Two different robots, including SoftBank’s humanoid robot Pepper’and others on four legs like a dog, stamped and shimmied in a choreographed dance that is usually performed by the Hawks’ fans before games in the 40,000 capacity Fukuoka Dome.
Some of the robots wore Hawks caps and waved flags supporting the team.
Fans on social media had mixed reactions.
“I think this is like a dystopia,” wrote one Twitter user.
Another called the performance “insanely beautiful.”
Boosted by the supportive robots, the Hawks won 4-3 as they look to defend their 2019 NPB title.
The NPB season began three months late on June 19 due to the coronavirus pandemic and currently no supporters are allowed to attend games.
However, from Friday, up to 5,000 fans will be allowed to attend professional baseball and soccer games in Japan due to an easing of restrictions.
I don’t really understand why they team was allowed to play. So, it is perfectly safe for sports teams to gather together, share the dugout, and hit the showers, but it is not safe for people to attend the games? I mean, I get that there are crowds at the stadium, but seriously, they can limit attendance to allow for distancing. Seems unfair as well that sports teams can collect a paycheck, while families can’t. I mean, some families don’t eat without a paycheck. Hardly true for team members. In my opinion coverage of this display using robots that are stealing people’s jobs is like rubbing our noses in it.
In Japan, a rapidly aging population and declining birth rate are creating a crisis. Without enough people to fill jobs and care for the elderly, could robots step up to fill the gap? Could they even become, as some robotics engineers hope, “better than human?” CBSN Originals takes you into the heart of Japan’s looming population collapse, and examines the robot solutions they hope will preserve their unique culture.APR 29, 2018 (Pay close attention USA because this is what is in store for you!) spacer
TOKYO — As the coronavirus pandemic rewrites the rules of human interaction, it also has inspired new thinking about how robots and other machines might step in.
The stuff of the bot world— early factory-line automation up to today’s artificial intelligence — has been a growing fact of life for decades. The worldwide health crisis has added urgency to the question of how to bring robotics into the public health equation.
Nowhereis thattruer than in Japan, a country with a long fascination with robots, (China has been busy developing computer surveillance and Japan has been busy developing the robot replacements. They have been training their people to prefer the company of robots over other humans. Sex with humans is becoming a distant memory for most of the Japanese. They have been developing personal relationships with robots on levels for decades. They have developed the art and it is ready to become the norm in the USA.) from android assistants to robot receptionists. Since the virus arrived, robots have offered their services as bartenders, security guards and deliverymen. (They have been doing that in Japan for a while now.)
But they don’t necessarily need to supplant humans, researchers say. (no, it isn’t necessary, but it is their plan, they just don’t want you to believe that until it is too late for you to stop it.)They can also bridge the gap between people mindful of social distance — now or when the next major contagion hits. (They want your loved ones to get to prefer the touch of a robot.)
Want to drop in on your elderly parents but are afraid of passing on a coronavirus infection? Maybe you’re missing your grandchildren, and finding Zoom chats a little limiting?
Ideas are brewing.
Hugging the bot
navatar the manifestation of a Hindu deity(especially Vishnu) in human or superhuman or animal form“the Buddha is considered an avatar of the god Vishnu”
navatara new personification of a familiar idea“the embodiment of hope”,”the incarnation of evil“,”the very avatar of cunning”
Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary
Avatar An incarnation, embodiment or personification of a principle, quality, or attitude; — used of people, mostly in a positive sense as a manifestation of a behavior or character worthy of admiration.“Martha Stewart, the home-and-hearth avatar whose products are now available at Kmart stores, is making upscale design touches like 200-thread-count cotton bed sheets something that most every American can aspire to.”
Avatar (Hindu Myth) The descent of a deity to earth, and his incarnation as a man or an animal; — chiefly associated with the incarnations of Vishnu.
Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia
navatarIn Hindu myth., the descent of a deity to the earth in an incarnate form or some manifest shape; the incarnation of a god.
navatarHence A remarkable appearance, manifestation, or embodiment of any kind; a descent into a lower sphere; an adorable or wonderful exhibition of an abstract idea, principle, etc., in concrete form: as, “The Irish Avatar” (a poem by Byron on a visit of George IV. to Ireland); “the avatar of mathematics,”
Chambers’s Twentieth Century Dictionary
nAvatara-va-tär′the descent of a Hindu deity in a visible form: incarnation:
nAvatara-va-tär′ (fig.) supreme glorification of any principle.
Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary
Skr. avatâra, descent, to come down; ava, from + root tṛ, to cross, pass over
(Notice the name of this company… Avatar IN! As in deity/demon enters you!!! )
By making Avatar a new ability for everyone, we will expand all the possibilities of humankind.
Our mission at avatarin is to create a connected future for all, beyond all limits such as distance, time, cost and body.
Avatar to new social infrastructure
As a means of transportation for new people and a means of human expansion that transcends the conventional dimensions.
We aim to expand Avatar as a social infrastructure.
Through the platform “avatarin” that can be accessed from PCs and smartphones, avatars will play every role everywhere.
Communication, business, education and medical care, entertainment, etc. For example, you can attend an in-house meeting from an overseas business trip, enjoy shopping at a department store while staying at home, visit an aquarium from a hospital bed, receive administrative consultation from a remote area, or receive Japanese sports from overseas. Various possibilities will expand, such as watching a game.
Your own “avatar” can play an active role everywhere. With avatars installed all over the world, we are aiming to realize such a society where even space can be teleported
The “newme” robot developed by Japanese company Avatarin is basically a tablet computer on a stand, with wheels.The user controls the avatar from a laptop or tablet, and his or her face shows on the avatar’s screen.
“It’s really like teleporting your consciousness,” said founder and CEO Akira Fukabori. “You are really present.” (NO YOU ARE NOT! I don’t care how good they get at holographics that is not YOU! VIRTUAL REALITY is still NOT REALITY! Though some of you may have become so used to fantasy that you can’t tell the difference, or care. TRUTH is REALITY and EVERYTHING ELSE IS A LIE!)
Already available commercially, Avatarin’s robots have been used by doctors to interact with patients in a Japanese coronavirus ward; by university students in Tokyo to “attend” a graduation ceremony;and by fans of the Yomiuri Giants baseball team to remotely interview their favorite players after games held in empty stadiums.
There are even avatar robots that have just arrived in the International Space Station.
But it’s the way the robot is already being used by families separated by the coronavirus that really underscores the heart of the technology — starting with the family of the company’s chief operating officer, Kevin Kajitani, whose parents live in Seattle.
“His parents can’t always come and visit their grandson,” Fukabori said. “But they always access the avatar, and can even chase their grandson. And the grandson really hugs the robot.”
Avatarin is part of Japan’s ANA airline group, and the company has joined with the X Prize Foundation to launch a $10 million, four-year contest for companies to create more complex robots that could further develop the avatar concept. (Ya, ask the guy who invented the RFID chip how he feels now. How do we feel now that we know we have been training our replacements. We have been feeding the AI the data it needed to develop it’s intelligence so that it can replace every one of us.)
“You need to move,” Fukabori said. “This is really important, because we forget the freedom of this mobility. You can just walk around, and people will talk to you about really, really natural things. That creates human trust. That isn’t as easy in WebEx or Zoom, where if you don’t know each other it’s really hard to keep talking.”
Work is underway on prototypes that allow users to control a remote robot through virtual reality headsets and gloves that allow the wearer to pick up, hold, touch and feel an object with a distant robotic hand, with potential uses ranging from space exploration to disaster relief or elderly care. (It is a deception, do not trust your senses.)
But Fukabori said the cheaper, lightweight avatars offer more immediate and affordable uses. What sets this project apart from existing avatar robots, the company says, is the ability for users to access the robots easily from a laptop, by renting them out rather than having to buy them.
Avatarin hopes to install the avatars in more hospitals and in elderly-care centers, shops, museums, zoos and aquariums. The company also aims to have 1,000 in place for next year’s Tokyo Olympics. spacer (If you think it is by accident that the next Olympics will be in TOKYO you better think again! Everything that has happened lately has been perfectly timed. I have been watching. They have been working hard to make sure that ALL stores have the new software on their registers, have the ability to use self check out, have set up home delivery and store front pick up. They have everybody on Mandatory Health Insurance with a declared Provider. They have made sure that ALL medical offices were completely switched over to the new Electronic Charts and ALL charts are ONLY in the CLOUD. NO copies anywhere else! They have been cutting back on all stock delivered to stores. They have been wiping out all food sources, they have all restaurants set up for ALTERNATIVE Foods, no meats, no fresh vegetables. They have EVERYBODY in computerized vehicles which they control remotely. They have cameras set up everywhere, and now they will soon have the 5G towers EVERYWHERE. They have our SUN blocked out, if is still there and we are living under multiple FAKE SUNS! They have all purchases on line and on record, even when you pay cash. They have already been building armies of Robots which they are ready to roll out. They are like fire ants. They wait until everyone is onboard before they strike simultaneously!)
