In 1900 something like 40% of americans worked in agriculture - in comes technology - drops down to 2% of americans.
Then later, again, the same thing basically happened when we took all of our manufacturing jobs and automated and/or shipped them all to china.

In both cases, other jobs have become available.
Hopefully that will happen here too.

Heres an article from the videogame industry, the CEO of EA (EA sports games) says it used to take 6 months to build a stadium for one of their video games... he expects the time to drop down to six days. Wild stuff.

www.videogameschronicle.com

EA says generative AI could make it 30% more efficient and boost monetisation by up 20% over 5 years | VGC

CEO Andrew Wilson says advancements in AI provide a multi-billion dollar growth opportunity…
www.videogameschronicle.com www.videogameschronicle.com

With that kind of ease and efficiency, plus automatic art generation, a lot of independant coders will be enabled to work for themselves, to start their own game studio, but their own game without an entire team of people needed to enable them.
 
Last edited:
:D My reaction is: stupid robot - didn't think that maybe that plate should have been washed first, seeing as it'd just had some filthy trash on it. Oh, and as it wasn't wet, why would it go in a drying rack. If it aspired to intelligence, the robot should have blasted the human with laser beams out of its eyes, as punishment for contaminating a food preparation area ... ⚡
 
CelticRambler said:
:D My reaction is: stupid robot - didn't think that maybe that plate should have been washed first, seeing as it'd just had some filthy trash on it. Oh, and as it wasn't wet, why would it go in a drying rack. If it aspired to intelligence, the robot should have blasted the human with laser beams out of its eyes, as punishment for contaminating a food preparation area ... ⚡
Click to expand...
Well, I always cut my apples into slices first, so I need this thing to take a knife and carve up the apple's flesh for me.
Preferably with glowing red eyes as it holds the knife.
 
The robot should have thought that, after handling the trash, it should not have handled the clean plate and cup. But I've seen humans make the same mistake. That said, I wonder how much of this was preplanned, as in the robot was programmed to figure out what to do, but it still cannot post on Indietalk, talking about robots talking about AI.
 
Aspiring Mogul said:
The robot should have thought that, after handling the trash, it should not have handled the clean plate and cup. But I've seen humans make the same mistake. That said, I wonder how much of this was preplanned, as in the robot was programmed to figure out what to do, but it still cannot post on Indietalk, talking about robots talking about AI.
Click to expand...
It is a fully autonomous robot, it's the real deal, these are not 'preprogrammed' sequences.

As far as handling the plate afte the trash, that was a a direct verbal human command, so it really was the human making that mistake and not the robot.
 
sfoster said:
As far as handling the plate afte the trash, that was a a direct verbal human command, so it really was the human making that mistake and not the robot.
Click to expand...
Ahhh, the old "I was just following orders" excuse, beloved of those humans with limited intellectual and/or moral capacity. :seeya:

stormtrooper_grande.jpg
 
Aspiring Mogul said:
despite two centuries of advances, humans haven't been thrown out of work.
Click to expand...

2 Centuries? In 1829 they invented the sewing machine. It created so many new jobs, it generated the concept of a sweatshop.
It was not automated. Only in the last 50 years did we have machine automation.

The upfront costs have been enormous, involving custom hardware and custom software, both of which often overrun in costs and production time. Remember when obama tried to launch his health care website and it crashed for months? That was a simple website!! Automated production is a lot more complicated, and sometimes people can even die around those machines if you're not very careful.

Due to all these costs, automation historically has only been viable for large scale factory production, with huge upfront investment in time and costs for R&D.

Now finally, we come to why Figure is different. There is no R&D cost for customers, no custom hardware, no custom software, it's a general, all purpose automaton. There is no human cost of health care premium, no possibility of getting sued, and best of all no salary. Anyone that runs a business will be able to purchase a Figure and automate their business.

And then when the business closes for the day? You take it home with you! It does all your chores, cooking, etc and rubs your feet while you watch TV. Give it time, Figure 2.0, maybe it's even a supermodel or superhuman wtih impossible proportions like a barbie doll, and it never gets sick or has a bad day or argues.

It's easy to laugh at sex bots, but all it takes is one lonely streak of 1-2 years and people would buy one, ESPECIALLY if it does all your chores and cooking and is a personal assistant too. Just imagine it looks like the most beautiful AI drawings of whatever your type is.

Michael B Jordan struggles with being lonely for years sometimes

They say prostitution is the oldest profession... even that will be at risk of shrinking.


Aspiring Mogul said:
Speaking of automation, Mercedes is using robots to do boring and repetitive tasks.
Click to expand...

