US To Allow Small Drones To Fly Over People at Night (reuters.com) 165
The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on Monday said it is issuing long-awaited rules to allow for small drones to fly over people and at night, a significant step toward their use for widespread commercial deliveries. From a report: The FAA is also requiring remote identification of most drones, which are formally known as unmanned aerial vehicles, to address security concerns. "The new rules make way for the further integration of drones into our airspace by addressing safety and security concerns," said FAA Administrator Steve Dickson in a statement. "They get us closer to the day when we will more routinely see drone operations such as the delivery of packages." The race has been on for companies to create drone fleets to speed deliveries.
And thus was the backstory to Defender (1981) (Score:2)
*nt*
Re: (Score:2)
Proof by literary reference?
Just because a fictional story, has some cause that seemed to escalate to some major disaster. That doesn't mean that we should avoid such thing, just keep an eye on its progression to make sure it doesn't go that far.
Genetically Modified Corn could be in theory be altered to be unfit for human consumption. However, it takes just a little effort to make sure that any such experiments are controlled, and limited.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't be so sure about the corn. We already have unapproved GMO corn that was never supposed to be for human consumption in the food supply. We *THINK* it's all removed now...
Re: (Score:2)
It helps the larger company's, but harms the amateur and small business folks (real estate shooters, etc).
Regulation kills a fun hobby.
Will the rules cover ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Will the rules cover issues such as noise, either making the drones fly high enough or have some type of noise muffler? Will there be restrictions on camera images to address privacy concerns?
Aside from regulations, how will the delivery companies figure out where to land and drop off the packages? Some housing, such as apartment complexes, likely need some interaction with humans or a new protocol to drop off packages. What if there is bad weather like rain or unplowed snow? Boxes can't be left in those damaging conditions (maybe the boxes have to be weatherproofed?).
Since air transit is easier to detect, will drone deliveries make it easier for thieves to track deliveries? One rule "requires drones to broadcasts [sic] remote ID messages via radio frequency broadcast". Even if the messages are encrypted, the signals cannot be concealed.
Re: (Score:2)
I think a concern is that rogue drones will 'appear' among the legal drones and instead of dropping packages off they will be picking them up... Everyone will need a one-way drop off point, probably sold at a hefty profit from the delivery companies.
Re: Will the rules cover ... (Score:2)
I am having a guinea pig cage delivered to my house today! Am I worried itâ(TM)s going to get stolen from my porch? Nope, because what self respecting thief would steal random stuff?
My point is that what you describe would be a fairly sophisticated operation and that will not be worth it for arbitrary Amazon crap.
Re: (Score:2)
I am having a guinea pig cage delivered to my house today! Am I worried itâ(TM)s going to get stolen from my porch? Nope, because what self respecting thief would steal random stuff?
My point is that what you describe would be a fairly sophisticated operation and that will not be worth it for arbitrary Amazon crap.
Don't all/most thieves steal random stuff because they have no easy way to figure out what's in the boxes before stealing them?
I wonder if being able to see boxes as they fly through the air might allow thieves to focus on higher-value packages, i.e., boxes of certain sizes or shapes.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the point the GP was making is that the average "porch pirate" is a long, long way from being the kind of sophisticated master criminal who could set up an automated drone-based package theft system. Not to mention that the actual delivery points for packages are probably going to involve some sort of small designated landing pad with beacons and monitoring cameras, etc. meaning people will know when their packages have arrived and they will be able to monitor them. For that matter, they could have
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Will the rules cover ... (Score:2)
You put a giant ( 2ft square ) plastic QR code on your lawn - that was given to you by the shipper - and the drone uses that as a drop off point as long as there is no obstacles like trees and stuff. You wonâ(TM)t even get the QR code, and be eligible for these types of deliveries, unless itâ(TM)s clear from a sat image that you have the space for it.
This is primarily for the suburbs and exoburbs. The urban environment isnâ(TM)t even being contemplated by most companies.
This is the plan of a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Will the rules cover ... (Score:2)
No, not true. The âoeAmazon planâ is to start with numerous small warehouses in new communities. Packages come to the warehouse at all hours and are delivered by drones 24/7 . These locations also act as pickup and return drop off points so Amazon owns the entire end to end delivery and return path ( and it makes it nearly impossible for anyone to compete ).
Re: (Score:2)
The urban environment isnâ(TM)t even being contemplated by most companies.
In an urban environment, there are Amazon Lockers where customers can pick up packages. These are often located in convenience stores or at private mailbox locations.