In Tokyo, robotics lab ZMP has been developing three small bots to help compensate for Japan’s shrinking labor force, employing the same technology as self-driving cars.
A delivery robot aims to transport goods ordered online from local warehouses to customers’ doors; a patrol robot, with six cameras, does the job of a security guard; a self-driving wheelchair can be programed to take users to specific destinations. The wheelchair is already available and approved for use on Tokyo streets. The others still await official permission to venture out alone in public. (did you notice the wheelchair is not only self driving, but it can be set to take you to a SPECIFIC LOCATION… meaning they are in TOTAL control, not you.)
Now, the patrol robot has been adapted so it can also disinfect surfaces as it patrols, and is attracting interest from Tokyo’s Metro stations as well as other businesses. (So, these robots can be used to spray deadly poisons, or contagious pathogens in your neighborhood, without any concerns for their safety.)
In May, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe noted surging demand for unmanned deliveries and pledged to carry out tests to see if delivery robots were safe to use on roads and sidewalks by the end of the year.(Amazon has been saying for years now that they want to use robots and drones to deliver your packages.)
Even the self-driving wheelchair can come into its own amid a coronavirus-filled world, the company said, potentially helping elderly people move around more independently without a helper who might be a vector for the virus.
“Before corona, most customers wanted to reduce workers,” said ZMP’s chief executive, Hisashi Taniguchi. “But after corona, our customers changed drastically. Now, they want to accelerate unmanned systems.”
I am sure that some of you think it is a wonderful thing, while we are under lockdown, to be able to virtually visit with your family, better than not at all. But, how will you feel when that is the ONLY way you will be allowed to interact? YOU will learn pretty quickly that it is not any kind of a replacement for REAL CONTACT!
Qbit Robotics, also in Tokyo,has programmed a robotic arm and hand to interact with customers(don’t you just want to interact with a mechanical arm! What a way to start your day!) and serve them coffee, mix cocktails or even serve a simple cup of instant pasta.
President and chief executive Hiroya Nakano said he aims not to replace human interaction but to supply robots that can communicate and entertain in a “friendly” way.
While robots can sometimes seem disturbing and alien to Westerners, they tend to be seen in a more welcoming light by many Japanese people, Nakano said.
“Until now, expectations have been high for what robots can do in the future, but they haven’t been able to do what humans do,” he said. “But now we are living with the coronavirus, the idea of no contact or automation has become especially important. And I feel there is an extremely high expectation for robots to meet that demand.”
And one can dance, too
In South Korea, a Chinese-made robot is already greeting children in Seoul’s schools as they reopen.
The Cruzr, with eyes that beam a neon-blue light and a video screen on its chest, takes kids’ temperatures and reminds them to follow anti-virus rules.
“Please wear your mask properly,” the robot recently told a student at Wooam Elementary School whose mask wasn’t covering his nose. (So we have robot hall police!)
Chinese robotmaker UBTech launched Cruzr in 2017 as a humanoid service robot for businesses, but the pandemic has given it added value as a personal assistant free from infection risks.
It is also being used by medical institutions for mass temperature screening, patient monitoring and medical record keeping, helping overwhelmed medical workers.
In June, Seoul’s Seocho district government deployed Cruzr robots to the district’s 51 public schools, helping reduce the burden on overworked teachers.
Before the robot came to school, teachers had taken kids’ temperatures as they arrived, creating long lines and raising infection risks from human contact. Now, the robot checks the temperature of multiple students as they walk by and immediately sounds an alarm if anyone has a fever.
“At first, students were ill at ease with the robot greeting them at the school gate, but in a matter of weeks, students have embraced it as part of the school community,” said Yoo Jung-ho, head of Wooam’s science department.
At the school, students waved toward the robot at the gate as they walked into the school, and nodded in agreement when it reminded them about the mask rules.
The robot can also provide basic academic help and entertain students by teaching them simple dance moves.
“Of course, robots can’t replace teachers at classrooms yet, but there is significant and rising potential for ‘contactless’ teaching with the pandemic,” Yoo said.
