Here's a great tool which predicts the likelihood of a job being done by a machine.
http://www.npr.org/sections/money/20...e-by-a-machine
Printable View
Here's a great tool which predicts the likelihood of a job being done by a machine.
http://www.npr.org/sections/money/20...e-by-a-machine
Well, unless you own the company, then the answer is a simple 'no' to that statement.
But, now I shall go and have a look at that link!
Since I'm almost totally retired, my job may very well be done by a machine. :rolleyes: which is why I have a health care directive.
My job appears to be safe!
The robots haven't even heard of it, yet.
I only have a chance that my job is done by a robot if I design it how to.
Acorn
I'm primarily an artist, so automatic replacement is unlikely. Even though there are some software applications out there that generate maps for games, I don't fear replacement, especially with all the professional map commissions I get for both video game and tabletop roleplaying game publishers. My maps are more art than science.
It would seem that anything remotely creative or something involving an emotional role such as therapists is fairly safe. Though I was surprised to see that the lawyers are quite safe (damn) Also surprising that middle school teachers are less safe than secondary school teachers.
@ gamerprinter -- after looking at my son's Grand Theft Auto 5, I think you're safe! From robotic replacement, anyway.
Offshoring is another story, since those guys in Bangalore and Hyderabad can pick up -- sort of -- where we are at culturally. Would suggest that you check out making game simulations for the Departmant of Defense. The F-35 fighter jet program alone will run to 1 TRILLION dollars... and within the artwork parts of that budget will be ... probably already are ... lots of high-paying war-fighting simulations and training scenarios. Likely made by contractors and sub-contractors to Lockheed Martin. And, for defense stuff, you'll never have to worry about anything even vaguely sensitive being offshored...
In addition to US publishers, I do a lot of work for overseas publishers too, though mostly in Britain, companies like EN Publishing. Though some of my maps are exclusively digital productions, a good chunk of my work is half hand-drawn as an overlay over digital work. So I'm not worried. I'm over 50 years old, so I'll be dead before I'm replaced, more than likely.
In the 1970's when automation was first taking place, TV programmes were predicting that by 2000 we'd all be working 20hr weeks (HoHo!) Of course the total opposite has been true, from a then average 40hr week more & more people are now working 60/70 hr weeks whilst the unemployed sector of societies have been expanding and becoming a "drain" on the economic structure of a country.
Now we have globalisation, whereby traditional manufacturing countries are in decline whilst third world countries are in the ascendancy. Unfortunately this globalisation is dependant on a low paid work force, so as countries move out of poverty economics, they are destroying the one factor that gives them the edge and manufacturing moves elsewhere!
Imagine a future were all work is now undertaken by machines, of which isn't far from the truth. Then how are all those humans replaced by robots going to earn money to purchase products & services produced by those robots?
There's going to be very little that can't be undertaken by a computer in the future, but I find some of the conclusions of this tool strange. The most obvious one, "Does your job require you to squeeze into small spaces?" Looking at an airline pilot, this scores a high 60%. There's so much technology already crammed into a cockpit that the absence of two people would leave a cavernous space to further fill the cockpit.
What is a far more important question here would be "Would you accept the replacement of the Pilot by a Robot?" and the answer in most cases would be "No" but in reality computers are routinely landing planes.
I read a report by someone who makes predictions based on science of what the next century is going to be like (I'm not claiming this person is in any way accurate), and he stated that everyone will be assigned a robot whose work pays income for each individual owner - so robots work, but we get paid for their work.
Your pilot comment reminds of the sci-fi book Friday, by Larry Niven, the main character is an artificial person (pretty much a testtube person, rather than a robot) who isn't allowed to pilot a ramjet, even though the pilot in the story operated a computer that did all the actual flying, the pilot was more a manager and public relations aboard the ramjet, and not a true pilot.
So Egg, is there any way to get back to the max prosperity of, say, 1967 without greatly reducing the advanced countries' populations... back to 1967 levels? I watched the increase in weekly work-hours at Qualcomm, in the years before I retired. The software engineers (programmers) there were really pushed hard. Intense deadlines and pressure. They were paid well, but the actual dollars-per-hour ... not so good.