The obvious solution would be to have the drones deliver to these locations. The drone drops the package, a robot (or perhaps a human attendant) puts it into a locker, and then an alert with an unlock code is texted to the recipient.
Re: Will the rules cover ... (Score:2)
Itâ(TM)s cheaper and more reliable to service lockers using a truck. In some places these trucks can be automated and handled by an attendant at an affiliated business - like a grocery store or whatever - but in larger cities an Amazon truck with a human will continue to service these lockers for decades to come.
Re: (Score:2)
At altitudes above 200' ( 60 meters ) drones become somewhat difficult to hear. At 300', I have to really focus to hear it.
You won't hear it at all from inside your home unless it lands in your yard. ( See below )
Rules are already in place in most States about camera imagery and / or audio.
Example: Texas laws state absolutely no imagery or recordings of any kind may be obtained via a drone platform without
express consent of the property owner. You can use a camera to help fly around, but you can't take
Re: (Score:2)
Drop off points will likely be a controlled facility similar to how UPS / Fedex pickup locations work today so folks don't help
themselves to the package or the drone itself while on the ground. I have doubts these are going to land at your home with
your package.
But isn't that what happens right now with home deliveries to front doors? That's too bad if drones aren't going to mean home deliveries. I would prefer a delivery of a package to my fenced-in backyard, as the chance of theft is much less.
I wonder how the economics of delivering to drop-off points works for drones versus trucks. I would imagine that the truck is much more efficient due to carrying many boxes. Wouldn't drones only have an advantage over trucks for unmanned delivery for single, relatively
Re: (Score:2)
One concept is a hybrid system: A truck will drive into a neighborhood and then launch dozens of drones to fan out and drop off the individual packages. The truck could still deliver big stuff the old-fashioned way.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm imagining there are a large percentage of orders that weigh less then 7lbs. Maybe not a majority but a lot. If you have a fleet of drones doing all the tiny boxes then you can save your more expensive options for the heavier items.
Got to figure there are a lot of liability issues for drones but also a lot of liability issues for human delivery as well. It may turn out drones have fewer accidents and more successful deliveries then a human driver who has to deal with many other humans.
Maybe Amazon won't
Re: (Score:2)
You've watched how they handled covid right? We're going to do nothing, and anyone who gets hurt or killed will be marginalized under the category of "Sorry people died, but I needed my 12" 300hp vibrator. The economy has to come first, right?"
Re: (Score:2)
The chances of having equipment good enough to track drones in flight and the knowledge to use it is pretty low. Most theft is opportunistic, a parcel spotted in the open somewhere and grabbed.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would the FAA rules regulate whether or not the packages are left in snow? I think you're mixing up who is responsible for what. FAA is responsible to managing air travel and its safety. It is not the FAA job to make sure your package doesn't get wet once in your porch (though they might care if the package is wet in the air and makes for a hazard because it falls apart while in flight or makes the drone too heavy to safety fly).
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure where either of those fall under FAA authorization. Those both sound like local issues.
I'm sure that's not the FAA problem.
will safety rules stop amazon from useing 1099'er (Score:2)
will safety rules stop amazon from useing local 1099'er to run the drones so they can't get off and let the damaged party be left to only collect from an low paid amazon 1099 local driver.
Will there be drone traffic control? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That sounds great to me. You always want a vehicle owned by a major corporation to be what destroys your car - bigger pockets.
Nice headline - you missed a critical comma (Score:5, Informative)
Will drones be allows to fly over people during the day as well?
Re:Nice headline - you missed a critical comma (Score:4, Funny)
Can drone deliveries be scheduled? (Score:2)
In contrast to truck deliveries, drone deliveries will likely be single boxes to single destinations. That means that there are no traveling salesman type of optimizations for planning routes. If that's the case, then would recipients be able to schedule deliveries? Air transit also means no waiting for traffic or traffic signals, so the estimated time of delivery should be quite precise. This might cut down on thefts if the recipient can stand outside and wait for a delivery. In fact, this could also
Can I run a small EMP above my house? (Score:2)
Like, a cone starting at my roof and going upwards at a 45 degree angle, with only 1000ft reach.
Alternatively, don't mind me, I'mma just gonna build this really high antenna and electric fly catcher right here above my house. ;)
It's, you know... for 'security reasons'. From terrorist Russian Chinese. Think of the children! ... Yeaah, it protects children from $foreignersDuJour. And you don't hate America, do you, son? *evil grin*
Well f*ck, can't play with the toy in the backyard (Score:5, Interesting)
The FAA decided NOT to exempt the little plastic toys that people like to fly around the yard, so those will all be illegal now. That rather annoys me that they don't distinguish between plastic toys and actual aircraft.