Nine-year-old Lee Hye-rin says she “befriended” the robot after they danced together.
“When I first saw the robot standing in place of our teachers greeting us at the entrance, I found it cold and disorienting,” Lee said. “But this robot is actually the same height as I am and also displays goofy dance moves, and I realized I can befriend him and share a fun time.”
But Lee feels the robot is not so friendly when it orders her to wear her mask properly.
“If I fail to follow the mask rule, my teacher’s warning will be followed with a smile telling me to behave better in the future, but the robot doesn’t smile when it warns me about the mask,” she said.
On conference stages and at campaign rallies, tech executives and politicians warn of a looming automation crisis — one where workers are gradually, then all at once, replaced by intelligent machines.But their warnings mask the fact that an automation crisis has already arrived. The robots are here, they’re working in management, and they’re grinding workers into the ground.
The robots are watching over hotel housekeepers, telling them which room to clean and tracking how quickly they do it. They’re managing software developers, monitoring their clicks and scrolls and docking their pay if they work too slowly.They’re listening to call center workers, telling them what to say, how to say it, and keeping them constantly, maximally busy. While we’ve been watching the horizon for the self-driving trucks, perpetually five years away, the robots arrived in the form of the supervisor, the foreman, the middle manager. (This is why for the past 10 years they have been making everybody write down what they do each day, and how long it takes them to complete each task…data they fed into the AI.)
These automated systems can detect inefficiencies that a human manager never would — a moment’s downtime between calls, a habit of lingering at the coffee machine after finishing a task, a new route that, if all goes perfectly, could get a few more packages delivered in a day.But for workers, what look like inefficiencies to an algorithm were their last reserves of respite and autonomy, and as these little breaks and minor freedoms get optimized out, their jobs are becoming more intense, stressful, and dangerous. Over the last several months, I’ve spoken with more than 20 workers in six countries. For many of them, their greatest fear isn’t that robots might come for their jobs: it’s that robots have already become their boss.
In few sectors are the perils of automated management more apparent than at Amazon. Almost every aspect of management at the company’s warehouses is directed by software, from when people work to how fast they work to when they get fired for falling behind. Every worker has a “rate,” a certain number of items they have to process per hour, and if they fail to meet it, they can be automatically fired.
When Jake* started working at a Florida warehouse, he was surprised by how few supervisors there were: just two or three managing a workforce of more than 300. “Management was completely automated,” he said. One supervisor would walk the floor, laptop in hand, telling workers to speed up when their rate dropped. (Amazon said its system notifies managers to talk to workers about their performance, and that all final decisions on personnel matters, including terminations, are made by (SOFTWARE/AI) supervisors.)
Jake, who asked to use a pseudonym out of fear of retribution, was a “rebinner.” His job was to take an item off a conveyor belt, press a button, place the item in whatever cubby a monitor told him to, press another button, and repeat. He likened it to doing a twisting lunge every 10 seconds, nonstop, though he was encouraged to move even faster by a giant leaderboard, featuring a cartoon sprinting man, that showed the rates of the 10 fastest workers in real time. A manager would sometimes keep up a sports announcer patter over the intercom — “In third place for the first half, we have Bob at 697 units per hour,” Jake recalled. Top performers got an Amazon currency they could redeem for Amazon Echos and company T-shirts. Low performers got fired.
“You’re not stopping,” Jake said. “You are literally not stopping. It’s like leaving your house and just running and not stopping for anything for 10 straight hours, just running.”
After several months, he felt a burning in his back. A supervisor sometimes told him to bend his knees more when lifting. When Jake did this his rate dropped, and another supervisor would tell him to speed up. “You’ve got to be kidding me. Go faster?” he recalled saying. “If I go faster, I’m going to have a heart attack and fall on the floor.” Finally, his back gave out completely. He was diagnosed with two damaged discs and had to go on disability. The rate, he said, was “100 percent” responsible for his injury. (Sounds like slavery in a Nazi workshop.)
Every Amazon worker I’ve spoken to said it’s the automatically enforced pace of work, rather than the physical difficulty of the work itself, that makes the job so grueling. Any slack is perpetually being optimized out of the system, and with it any opportunity to rest or recover. A worker on the West Coast told me about a new device that shines a spotlight on the item he’s supposed to pick, allowing Amazon to further accelerate the rate and get rid of what the worker described as “micro rests” stolen in the moment it took to look for the next item on the shelf.
