|
|
|
Contributors | Messages | Polls | Resources |
    |
 |
|
Comments
Threaded | Newest First | Oldest First
 clrmoney
9/20/2017 2:32:27 PM User Rank Platinum 
Automation Boon
I think that automation will have some ups and downs to it. The ups are it will probaby make things easier in a way. The down are it may takever everything so what would be the purpose for us to even do anything because we're human.
 elizabethv
9/22/2017 8:29:29 AM User Rank Platinum
Re: Automation Boon
clrmoney - I don't think automation can take as many jobs as people fear. At the end of the day, people are still going to be the consumers, and we aren't going to consume from robots all the time. Like how a lot of companies were using automated systems to answer their phones for awhile, but as people have become more and more disenfranchised with automated phone services, companies have been getting rid of it more and more.
 afwriter
9/21/2017 12:00:43 PM User Rank Platinum
Skeptical
Even after reading this I remain skeptical that Automation would be a "boon." I think it is something that we will all eventually get used to, but I feel like if you have to give it a sales pitch it isn't as great as you are making it out to be.
 mpouraryan
9/21/2017 12:42:36 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
Automoation is a reality whether we like it or not--I just "dropped in"to join the latest Live Session whereby the Level3 Speaker underscore how they continue to focus on automating thousands of human manual tasks a month.....
mpouraryan
9/21/2017 1:49:42 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
..some "further food 4 thought" for all to reflect upon as I wish all a great rest of the week and for all in the US, a restful W-End:
http://news.sky.com/story/ai-machines-will-replace-teachers-claims-wellington-college-head-11029135  DHagar
9/21/2017 8:09:34 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@afwriter, good analysis! The key will be how smart we are in designing and using automation. If we make it an either/or proposition we will get limited results. If we design it to improve processes with automation to augment the employees, we may get the best of both worlds.
 JohnBarnes
9/25/2017 8:34:32 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
DHagar,
Every time something is automated, it changes both the product (and the expectations of it) and the person who "makes" the product (in quotes because running a shoe machine is not really very much like making shoes). It's not just a substitution but a fundamental change in what the thing means and how it comes to be used. Once upon a time, train and ship and even airplane reservations used to be about making sure people paid for the ride (nobody was going to search every passenger on the Rock Island Line to make sure none of them were Jesse James.)think about the welter of different public and private obligations that now surround travel reservations. DHagar
9/26/2017 5:12:39 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@JohnBarnes, excellent insights. I fully agree that all aspects change. But I also believe that it requires us to think differently then about the process and where man/machine is most valuable. The ability to realign WITH automation is the key and putting that together in ways that value both the AI and the Human Intelligence.
I believe that is the new model we need to learn much about and then find better ways to use both. JohnBarnes
9/26/2017 6:18:54 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
DHagar,
And yet again, "the street finds its own uses for technology." Paypal started as a way to unclog one very jammed up part of ecommerce, but swiftly (at least in terms of past economic history) gave birth to eBay (which spawned its own doom in the form of Craigslist), Uber, Airbnb, and how many others? It's just about impossible to imagine teaching cultural studies anymore without using YouTube, which started out as a way for people to share home videos. The automation-person interface created to do one job is soon doing jobs that no one imagined when it was created. DHagar
9/26/2017 6:25:41 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@JohnBarnes, absolutely true! It is a total discovery of the compounding affects and interactions on the processes, people, economics, etc. It produces its own "unintended" consequences that we have to digest and begin to understand.
Unpredictable, yes, but the ability to adapt and apply in new and improved ways is also the new opportunity, if we truly want to develop value to all.  faryl
9/21/2017 10:12:35 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
I'm all for automation if it means relying less on human interaction for assistance though!
afwriter
9/21/2017 11:10:16 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
This came off a little anti-automation. I am not against the idea of automation, I think it will help in a lot of places, but I don't think it is the end-all-be-all...yet.