The smallest of the indoor toys that take off from the palm of your hand will still be legal, it appears.
For anything over 250 grams, you'll now need two GPS units and two linked ID transmitters. You must continuously broadcast the following, according to the Rule:
(1) a unique identifier to establish the identity of the unmanned
aircraft;
(2) an indication of the unmanned aircraft latitude, longitude, geometric altitude, and
velocity;
(3) an indication of the control station latitude, longitude, and geometric altitude;
(4) a time mark; and
(5) an emergency status indication.
It's pretty darn stupid, IMHO; like making kids get license and registration for Matchbox cars. One draft actually made paper airplanes illegal, but I believe that fixed.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah it's pretty sad:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
But it's a boon to the chinese companies who will produce the gear to fulfill these requirements!
Good news is there are some amazing sub-250g toys you can still have a lot of fun with. The rest of the hobby, though, is pretty much dead under these new regs. By design.
If the FAA would spend as much time doing its job regulating full scale aircraft and governing the airspace above 500' as it has on flying toys, maybe we wouldn't have had scandals like the
Re: (Score:2)
So what are we broadcasting these data over? We're not supposed to use ADS-B, because stations allegedly can't handle the traffic.
Adding another GPS receiver is no big deal on a good-sized quad, so I'm not worried about that. But what is the standard we're supposed to use for ID broadcasts?
They might approve DRIP protocol (Score:2)
The rule says you have to use an FCC-approved protocol.
As far as I'm aware, there are no protocols approved by the FCC under this rule just yet. Obviously the major manufacturers have something going.
The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) is an open organization that develops protocols such as HTTP and SMTP. There is an IETF effort to establish Drone Remote Id Protocol (DRIP).
https://datatracker.ietf.org/w... [ietf.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That is exactly the argument Marx made. "Capital" today typically means "money" but in Marx's day it really meant "machinery." When production depends on machines (rather than labour) what motivation is there for the owners of the machines to share their wealth?
It turns out that when you've got machines the more stuff you make, the cheaper each unit tends to be. So it's worth your while to make stuff for yourself, and also stuff for everyone else. Add in a bit of socialist stuff where it's needed (labour un
Just No (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty much this. Yet another extremely valid reason to live out in the boonies. Having god damn drones buzzing overhead non-stop day and night just so someone's pointless consumerism can be sated by amazon drone delivery sounds positively delightful.
The FAA Has Seen the Light (Score:2)
So the FAA looked at drones and said "maybe they're not so bad after all". Sweet.
Contrast this with the drone hysteria of a few years ago.
I live in Seattle. A couple of years ago, I asked the city for a crosswalk. The neighborhood kids had to use a bus stop on the other side of a busy street (Pike Street), and cross where there was no marked crosswalk.
The city told me, and I'm paraphrasing here, to feel free to tongue my own asshole, because they don't care if the kids get run over, they aren't putting in
Re: (Score:2)
FAA dudes got "campaign contributions" from Amazon dudes.
Re: (Score:2)
The FAA was appointed by Trump (who famously hates Amazon) and its members cannot accept any campaign contributions.
We jammin (Score:2)
New market (Score:2)
Heavy duty "butterfly" nets.
Terminology (Score:2)
Can we at least all start using the proper terminology?
https://pilotinstitute.com/dro... [pilotinstitute.com]
What is a drone?
“Drone” is the most commonly used term to refer to any unmanned aerial vehicle, mostly because it’s a term that the media knows will catch the attention of casual viewers. From a technical standpoint, a drone can refer to any vehicle – even those that travel in water or land – that can travel autonomously.
In modern times, the definition of drone has expanded to include vehicl
widespread commercial deliveries (Score:2)
The noise (Score:2, Interesting)
The noise is going to suck. I mean, really suck. Never mind the privacy invasion or the high probability of collisions.
To all you tinfoil hats out there (Score:2)
Disclaimer I've met these guys (but don't know them well). Basically most drones use pretty simple software, so what WFD does is they have a device that creates a 1km or bigger 5 km zone of control. You can identify certain drones as friendly with an IFF, and ones that enter the zone with no IFF get hacked and are forced to land.