People can’t sustain this level of intense work without breaking down. Last year, ProPublica,BuzzFeed, and others published investigations about Amazon delivery drivers careening into vehicles and pedestrians as they attempted to complete their demanding routes, which are algorithmically generated and monitored via an app on drivers’ phones. In November, Reveal analyzed documents from 23 Amazon warehouses and found that almost 10 percent of full-time workers sustained serious injuries in 2018, more than twice the national average for similar work. Multiple Amazon workers have told me that repetitive stress injuries are epidemic but rarely reported. (An Amazon spokesperson said the company takes worker safety seriously, has medical staff on-site, and encourages workers to report all injuries.) Backaches, knee pain, and other symptoms of constant strain are common enough for Amazon to install painkiller vending machines in its warehouses.
The unrelenting stress takes a toll of its own. Jake recalled yelling at co-workers to move faster, only to wonder what had come over him and apologize. By the end of his shift, he would be so drained that he would go straight to sleep in his car in the warehouse parking lot before making the commute home. “A lot of people did that,” he said. “They would just lay back in their car and fall asleep.” A worker in Minnesota said that the job had been algorithmically intensified to the point that it called for rethinking long-standing labor regulations. “The concept of a 40-hour work week was you work eight hours, you sleep eight hours, and you have eight hours for whatever you want to do,” he said. “But [what] if you come home from work and you just go straight to sleep and you sleep for 16 hours, or the day after your work week, the whole day you feel hungover, you can’t focus on things, you just feel like shit, you lose time outside of work because of the aftereffects of work and the stressful, strenuous conditions?”
Workers inevitably burn out, but because each task is minutely dictated by machine, they are easily replaced. Jake estimated he was hired along with 75 people, but that he was the only one remaining when his back finally gave out, and most had been turned over twice. “You’re just a number, they can replace you with anybody off the street in two seconds,” he said. “They don’t need any skills. They don’t need anything. All they have to do is work real fast.”
There are robots of the ostensibly job-stealing varietyin Amazon warehouses, but they’re not the kind that worry most workers. In 2014, Amazon started deploying shelf-carrying robots, which automated the job of walking through the warehouse to retrieve goods. The robots were so efficient that more humans were needed in other roles to keep up, Amazon built more facilities, and the company now employs almost three times the number of full-time warehouse workers it did when the robots came online. But the robots did change the nature of the work: rather than walking around the warehouse, workers stood in cages removing items from the shelves the robots brought them. Employees say it is one of the fastest-paced and most grueling roles in the warehouse. Reveal found that injuries were more common in warehouses with the robots, which makes sense because it’s the pace that’s the problem, and the machines that most concern workers are the ones that enforce it.
Last year saw a wave of worker protests at Amazon facilities. Almost all of them were sparked by automated management leaving no space for basic human needs.In California, a worker was automatically fired after she overdrew her quota of unpaid time off by a single hour following a death in her family. (She was rehired after her co-workers submitted a petition.) In Minnesota, workers walked off the job to protest the accelerating rate, which they said was causing injuries and leaving no time for bathroom breaks or religious observance. To satisfy the machine, workers felt they were forced to become machines themselves. Their chant: “We are not robots.”
Every industrial revolution is as much a story of how we organize work as it is of technological invention. Steam engines and stopwatches had been around for decades before Frederick Taylor, the original optimizer, used them to develop the modern factory. Working in a late-19th century steel mill, he simplified and standardized each role and wrote detailed instructions on notecards; he timed each task to the second and set an optimal rate. In doing so, he broke the power skilled artisans held over the pace of production and began an era of industrial growth, and also one of exhausting, repetitive, and dangerously accelerating work.
It was Henry Ford who most fully demonstrated the approach’s power when he further simplified tasks and arranged them along an assembly line. The speed of the line controlled the pace of the worker and gave supervisors an easy way to see who was lagging. Laborers absolutely hated it. The work was so mindless and grueling that people quit in droves, forcing Ford to double wages. As these methods spread, workers frequently struck or slowed down to protest “speedups” — supervisors accelerating the assembly line to untenable rates.
We are in the midst of another great speedup. There are many factors behind it, but one is the digitization of the economy and the new ways of organizing work it enables. Take retail: workers no longer stand around in stores waiting for customers; with e-commerce, their roles are split. Some work in warehouses, where they fulfill orders nonstop, and others work in call centers, where they answer question after question.In both spaces, workers are subject to intense surveillance. Their every action is tracked by warehouse scanners and call center computers, which provide the data for the automated systems that keep them working at maximum capacity.