I think tomorrow I will go see 'San Andreas'. Perhaps it will help reverse the immigration to my California... particularly after they see it in New York, China and the Middle East! Preview looked very exciting -- a REALLY FINE surfing wave wiping out the Golden Gate Bridge, tourists running in terror, great stuff!
There will be very few jobs that can't be done by computers in the future. I would suggest we better start buying shares in these companies. :)
Personally, I don't see earthquake as the big worry in California. The real problem will be the lack of water available, as winter dumps less snow into the mountains and the Colorado River is sourced more and more by Colorado, Arizona, Nevada and California. The big earthquake seems more likely to shake an uninhabitable desert where nobody lives than to cause any real real estate damage. Things look worse and worse each year.Quote:
Originally Posted by jon404
I can never understand why somewhere such as the USA (a very large economy) does not have desalination plants. There has always been a misconception that the energy costs are too high but according to wikipedia the energy costs of supplying the whole of the USA's domestic consumption of water via desalination would be less than 10% of the country's energy consumption, and what's more precious than water?
When you carry the debt load of some of the states and Fed coming up with the cash for big ticket items is a stretch. The west no longer has the cash to spend. Locally we're looking to put in a new sewage treatment system with a cost of over one billion dollars. Most will be picked up by the local tax payer. Where does the money come from. Most people are tapped out.
San Diego -- we are close to opening a very large desalination plant up at Carlsbad. On line this November. 50 miilion gallons of fresh water per day, or 7% of the SD region water needs. See http://carlsbaddesal.com/
Here in coastal California, we can obviously build any number of these facilities if the drought continues or worsens. And, obviously again, we will all accept whatever the higher water bills will come to, offset somewhat by our reduced water use or water recycling. No alternative... it's part of the cost of living in California. And desalination is a lot cheaper for us than building pipelines and pumping stations up to Oregon or to get water from the Columbia River or BC.
Tough times ahead? Right now, I'm reading a great sci-fi book, The Water Knife, about water wars between Nevada and Arizona. See http://www.amazon.com/The-Water-Knif.../dp/0385352875 ... it's really good!
Back to the topic -- want a safe job? Why not your local water company, or work at your local electricity generating station? Or sewage treatment? These jobs are NOT going away! And they will always need artwork for all those flyers that come in the mail telling you to save water, don't use too much electricity during heat waves, and don't dump used motor oil in the sewers...
I think a good job with lots of future work is advising people on how to look after their debts. :)
ah, robots, cheap Polish and Romenian workers, my job is already gone. ;o)
Greed? Andyes, It could be done environmentally clean too. And since to oceans are rising, we might as well take some out of it. The biggest problem would be transportation ofcourse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloud
Well California might be able to use large scale desalinators for water, but the drought issue is more than just California - Arizona, New Mexico, and Nevada don't have an ocean to desalinate, and they have the same problem as California (no water).
Water, they say, is the only thing on earth that runs uphill towards money. In the USA, we have spent unbelievable amounts of money on huge dams on every river out West. In the past, not for water to drink, but for irrigation for the farms. California and parts of Arizona are PERFECT for high-value crops... if you irrigate... but in many places the clay beneath the soil is salty and the salts leach out and wreck the fields.
The water also lets us build houses for the people who can move here since there's water. Hoover Dam, Shasta Dam, etc. Here in San Diego, water from high in the Rockies, from the Colorado River to the farms in the Imperial valley, and then to San Diego. More water from the Sacramento River, way to the north... pumped into the San Joaquin valley for the farms, and then over the hills to Los Angeles.
But we are hitting the limit now, with the drought. Developers want to run a big pipe down from the Columbia River, in Washington state. If we could ever get water rights. Technically, we can do it... after Grand Coulee dam, we can build ANYTHING related to water. But that new water would let the developers build houses for another 20 million people. And it gets you back to that old song... "Don't you know just what you've got ...pave paradise, put up a parking lot."
My job appears to be safe as well!