Quite honestly, giving people the ability to control what comes into their lives (
Re: (Score:2)
And that's pretty illegal for non-governmental agencies. And the reason is simple - there's no reason for you to get a 1km bubble around your house. It interferes with my drone.
most misleading headline (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
what we're gonna do with the approximately 1-1.5 million people who are going to get put out of work soon. It's pretty clear shipping is 10-20 years from automation. Yeah, there's time, but it's gonna happen in our life times.
The same thing that the horse and buggy sector did... Get over it and move on.
You know people didn't just quick their job (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
There were decades of poverty
No there weren't. The early 20th century was a time of unprecedented growth in living standards. The exact opposite of "poverty".
They only look poor in hindsight, precisely because we now enjoy the prosperity created by automation and efficiency.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly, people have no clue what it was like to live in real poverty, no proper medical treatment (anasthetics weren't even invented). I remember reading a prediction from a futurist in the year 1900 predicting that by the year 2000, life expectancy could get as high as 50 years.
Reference (middle of third paragraph): https://personal.psu.edu/staff... [psu.edu]
By the way that John Elfreth Watkins guy did get some predictions correct (cars will be cheaper than horses) .. others were slightly off (two days to cross the
"Unprecedented growth in living standards" (Score:2)
We stand atop their corpses. We just don't like to talk about it.
Re: (Score:2)
doesn't mean much when you're working from "frequently starving to death".
Nobody was "starving to death" in post-Civil-War America.
Hyperbole doesn't help your argument.
"Growth" doesn't put food on the table
Yes it does. Claiming that rising prosperity doesn't help people afford food is idiotic.
61% increase in average real wage (Score:2)
The model T came out in 1908.
Over the next ten years, average real wages increased 61%.
(followed the the roaring twenties) (Score:2)
Btw, after that ten-year period of wages going up 61% net of inflation, next was "the roaring twenties". The 1920s was when the US economy grew by a staggering 42%, until the US was producing almost half of the entire global output of goods. This is when average Americans could suddenly afford cars, washing machines, refrigerators, etc.
Year, avg wage, price of Model T
1912 $592 $600
1914 $627 $490
1916 $708 $360
1924 $1,303 $290
I guess if you want to call going from having a horse and not having electricity to
Re: (Score:2)
Sure everything wasn't all flowers and rainbows for everyone in 1928 or whatever, but it was a hell of a lot better than it was in 1908!
The rise of manufacturing machines made everyone's life much *better*, not absolutely perfect.
Re: (Score:2)
Can I tell you a secret? I say this with love, by the way.
Of course we all say something dumb from time to time. We just aren't thinking right for a minute. A few days ago I said something really dumb on here. I wish I could remember what it was, but I've forgotten. I do remember that in a YouTube comment section I suggested that someone should be wearing gloves while milling metal - um no. That would was fucking stupid of me, and someone pointed that out.
Sometimes when we say something really dumb, like c
Re: (Score:2)
There was still rampant food insecurity right up until the 40s and 50s
So? What's your point?
Nobody is saying that automation instantly made everything perfect. But it clearly made things better.
There is every reason to believe that the automation of transportation and delivery will be an economic improvement, just like every wave of automation in the past.
Re: (Score:2)
The very obvious point, which has been made very clearly, is that periods of transition are dangerous and sometimes harm people.
That doesn't mean you shouldn't advance. It means you should make plans to mitigate the harm.
Re: (Score:2)
The very obvious point, which has been made very clearly, is that periods of transition are dangerous
Many people have said this, but none have any data to support it.
Times of rapid automation also tend to be periods of rapid job growth. So it isn't clear that "transitions" are actually a problem.
Can you give some specific time periods that you believe were "dangerous transitions"?
It means you should make plans to mitigate the harm.
Most government training programs train people for the wrong jobs. This delays them from moving quickly into new employment.
Many of the programs, including programs to retrain coal miners, have the perverse effect of keeping peo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Star Trek already covered this [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Star Trek already covered this [wikipedia.org].
It’s a common trope in sci-fi (Suicide booths in Futurama, as another example) because when you get to the core of the issue, under capitalism, labor is a commodity. What is typically done with commodities that no longer have value in the marketplace? They are disposed of. [wikipedia.org]
Since most folks kinda find the idea of normalizing suicide to be morally reprehensible, we’ll just have to start rationalizing social welfare programs as “value of human life” taxes.
Re: (Score:2)
Capitalism doesn't expect useless commodities to dispose of themselves. You have to dig a hole and push them in.