JohnBarnes
9/26/2017 6:22:34 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
afwriter,
I think it's all right to be more than a little anti-automation. If one worker plus the newly automated system components can do the work of fifty workers -- and perhaps get paid what three of them used to get paid -- that's great news for the guy with the new job. It's also a disaster for the other 49, accompanied by a declaration that their pain does not matter. afwriter
9/26/2017 10:40:40 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@JohnBarnes, I sometimes think that the only jobs that will be left in 100 years are content creation and machine maintenance.
JohnBarnes
9/26/2017 10:47:38 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
Afwriter,
In much less than 100 years I expect those will be automated too. Sentimentally I would like to think content creation would be last to go but rationally, field maintenance is more demanding of human improvisation and creativity.
elizabethv
9/27/2017 8:44:28 AM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@afwriter - this is actually a big fear I have for the future. Mostly for my kids. What kinds of jobs can I try to prepare them for? The economy as we know it can't continue to exist with only two possibilities for jobs in the future. My brother currently lives in Japan, and he said they don't use any technology that would replace a person's job. So there are literally still businesses where people fill forms out by hand and file them in filing cabinets, just in the interest of not taking away a person's job. I almost think if automation comes to that, we may have to take a route like that just to continue to have a functioning society. There have literally been genocides when the younger generations were not able to find and maintain jobs to support their desire to have families.
afwriter
9/28/2017 10:45:02 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
If machines took over all of our jobs it would either be a utopia or dystopia depending on how everything played out.
 ms.akkineni
9/30/2017 2:03:21 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@afwriter:
There is absolutely no doubt about what you stated. I can't even imagine that scenario. Machine is just a machine if there is no human force driving behind. elizabethv
9/22/2017 8:34:09 AM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@afwriter - exactly! I don't see automation is the end-all-be-all idea. I think there will always be need and room for a human employee. At the end of the day, we're smarter than computers, even if they know more calculus. They still can't think critically or factor in small details a machine would never be privvy to.
 dcawrey
9/22/2017 12:26:19 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
Some good points about HR here.
Look, some of the issues with a lack of tech talent has to come from HR. I think it's time to start thinking differently about people in IT. As long as someone is capable, they can be trained on new technologies. JohnBarnes
9/25/2017 8:39:29 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
"They still can't think critically"
-- you mean, do what inference engines have been learning to do for 45 years, and now do constantly for things like process control, weather forecasting, and investment software? "... or factor in small details a machine would never be privvy to." Exactly what the big data, machine learning, and anti-interpretability revolutions are accomplishing. Machines will be far better tha human beings at both those things, well within our lifetime. (Even mine, and I'm an old fat guy from a short-lived family). elizabethv
9/26/2017 5:46:55 AM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@JohnBarnes - I know what you mean, but I still want to remain hopeful that there are nuances a machine could never learn. No matter how many algorithms we can come up with to feed it. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it's just a part of me that doesn't want to accept that machines could ever truly replace a human being. Either way, I don't see a full acceptance of machines (robots) for quite a few years to come. Even if we get to the point where the robot in "Passengers" is a reality, would anyone really have a conversation with a robot? Beyond what is needed for information gathering.
JohnBarnes
9/26/2017 6:32:56 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
ElizabethV,
And yet again ... "No matter how many algorithms we can come up with to feed it." Fewer and fewer people are writing algorithms anymore, because machines write better ones. Nor are the machine algorithms just improvements on originally human ones; the high level chess and Go playing software, for example, which now reliably beats any human player, plays by techniques and tactics that are literally too big and sophisticated to fit inside a human mind. Except for a very brief interval (which wouldn't have to happen if human investors weren't insisting on too-quick deployment) human driven cars will always drive better than the best human drivers, and yes, I mean specifically they will make better choices and interpret small clues more accurately; your kid will be much safer chasing a puppy into traffic once all the drivers are robots even if the robots are champion rally car and stunt drivers with Ph.D's in moral philosophy. (Admittedly, I'd probably rather have a beer with those drivers, but mainly because there'd at least be some hope I could come up to their level). Things are in the saddle, and ride mankind. Mankind just isn't fully saddlebroken and equipped with enough riders yet to realize it. And a damn good thing, too, because the human record of self-administration is one long tragifarce of folly and blunder. elizabethv
9/27/2017 8:39:44 AM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@JohnBarnes - I hear what you're saying, I just really struggle to believe it. Or maybe, accept it is the better word. I'm a control freak, so by nature, I need control. We're taking my kids on a railroad ride this weekend, and I'm freaked out enough about that. Much less an automated car. Accepting that an automated car could drive better than I can, I don't think I can do that.