At the most basic level, automated management starts with the schedule. Scheduling algorithms have been around since the late 1990s when stores began using them to predict customer traffic and generate shifts to match it. These systems did the same thing a business owner would do when they scheduled fewer workers for slow mornings and more for the lunchtime rush, trying to maximize salesper worker hour. The software was just better at it, and it kept improving, factoring in variables like weather or nearby sporting events, until it could forecast the need for staff in 15-minute increments.
The software is so accurate that it could be used to generate humane schedules, said Susan Lambert, a professor at the University of Chicago who studies scheduling instability. Instead, it’s often used to coordinate the minimum number of workers required to meet forecasted demand, if not slightly fewer. This isn’t even necessarily the most profitable approach, she noted, citing a study she did on the Gap: it’s just easier for companies and investors to quantify cuts to labor costs than the sales lost because customers don’t enjoy wandering around desolate stores. But if it’s bad for customers, it’s worse for workers, who must constantly race to run businesses that are perpetually understaffed.
Though they started in retail, scheduling algorithms are now ubiquitous. At the facilities where Amazon sorts goods before delivery, for example, workers are given skeleton schedules and get pinged by an app when additional hours in the warehouse become available, sometimes as little as 30 minutes before they’re needed. The result is that no one ever experiences a lull.
The emergence of cheap sensors, networks, and machine learning allowed automated management systems to take on a more detailed supervisory role — and not just in structured settings like warehouses, but wherever workers carried their devices. Gig platforms like Uber were the first to capitalize on these technologies, but delivery companies, restaurants, and other industries soon adopted their techniques.
There was no single breakthrough in automated management, but as with the stopwatch, revolutionary technology can appear mundane until it becomes the foundation for a new way of organizing work. When rate-tracking programs are tied to warehouse scanners or taxi drivers are equipped with GPS apps, it enables management at a scale and level of detail that Taylor could have only dreamed of. It would have been prohibitively expensive to employ enough managers to time each worker’s every move to a fraction of a second or ride along in every truck, but now it takes maybe one.This is why the companies that most aggressively pursue these tactics all take on a similar form: a large pool of poorly paid, easily replaced, often part-time or contract workers at the bottom; a small group of highly paid workers who design the software that manages them at the top.
This is not the industrial revolution we’ve been warned about by Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, and others in Silicon Valley. They remain fixated on the specter of job-stealing AI, which is portrayed as something both fundamentally new and extraordinarily alarming — a “buzz saw,” in the words of Andrew Yang, coming for society as we know it. As apocalyptic visions go, it’s a uniquely flattering one for the tech industry, which is in the position of warning the world about its own success, sounding the alarm that it has invented forces so powerful they will render human labor obsolete forever. But in its civilization-scale abstraction, this view misses the ways technology is changing the experience of work, and with its sense of inevitability, it undermines concern for many of the same people who find themselves managed by machines today. Why get too worked up over conditions for warehouse workers, taxi drivers, content moderators, or call center representatives when everyone says those roles will be replaced by robots in a few years? Their policy proposals are as abstract as their diagnosis, basically amounting to giving people money once the robots come for them.
Maybe the robots will someday come for the truck drivers and everyone else, though automation’s net impact on jobs so far has been less than catastrophic. Technology will undoubtedly put people out of work, as it has in the past, and it’s worth thinking about how to provide them a safety net. But one likely scenario is that those truckers will find themselves not entirely jobless but, as an analysis by the UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education suggests, riding along to help mostly autonomous vehicles navigate tricky city streets, earning lower pay in heavily monitored and newly de-skilled jobs. Or maybe they will be in call center-like offices, troubleshooting trucks remotely, their productivity tracked by an algorithm. In short, they will find themselves managed by machines, subject to forces that have been growing for years but are largely overlooked by AI fetishism.
“The robot apocalypse is here,” said Joanna Bronowicka, a researcher with the Centre for Internet and Human Rights and a former candidate for European Parliament. “It’s just that the way we’ve crafted these narratives, and unfortunately people from the left and right and people like Andrew Yang and people in Europe that talk about this topic are contributing to it, they are using a language of the future, which obscures the actual lived reality of people right now.”