Re: (Score:2)
we really do need to do something about
Perhaps...engage them in dialogue, make as-much-or-more effort to see things their way as you are demanding they do for you, provide unbiased education on the relevant facts in a politically-neutral way so they can actually absorb the data, and find reasonable compromises and middle grounds?
You won't get anywhere by insulting them, and if you white-knuckle your own positions without making any compromise, you can't expect them to do any different.
There is no easy way t
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps...engage them in dialogue,
Why? They're not listening now despite the facts. Witness the lawsuit filed today [msn.com] by a bunch of Republicans who are suing Mike Pence (yes, you read that right) to have him ignore the will of the people and unilaterally decide who is the next president. They are claiming he, and only he, has the complete authority to decide, regardless of what the Constitution or any other laws say.
Kindly explain how people so hellbent on enforcing dictatorial powers would listen to anything
Re: (Score:3)
Why?
Because that's how civil societies operate. We talk to each other.
They're not listening now despite the facts.
Some of them aren't listening. The most extreme ones for sure. Does that mean you can't have a productive conversation with those who aren't so extreme? Responding to extremity with more extremity just pushes the moderates over to opposing extremes, which I am quite sure is the opposite of what you want.
ignore the will of the people
That's what I am talking about right there. You misrepresen
Re: (Score:2)
The claim made in the suit is that the votes do not represent the will of the people by virtue of being fraudulent. But rather than say "to have him make an independent judgement about the legal status of key votes," or something similar, you modified the claim to carry your own personal judgement, and make it sound like something other than what it is (and clearly worse).
That may be what the suit says, but the reality is they want him to override the will of the people by making the claim (as I already s
Re: (Score:2)
Woah, Patrick sucks balls but you don't have to assign that level of stupidity to him to make your point. He promised at least $25,000 per incident and a total pool of a million, not a million per incident. And government officials are customarily and legally prohibited from colle
Re: (Score:2)
If your job is to drive a truck around and drop boxes off at people's doorstep, then you will find a new job with similar skill requirements doing something else. We'll figure it out when it happens. The advantage of having a job with minimal responsibility and investment, is that it's easy come, easy go.
If you had developed a decade or more of experience doing something deeply skilled and nuanced, that's actually a hard problem. But this one is easy, you'll adapt to whatever the world looks like in 10-20 y
Re: (Score:2)
Why would that be a harder problem. Heck, it's easier because you have the skills to pick up difficult problems. We're not likely to run out of difficult problems, but robots will in the not to distant future do all grunt work.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
What did horse buggy whip drivers do when cars came round?
Find a different gig. I mean all the crap people are getting delivered needs to be designed. Bigger houses need to be designed and built etc. Custom furniture design. Who knows man? There's always newer and newer things to do. A lot of people were afraid there'd be no jobs after sewing machines were invented.
Universal Basic Income will be a fallback. We already have UBI .. 90% of americans ($1200) got it in 2020, and will get in 2021 ($2000). Congre
Re: (Score:3)
"Past performance is not an indicator of future success."
Re:We should probably work on figuring out (Score:4, Insightful)
"Past performance is not an indicator of future success."
That is a heuristic for stock market investing because investors alter their strategy to arbitrage away past advantages.
It is not a good heuristic for anything else. In nearly any other human endeavor, past performance is the best indicator of future success.
Throughout the past few centuries, people have always seen past automation as good, but current automation as bad.
So you are sure that truck drivers will never find new jobs. But at the same time, no one thinks we should bring back telephone switchboard operators, maids to empty chamberpots, or plow fields with mules. Yet, at the time, the loss of those jobs was seen the same way you see delivery jobs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Humans have been reproducing exponentially up until now
The first derivative is still positive.
The 2nd derivative is negative. We are past the inflection point and the population will peak and begin to decline later this century.
when we've got robots that can economically replace humans for every type of work
You are missing an important economic concept: Comparative Advantage [wikipedia.org].
There is no such thing as being "better at everything".
For a real-world example, look at China and America. American workers are more than THREE TIMES as productive as Chinese workers. In some areas, Americans are five times as productive. In all areas, Americans a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The philosopher David Hume pointed out that inferring the future based on the past is always logically fallacious, in all contexts. That doesn't change the fact that the past is all we've got to go on. So, for practical reasons, we continue to do our best based on that information.