JohnBarnes
9/28/2017 10:33:37 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
ElizabethV:
"The body of a savage man being the only instrument he understands, he uses it for various purposes, of which ours, for want of practice, are incapable: for our industry deprives us of that force and agility, which necessity obliges him to acquire. If he had had an axe, would he have been able with his naked arm to break so large a branch from a tree? If he had had a sling, would he have been able to throw a stone with so great velocity? If he had had a ladder, would he have been so nimble in climbing a tree? If he had had a horse, would he have been himself so swift of foot? Give civilised man time to gather all his machines about him, and he will no doubt easily beat the savage; but if you would see a still more unequal contest, set them together naked and unarmed, and you will soon see the advantage of having all our forces constantly at our disposal, of being always prepared for every event, and of carrying one's self, as it were, perpetually whole and entire about one." -- Jean-Jacques Rousseau, "Discourse Upon the Origin and Foundation of the Inequality of Mankind." (1754) Plus ca change ...  Michelle
9/25/2017 2:43:17 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
I just want to add a bit about modern HR offices. I suspect many already function as if a machine is involved in day-to-day tasks. Many departments aren't actually helpful to employees and offer zero solutions to serious internal issues. Perhaps the machines can do a better job in the end...
JohnBarnes
9/25/2017 7:43:10 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
Michelle,
I suspect the robotic group affect of HR offices is because they're primarily legal cover for the company; employment law is now so complicated (and so many old time managers were so idiosyncratic) that staying out of trouble requires rigidly enforcing rules, and rigid rule-following is nowadays something we associate with computers. So whatever personal qualities HR folk may have, their job consists in finding least-litigatable-option and insisting on it. And again, optimizing to a single criterion comes across as robotic because that is what hte robots of today do. elizabethv
9/26/2017 5:43:25 AM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@JohnBarnes - I fear that type of mindset is rubbing off on other departments and in other areas. People are in general overwhelmingly concerned with a potential litigious mindset. It seems like many different departments have scripted responses to give to a variety of situations.
Michelle
9/26/2017 1:17:36 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@John that sounds right. Robotic execution on behalf of the company is really all they can do in many cases. It's folly to think the HR department has any motivation to improve anything beyond the company's desire to avoid being sued...
JohnBarnes
9/30/2017 3:33:04 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
Michelle, Elizabeth, et al.
I did say "that's what the robots of today do." As I'm much too fond of noting, robots are rapidly gaining in nuance, complexity, contingency -- I would simply say in subtletly and intuition -- and unlike the fleshly HR people, a robot AI will not become less careful because it is in tired or in a hurry to get home, or less compassionate and perceptive because the boss was mad at it. Admittedly I'm an extremist -- I think eventually all human tasks that don't require having an actual physical body present will be done by machines better than any human being can do them, and that includes human client service jobs like HR, teaching, and counseling. Automation is a loss to employees because currently we tie income to work (for the very good reason that if we don't, people don't work and we all go cold and hungry). But in the long run automation will be a benefit to the human race -- once we all have a way to get along without jobs. It's a threat to employees but a benefit to people. That's part of why it scares so much of the current political, economic, academic, and religious leadership: if human beings are no longer employees, who will they have to boss around? Michelle
9/30/2017 3:51:42 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
Fair points (some scary). What will become of humans without others to boss around? Have you seen Wall-E? That's an extreme example of allowing bots/computers to handle human tasks.