This is the robot mercedes is thinking of using.


It's easy to look at this thing and think it's the same as Figure... but that's like looking at my airsoft BB gun and thinking it's the same thing as a glock, cause they're both made of metal and take the same shape. What's INSIDE is different. OpenAI is a whole different beast, especially with Bezos and nVidia teamed up.
 
Last edited:
sfoster said:
2 Centuries? In 1829 they invented the sewing machine. It created so many new jobs, it generated the concept of a sweatshop.
It was not automated. Only in the last 50 years did we have machine automation.
Click to expand...

The first programmable, automated looms were invented in France and Britain in the late 1700s (before the USofA came into existence ;) ). If you've never seen one in real life, you're missing out on some mind-blowing technology - especially when you remind yourself that they didn't have electricity to power them, yet were capable of producing the most intricately patterned fabrics. The feeling at the time was that the adoption of these labour-saving, productivity-enhancing machines would put thousands of weavers out of work; but as things turned out, they made woven fabric so much more affordable that demand exploded and whaddyaknow, the number of workers involved in fabric production expanded and - as you say - subsequent technological developments and consumer demand led to yet another variation on the slave trade, still going strong today.
sfoster said:
Due to all these costs, automation historically has only been viable for large scale factory production, with huge upfront investment in time and costs for R&D.

Now finally, we come to why Figure is different. There is no R&D cost for customers, no custom hardware, no custom software, it's a general, all purpose automaton. There is no human cost of health care premium, no possibility of getting sued, and best of all no salary. Anyone that runs a business will be able to purchase a Figure and automate their business.

And then when the business closes for the day? You take it home with you! It does all your chores, cooking, etc and rubs your feet while you watch TV. Give it time, Figure 2.0, maybe it's even a supermodel or superhuman wtih impossible proportions like a barbie doll, and it never gets sick or has a bad day or argues.
Click to expand...

So much naïvety there, and a serious mis-understanding of the history of industrial production. :D Automation (in the widest sense) has
always been borne out of a drive to make individuals more productive, doing whatever they do. So while, yes, you'll find the biggest, heaviest, fastest versions of "robots" of all kinds in large-scale factories, the building blocks of this technology are regularly found in the smallest of businesses, and some of the most disruptive innovations come from these same small-scale operations precisely because they haven't invested hugely in bespoke equipment.

Which takes us back to money. There is no human cost of health care premium, no possibility of getting sued, and best of all no salary. Each of those costs will be replaced with an equal or greater cost, because the suppliers of these magic machines aren't providing them for the greater benefit of humanity. Instead of health care, you'll need to pay for a maintenance contract; "the human made me do it" isn't going to stop you being sued when your robot injures someone; and do you seriously think these machines will day after day run for free with no input cost? At the very least, you'll need to charge the batteries. Several millions of us live in economies where you don't need expensive health insurance, so when it costs only 22€ for a doctor's visit, Figure 17.0's going to have to be very cheap to make financial sense.

No, these humanoids are the ultimate in first world gadgetery: they replicate all the worst aspects of human anatomy, and exaggerate the inefficiencies that we invented "ordinary" robots do deal with, just so they look "cool". Sure, they'll be adopted by people who want to sit in front of the TV and vegetate - but there are an awful lot of us who don't have TVs and actually enjoy "chores" such as cooking, and resent being told that we have to upgrade our cheap 50€ phone to the latest model because apparently it's no longer capable of doing what it did perfectly well until the last software update.

when the business closes for the day? You take it home with you!
Why didn't it take itself home, like a human would? :huh:

And how does it know the apple is edible, not a prop for the purposes of making a video?

And did it's learning model include reading fairy tales, allowing for the possibility that the apple might be poisoned? Oooooh - is the apple poisoned, and Figure is trying to kill the stupid human? :evil:
 
Last edited:
CelticRambler said:
when the business closes for the day? You take it home with you!
Why didn't it take itself home, like a human would? :huh:

And how does it know the apple is edible, not a prop for the purposes of making a video?

And did it's learning model include reading fairy tales, allowing for the possibility that the apple might be poisoned? Oooooh - is the apple poisoned, and Figure is trying to kill the stupid human? :evil:
Click to expand...

These are some really strange takes.
You want the robot to have it's own car, and the businesss owner to have their own car, and then both of them drive their separate cars to work, and drive their cars home, instead of carpooling? Why would they spend all that extra money buying a second car and second car insurance, etc?

This is a real argument you're making? It's silly.
Also you're being way too critical, to the point of being unfair, even humans can't tell if it's a real apple or a prop sometimes.