MAYBE this bit of automation, over the centuries-long history of automation, will be THE bit that pushes us past a tipping point and leaves most of our population unemployed and unemployable. Probably not, but maybe. And AFTER
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Living Standards increase twenty fold? That was certainly true of post WWII America, but must've had your head so far up your ass the last 30+ years to not see that "living standards" have gone to shit in the US since 1980
Students from Working Class families can no longer afford to obtain a higher education on their own -- they have to take on decades of debt via "student loans" which has become a predatory racket, in which many people have not been able to come out from under, even after decades of payment
Re:We should probably work on figuring out (Score:5, Interesting)
"living standards" have gone to shit in the US since 1980
America's per capita GDP in 1980 was $12,575.
America's per capita GDP in 2019 was $65,280.
Inflation over that period was 235%. So a 1980 dollar would be worth $3.35 today.
$65,280 / ($12,575 * 3.35) = 1.54
So, since 1980, American per capita GDP has gone up 54%. That is not spectacular for a 40 year period, but it is not "gone to shit" either.
Re: (Score:2)
you're looking at two different things and you're both right. GDP is growing, median wage (which is closer to "living standards" than GDP is) has been stagnant as a rock for 50 years.
Re:We should probably work on figuring out (Score:5, Informative)
Household income 1990-2019 [statista.com].
Over the last 30 years, median household income has gone up 26% in inflation-adjusted dollars.
Not spectacular, but not "stagnant as a rock", and certainly not "gone to shit".
During that time, the number of people in an average household went down by 20%. So 26% more income supporting 20% fewer people.
Wage stagnation (Score:2, Insightful)
We keep the price of housing, healthcare & college out of the inflation statistics so you don't notice just how much worse things are getting.
Re: (Score:3)
We keep the price of housing, healthcare & college out of the inflation statistics
Housing is expensive because voters support restrictive building and zoning policies that push up their property values.
Healthcare and college are not expensive because of automation, but precisely the opposite. They are industries that rely on manual repetitive processes and opaque pricing.
Re: (Score:2)
We keep the price of housing, healthcare & college out of the inflation statistics so you don't notice just how much worse things are getting.
No "We" don't. All of those categories are included in the most widely used general inflation measures, including the CPI. [bls.gov]
Where you get this shit is anybody's guess.
That's a myth (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There have been some pretty darn significant hard times between the ending of one sort of job and people being hired for something else. Some of the displaced people didn't live to see the recovery.
It's easy for the people who probably won't be in those hard times to write them off as a temporary problem as long as they don't get bad enough for the people caught in them to pick up torches and pitchforks.
You seem to think it's fine if a bunch of people take one for the team, but I don't see you stepping forw
Re: (Score:2)
There have been some pretty darn significant hard times between the ending of one sort of job and people being hired for something else.
Can you give a specific example of a period of rapid automation followed by prolonged unemployment of the displaced?
Unless you are claiming that the Great Depression was caused by robots, I don't see it.
Re: (Score:2)
Google "unemployment in the industrial revolution" for too many references to list here.
As for the great depression, industrialization (not robots since those didn't exist yet) contributed heavily to a wealth disparity as worker's share of the GDP was pushed down while owners (Wall Street) profits soared. That created an unsustainable bubble that finally popped and lead to the great depression.
The effects of industrialization then and automation now not only leaves people unemployed, but leaves others much
Re: (Score:2)
Google "unemployment in the industrial revolution" for too many references to list here.
I did as you suggested, and googled for that exact phrase.
This is what the first link said: "The Industrial revolution provided much demand for labor than its supply so the unemployment rate was very low."
This is what the 2nd link said: "The Industrial Revolution created an increase in employment opportunities. As factories became widespread, additional managers and employees were required to operate them."
This is what the 3rd link said: "Since the dawn of the industrial age, a recurrent fear has been that
Re: (Score:2)
No, they've always been right. Technology has displaced labour since pretty much the beginning of time. Our response, again since the beginning of time, has been a combination of 1) discovering new jobs, usually for more skilled labour, 2) making up new bullshit jobs, 3) inventing social systems to redistribute wealth.
Typically (1) takes too long, and often involves a skill upgrade that is too demanding for many of those displaced; it's a solution for the next generation. That leaves (2) and (3).
Re: (Score:2)
For a value of "always" that doesn't always include short time scales.
Re: (Score:2)
For a value of "always" that doesn't always include short time scales.
Delivery trucks aren't going to disappear overnight. The drivers have years to find other employment. Fewer new people will become drivers. 10 years from now, most truck driver jobs will be gone, and "driving a truck" will be seen the same way we view "switchboard operator" today.