Packaging

[xoxoxoBruce]

This machine will take 1000 different sized items and make not boxes but cardboard packages to ship them, in an hour. That include puting the item inside and labeling.

[Diaphone Jim]

Trippy!
I am gone for the count when a re-run of "How Things are Made" comes on TV.

[xoxoxoBruce]

The flanges around the package should provide some bump protection.

[Griff]

No more of those giant Amazon boxes of padding to hold one little object. This is good. Way back in the 80's we had an automated parts picker, that human scanning is superfluous.

[tw]

As companies like Walmart move towards competition with the existing Amazon, Amazon already has plans to eliminate maybe 3000 jobs by automating the boxing.

BTW, eliminating jobs that way (innovating) always means more jobs in the economy.

An example of how Amazon innovations are / will be keeping it ahead of the competition.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by tw

BTW, eliminating jobs that way (innovating) always means more jobs in the economy.

Prove it.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Griff

Prove it.

Let's assume your belief. We can make more jobs by removing computers from all COs and reinstalling human operators. That makes more jobs - according to myth generated by soundbyte reasoning. What really happens? Massive job losses elsewhere and stifled innovations - future jobs not created.

Yes, like all money games, those boxing machines cause short term job losses - ie one to four years later. And then result in massive job increases everywhere else four and more years later. Economics always worked that way.

What made America great and so productive? The constant replacement of humans by machines. That reality has never changed. But not understood by many who want to see all results immediately - ie one year later.

Anytime a machine replaces a human, then more jobs are created. It makes no sense when one thinks in terms of open loop systems. It makes complete sense when one is viewing in realities - closed loop systems. Most do not know how to view in terms that apply to reality - ie weather, world conflicts, economics, electricity, and even general relativity. Even explains why soundbytes (ie advertising) so easily manipulate the naive.

Whenever machines replace humans, more jobs are always created in the economy. But only when one views the bigger picture - a closed loop system.

The scary part - that someone in America would not know that well proven and obvious fact.

[Griff]

Let’s assume I’m pro-automation. Let’s make me an automation utopian rather than dystopian. Get me from today to 2100 without blood in the streets from displaced blue collar workers. I don’t think retraining ever gets the job done. Could we instead have the machines pay us?

[tw]

Originally Posted by Griff

Get me from today to 2100 without blood in the streets from displaced blue collar workers.

You have assumed smarter means harder. How did a 14 year old kid learn how to program a computer in the early 1960s. People are much smarter than some would assume. More automation often means the blue collar worker needs less abilities.

We should ban all vending machines so that more people remain standing about in restaurants?

Ask a McDonald employee to make change without that cash register. Notice how automation even makes jobs possible for employees with less abilities.

But we know this is well proven in history. When automation replaces humans, then the economy always creates more jobs. It is only confusing to people who think in terms of Trump style soundbytes. Or who do not understand the difference between closed loop and open loop systems (ie economics).

That same open loop rhetoric also says tax cuts increase jobs. Reality. The resulting closed loop system results in job losses many years later. Closed loop systems also involve an ignored factor called time.

Soundbyte logic (using open loop reasoning) only sees a job lost today because of a box making machine installed today. And does not see the so many resulting new jobs so many years later.

Again, how to create less jobs. Replace those telco switching computers with operators. A resulting recession means less jobs. That has never changed.

[Gravdigr]

Now he's re-writing international politics, economic policy, and the dictionary.

[Griff]

I’m concerned that he may be advising the Biden campaign.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Anyone who would listen doesn't deserve to hold office.

[tw]

Which is why Sarah Sanders said she routinely ignores you. Even she knows automatic creates jobs.

[Griff]

https://gizmodo.com/how-automation-t...ers-1833623722

How Automation Turns Us Into Trump Voters

Okay, that’s a bit of an oversimplification, but new research adds to a growing body of work that suggests there’s a distinct link between regions hit by automation and voting Republican, and voting Trump especially. In 2016, areas where industrial robots have eliminated jobs—mostly in the Rust Belt and the South—saw a sizable upswing in voters turning to Trump. (Remember, automation likely played a much larger role in accelerating job loss over the last decades than did other factors like offshoring.)

The "experts" are split on this question. We don't actually know whether AI displaced jobs will be replaced by jobs humans can do better than automation. We know that trucking, retail, call centers, etc...are all within reach of automation. As I look at the Democratic field, I see Biden apparently in the tw camp ignoring the 4 million manufacturing jobs in Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Missouri, and Iowa lost to automation. I see Bernie's well-intentioned but misguided ideas about making labor more expensive in this environment. I'd like tw to consider that the Paul Krugmans of the world were completely wrong about workers perception of the economy in 2016 and likely again are missing the story from their silos. The Trump signs are still up and even if he loses that discontent will still be there.

We know that automation will make creating easier. People with access to these tools will be able to progress from idea to shipped product simply and easily. The question is, is our economy organized for a successful transition? Will a retail worker in her 50s be able to work through retirement? Will that worker have the income to be a consumer? What happens if we raise the age for Social Security in this environment?

Let's remember that STEM jobs are a tiny proportion of the workforce.
https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2017/s...and-future.pdf
Nearly 8.6 million STEM jobs in 2015

There were nearly 8.6 million STEM jobs in May 2015, representing 6.2 percent of U.S. employment. Computeroccupations made up nearly 45 percent of STEM employment, and engineers made up an additional 19 percent.Mathematical science occupations and architects, surveyors, and cartographers combined made up less than 4 percentof STEM employment.

[Happy Monkey]

John Varley's Steel Beach had an amusing short scene depicting the end result of automation; the setting is a post-scarcity society, where everything is automated. It is determined that even though nobody needs to work to get money, many people do need to work for psychological reasons, and not everyone can do media, art, IT, or science jobs. So (for example) there are construction workers whose job is to watch the robots do construction.

They have upside-down pockets on their overalls, to assist in leaning on their shovels.