 
Last edited:
This is a bit of an old article, but i think Bill makes a great point here with a 3 day work week.
If we eliminate a bunch of jobs via productivity, it doesn't make sense to have half the population working, and half the population on UBI.

There would be too much animosity built up by the workers..
So instead of getting rid of half the jobs, move everyone to part time, and it will fix the problem better than UBI

fortune.com

Bill Gates teases the possibility of a 3-day work week

The Microsoft founder is predicting a utopian world where "we don’t have to work as hard”.
fortune.com fortune.com
 
sfoster said:
These are some really strange takes.
You want the robot to have it's own car, and the businesss owner to have their own car, and then both of them drive their separate cars to work, and drive their cars home, instead of carpooling? Why would they spend all that extra money buying a second car and second car insurance, etc?
Click to expand...

My remark about Figure taking itself home from the hypothetical business was somewhat sarcastic, but there's no good reason why a business owner would want an automaton programmed to work at peak efficiency in his/her business environment coming back to the family home to sort trash from apples.

The point I'm trying to make is that all these resources are being poured into making autonomous humanoids that, at the end of the day, do absolutely nothing that we bog-standard humans can't already do. The one thing we as a species have learnt over the course of many millenia of thought and innovation is that specialism is a great way to improve productivity. That holds true whether you're talking about a medical practitioner specialising in brain surgery, or a robot built specifically to solder nano particles to a circuit board.

Figure and its ilk are glorified toys. They have no special skills (that I've seen to date) and their sole advantage seems to be that they can "do stuff humans don't want to do". These humanoids, though, are the worst possible design for that, being inherently unstable on two legs and so full of complex electronics that they are almost certainly unsuitable for work in a world of rain, mud, snow and howling gales.

On a global scale, we're not short of humans who will do everything that needs to be done, and (depressingly often) in horrendous conditions; but there's a fair chunk of our Great Democratic First World that doesn't want willing human workers moving from where they are to where they're needed. So instead, let's encourage the consumer classes to hand over yet more of their disposable income to a handful of billionaire CEOs with a gift for selling snake-oil.
 
sfoster said:
This is a bit of an old article, but i think Bill makes a great point here with a 3 day work week.
Click to expand...
How many working hours are there in a day? Here in France, we're already on a "3-day-week" as standard, compared to many countries (35 hours maximum). In practice, this more often takes the form of a 4-day working week, 3-day weekend. A couple of years ago, I was offered a (permanent, pensionable) job with 36 weeks' annual leave, although even in France it's unusual to get more than 9 weeks paid leave per year.

You still won't get good people doing crappy jobs for crappy wages in crappy conditions, though. That requires something more than money to fix it.
 
CelticRambler said:
My remark about Figure taking itself home from the hypothetical business was somewhat sarcastic, but there's no good reason why a business owner would want an automaton programmed to work at peak efficiency in his/her business environment coming back to the family home to sort trash from apples.

The point I'm trying to make is that all these resources are being poured into making autonomous humanoids that, at the end of the day, do absolutely nothing that we bog-standard humans can't already do. The one thing we as a species have learnt over the course of many millenia of thought and innovation is that specialism is a great way to improve productivity. That holds true whether you're talking about a medical practitioner specialising in brain surgery, or a robot built specifically to solder nano particles to a circuit board.

Figure and its ilk are glorified toys. They have no special skills (that I've seen to date) and their sole advantage seems to be that they can "do stuff humans don't want to do". These humanoids, though, are the worst possible design for that, being inherently unstable on two legs and so full of complex electronics that they are almost certainly unsuitable for work in a world of rain, mud, snow and howling gales.

On a global scale, we're not short of humans who will do everything that needs to be done, and (depressingly often) in horrendous conditions; but there's a fair chunk of our Great Democratic First World that doesn't want willing human workers moving from where they are to where they're needed. So instead, let's encourage the consumer classes to hand over yet more of their disposable income to a handful of billionaire CEOs with a gift for selling snake-oil.
Click to expand...
Their special skill is that they're cheaper than humans.
That's always been the advantage of automation, but Figure takes away all the massive costs and time investment, intead you can train them like you would train a typical human.

If you can't understand why someone would want to take one home and have a personal assistant, it's kinda crazy to me.
People are lazy and they want an assistant to do their chores for them. The #1 thing people often request is to have a machine do their dishes, stuff like that. Someone that owned a small business would definitely utilize it as a personal assistant in the off hours.

That's awesome that you citizens in france have such great working conditions.
Hopefully we can get some of that action over here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top