Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: UncleBigs who wrote (64224)	6/20/2006 10:03:57 PM
From: shades	Respond to of 110194

Microsoft Developing Robotics Software it.slashdot.org Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Tuesday June 20, @04:42PM from the robot-in-every-home dept. s31523 writes to tell us Microsoft recently announced the launch of their new Microsoft Robotics Group and the first product release, a software program to help robotics developers. Despite the timing this has nothing to do with the recent abdication by Gates, and was actually instigated by Gates before his departure. From the article "It might take many years, but Microsoft believes robotics could present a big opportunity as the market grows, said Tandy Trower, general manager of the Microsoft Robotics Group. He cited estimates predicting that consumer robotics alone will grow into a multibillion-dollar industry in five to 10 years." Eventually it all boils down to productive labor. That's how capitalism works. You get to consume the value that you produce. Or if you OWN the slaves - you get to consume the value they produce - if the slaves are our robots - we get to consume and they get to do all the work eh? When a robot is doing the producing, how does that equate to a person doing the consuming? Where does a person get the income to pay for the production? No no - ownership of thier production was the theme in "I, Robot" and so much other scifi stuff - most recently the new Battlestar Galactica. Let's say a person sits around scratching his balls all day (well I do but that's another story) because his employer hired a robot to do the job he used to perform. Right - like grace's favorite local guy elroy jetson. He is so bored he has time to attack her daily on SI - hehe. Where does this person get the income to buy the robot's production? Unh unh - you don't BUY the robot's production - that gives the robot rights - property rights, ownership rights, we can't allow that can we Uncle? My nieces don't have to work - they have slaves (boyfriends) to give them everything thier heart will ever desire.

To: UncleBigs who wrote (64224)	6/21/2006 11:22:00 AM
From: GraceZ	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 110194

It is the nature of technology to destroy some jobs while creating new ones that we can't even imagine. One of the oldest arguments against machines and automation in the work place has been what would we do if machines take over our jobs. It has been proven over and over to be a false argument. There are more job descriptions created in a single year in a technologically advanced society than existed in say, the Middle Ages in totality. The other long run trend is specialization and division of labor. I employ robots in my biz. Well they aren't robots in the scifi sense we're used to but I employ computer automated programs to do what I could do manually but which would be a highly repetitive boring task that would take a human a lot more time. Since I happen to be the one who made the original investment in that particular piece of capital equipment I receive all the production from it. The money I receive is part wages (I have to intervene and make human judgements in some computer tasks) and part return on my capital investment in that equipment. I think it would be difficult to find a job where robots weren't employed by the people doing the jobs that they do (sometimes they make the investment as in my case or sometimes the equipment is bought by their employer). The thing that has increased human productivity to where it is now is the high level of automation that has been incorporated in even the simplest jobs. You can see this every time you go a a grocery store. Maybe you are old enough to remember the clerks in the grocery stores adding up what you bought on the bag they would use to put your purchases in? If you told that guy he would be using a laser scanning device that was hooked into a software data base that would automatically order more of what you just bought from the supplier he'd have looked at you like you were telling him that one day he'd be out of a job completely. It turns out clerks aren't obsolete, just the duties and equipment they use is different. It is capital equipment which has made people more productive. What gets people sitting around watching Opra (or scratching their balls) isn't automation but the willingness of society to pay them to do it. We're willing to pay the government to pay people to voluntarily take themselves out of the workforce for a pittance. We do this because there is a strong belief that no amount of capital equipment or training would make that particular person productive enough to live in our wealthy society by their own production. This socialistic urge is the root cause of inflation, the urge to pay someone in excess of what they produce.