JohnBarnes
9/30/2017 4:07:12 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
Michelle,
Actually that echoes an argument I've had at a distance (the distance being, it's mostly in her reviews of my books and how those influence what I write later) with Jo Walton for some decades. I think she is probably right that there's actually an enormous number of interesting things to do with time and effort besides working to survive and there are many, many different kinds of satisfactory rewards besides bossing people around or being the center of attention, and if machines abolish human work, we'll eventually make the world a reasonably happy and pleasant place for ourselves. Where we disagree, I think, nowadays, is that I figure it will take a few generations to wring the too much work/scarce power and attention assumptions out of our social structures, and that we may be so addicted to the idea that people need to use most of their time to do many things they don't like in order to get a sliver of time or things they do, and that it's essential to have a few people with the power to compel this, that the "withdrawal generations" may be a pretty bad time (and might derail the whole process). ms.akkineni
9/30/2017 5:04:40 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@Michelle:
I too had similar feeling. Thanks for sharing about 'Wall-E', haven't seen it. But will male an attempt now. afwriter
9/30/2017 5:35:27 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
I often think of that movie when I think about this stuff. Just a bunch of humans mindlessly attached to screens not even having to get up to do the most menial task.
JohnBarnes
9/30/2017 5:47:52 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
I tend to think of it as fear of the "little blue frog future", referring to William Barton's When Heaven Fell (for my money one of the ten or so best science fiction novels of all time, but much too scary to ever be popular). The backstory of its alien-ruled, no hope of humans ever being independent again future is that sometime billions of years ago, a hive/colony species that look like little blue frogs and might have originally lived like prairie dogs or ants, developed an instinct for making and improving tools. Not consciousness, just using a stick or a rock and improving the stick. After billions of years, they managed to improve their tools into robots and computers -- which of course had only one supreme purpose in the universe: to make it a perfectly safe and happy place for little blue frogs. And the robots and computers WERE conscious, and single-minded because of their origin ... and since they were first on the field, they conquered the galaxy. The only hope of humanity is to prove we are worthy servants to the frogs ....
The real fear is not that we might someday meet and be conquered by the frog-ruled robots. It's that we might eventually be the frogs. Michelle
9/30/2017 5:52:28 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
We're almost there! Just a little bit more to go.
ms.akkineni
9/30/2017 5:03:14 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@John.B:
Very good information and valid perspective. Good to read and know but scary at the same time. I think requirement would increase in areas of Artificial Intelligence as we gear into automation / robotization / digitalization. We have to get ready and be ready by making ourselves dated. JohnBarnes
9/30/2017 6:03:49 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
"The realm of freedom actually begins only where labour which is determined by necessity and mundane considerations ceases" -- Karl Marx.
The reason I don't think we'll end up as frogs, or slaves to the machines, is because frankly there's so much interesting stuff to do and know in the world, and although we certainly have people with low-brow and uninformed tastes, and many cultures urging people to "not get above themselves", the simple need to find a better game, or a song you don't get tired of so quickly, is going to pull people out of their torpor, eventually. It might take a while. The guy who spent twenty years mopping floors and is told "A robot will do that now. Go home to your comfortable place, there will always be food, and amuse yourself," may spend the rest of his life looking for naked celebrities, or cute cats, or naked cats, on the internet ... but his bored children will find their way to poetry, or music, or history, or architecture or flash mobs or maybe to sheep art because there will be "world enough and time." "Just have to get these two stupid servers to talk to each others and pass files correctly, first" -- Every technician, everywhere. ms.akkineni
10/25/2017 8:07:28 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@John.B:
Good insightful comment. Agree with you on the fact that there surely will be something that we can find to do at any time and all times, no matter how chnaging times are. JohnBarnes
10/25/2017 9:36:55 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
Well, I suppose if I'm wrong, we can all enjoy "A Much Better View of the Moon." But I am hoping that song will not be the prognosis for the future, and it's good to hear that others hope so too!
elizabethv
9/26/2017 5:40:48 AM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@Michelle - To some extent I think you're right. Though I'm not sure if machines really could do a better job. While I have personally experienced people who seemed completely incapable of any kind of critical thought, and behaved very much like a machine, part of me has to remain hopeful that even if we tend to be falling to the lowest common denominator (Harrison Bergeron anyone?) we don't have to fall that low. We have the ability to rise above. I hope. Good grief, do I hope.
Michelle
9/26/2017 1:19:12 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
You have to hope. If you don't, the machines will surely win in the end. :)
DHagar
9/26/2017 5:15:21 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@elizabethv, I agree that we do not need to accept reducing humans to robotic roles to make way for automation. We are only flipping the coin from one advantage to another when we do that. The key value is to learn to better utilize the capabilities of both and better organize jobs and processes to accomplish that.
 dlr5288
9/28/2017 2:31:35 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
Great points! I think it's so important to have organization and to be able to keep up with the new jobs.
DHagar
9/28/2017 5:52:48 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@dir5288, that is when we will make true believers of the skeptics. We must find ways to adapt the technology with the productivity and innovative capabilities of the human intelligence (ie employee) or we will not be gaining.
ms.akkineni
9/30/2017 2:05:07 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@DHagar:
Well stated, unless there is a human intelligence factor instilled into, machines will remain machines. DHagar
10/2/2017 7:25:46 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@ms.akkineni, and we all know what that produces! Examples: Automated phone systems that never deliver value, unnecessary information and poor choices in taking orders, etc.
afwriter
10/5/2017 11:23:14 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
Right? I have had a run of automated calls in the past week where I wasn't even given an option for what I was calling about.
DHagar
10/5/2017 11:34:00 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
@afwriter, great example! That's automation of automation! I had a similar experience where I was given automated choices and while I was trying to decide which choice to select, it presented a false message stating I had selected the wrong option. I had not even touched anything or made a selection and found myself arguing with the machine!
That is not a boon to employees or customers! afwriter
9/26/2017 10:44:08 PM User Rank Platinum
Re: Skeptical
Let's not forget that electricity is a great equalizer here. Machines may do a better job as long as they are powered up. I often worry that we will become too reliant on technology to do even menial tasks.
JohnBarnes
9/25/2017 7:49:14 PM User Rank Platinum
I like the accidental pun...
Most of Ewert's principles are imperative commands. "Change Agents" sounds like it could be one too: "Alter or replace the people/things that carry out your intentions." Which is really the biggest thing happening in the software-driven replacement of dedicated physical hardware, and one of the biggest in the retraining and retooling of the technical workforce.
|
Latest Articles
Italy's 5G auction could exceed a government target of raising €2.5 billion ($2.9 billion) after attracting interest from companies outside the mobile market.
The emerging-markets operator is focusing on the humdrum business of connectivity and keeping quiet about some of its ill-fated 'digitalization' efforts.
Three UK has picked Huawei over existing radio access network suppliers Nokia and Samsung to build its 5G network.
Verizon skates where the puck is going by waiting for standards-based 5G devices to launch its mobile service in 2019.
 On-the-Air Thursdays Digital Audio ARCHIVED | December 7, 2017, 12pm EST
Orange has been one of the leading proponents of SDN and NFV. In this Telco Transformation radio show, Orange's John Isch provides some perspective on his company's NFV/SDN journey.
 Special Huawei Video  Huawei Network Transformation Seminar The adoption of virtualization technology and cloud architectures by telecom network operators is now well underway but there is still a long way to go before the transition to an era of Network Functions Cloudification (NFC) is complete. Video
The Small Cell Forum's CEO Sue Monahan says that small cells will be crucial for indoor 5G coverage, but challenges around business models, siting ...
People, strategy, a strong technology roadmap and new business processes are the key underpinnings of Telstra's digital transformation, COO Robyn ...
Eric Bozich, vice president of products and marketing at CenturyLink, talks about the challenges and opportunities of integrating Level 3 into ...
Epsilon's Mark Daley, director of digital strategy and business development, talks about digital transformation from a wholesale service provider ...
Bill Walker, CenturyLink's director of network architecture, shares his insights on why training isn't enough for IT employees and traditional ...
All Videos
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
||
Tweet This