This isn’t to say that the future of AI shouldn’t worry workers. In the past, for jobs to be automatically managed, they had to be broken down into tasks that could be measured by machines — the ride tracked by GPS, the item scanned in a warehouse. But machine learning is capable of parsing much less structured data, and it’s making new forms of work, from typing at a computer to conversations between people, ready for robot bosses.
Angela* worked in an insurance call center for several years before quitting in 2015. Like many call center jobs, the work was stressful: customers were often distraught, software tracked the number and length of her calls, and managers would sometimes eavesdrop on the line to evaluate how she was doing. But when she returned to the industry last year, something had changed. In addition to the usual metrics, there was a new one — emotion — and it was assessed by AI.
The software Angela encountered was from Voci, one of many companies using AI to evaluate call center workers. Angela’s other metrics were excellent, but the program consistently marked her down for negative emotions, which she found perplexing because her human managers had previously praised her empathetic manner on the phone. No one could tell her exactly why she was getting penalized, but her best guess was that the AI was interpreting her fast-paced and loud speaking style, periods of silence (a result of trying to meet a metric meant to minimize putting people on hold), and expressions of concern as negative.
“It makes me wonder if it’s privileging fake empathy, sounding really chipper and being like, ‘Oh, I’m sorry you’re dealing with that,’” said Angela, who asked to use a pseudonym out of fear of retribution. “Feeling like the only appropriate way to display emotion is the way that the computer says, it feels very limiting. It also seems to not be the best experience for the customer, because if they wanted to talk to a computer, then they would have stayed with IVR [Interactive Voice Response].”
A Voci spokesperson said the company trained its machine learning program on thousands of hours of audio that crowdsourced workers labeled as demonstrating positive or negative emotions. He acknowledged that these assessments are subjective,but said that in the aggregate they should control for variables like tone and accent. Ultimately, the spokesperson said Voci provides an analysis tool and call centers decide how to use the data it provides.
Angela’s troubles with Voci made her apprehensive about the next round of automation. Her call center was in the process of implementing software from Clarabridge that would automate parts of call evaluations still done by humans, like whether agents said the proper phrases. Her center also planned to expand its use of Cogito, which uses AI to coach workers in real time, telling them to speak more slowly or with more energy or to express empathy.
When people list jobs slated for automation, call center workers come just after truck drivers. Their jobs are repetitive, and machine learning has enabled rapid progress in speech recognition. But machine learning struggles with highly specific and unique tasks, and often people just want to talk to a human, so it’s the managerial jobs that are getting automated.Google, Amazon, and a plethora of smaller companies have announced AI systems that listen to calls and coach workers or automatically assess their performance. The company CallMiner, for example, advertises AI that rates workers’ professionalism, politeness, and empathy — which, in a demo video, it shows being measured to a fraction of a percent.
Workers say these systems are often clumsy judges of human interaction.One worker claimed they could meet their empathy metrics just by saying “sorry” a lot. Another worker at an insurance call center said that Cogito’s AI, which is supposed to tell her to express empathy when it detects a caller’s emotional distress, seemed to be triggered by tonal variation of any kind, even laughter. Her co-worker had a call pulled for review by supervisors because Cogito’s empathy alarm kept going off, but when they listened to the recording, it turned out the caller had been laughing with joy over the birth of a child.The worker, however, was busy filling out forms and only paying half-attention to the conversation, so she kept obeying the AI and saying “I’m sorry,” much to the caller’s confusion.
Cogito said its system is “highly accurate and does not frequently give false positives,” but when it does, because it augments rather than replaces humans, call center agents have the ability to use their own judgment to adapt to the situation.
As these systems spread it will be important to assess them for accuracy and bias, but they also pose a more basic question: why are so many companies trying to automate empathy to begin with? The answer has to do with the way automation itself has made work more intense.
In the past, workers might have handled a complex or emotionally fraught call mixed in with a bunch of simple, “I forgot my password” type calls, but bots now handle the easy ones. “We don’t have the easy calls to give them the mental refresh that we used to be able to give them,” said Ian Jacobs of research company Forrester. Automated systems also collect customer information and help fill out forms, which would make the job easier, except that any downtime is tracked and filled with more calls.
The worker who used Cogito, for instance, had only a minute to fill out insurance forms between calls and only 30 minutes per month for bathroom breaks and personal time,so she handled call after call from people dealing with terminal illnesses, dying relatives, miscarriages, and other traumatic events, each of which she was supposed to complete in fewer than 12 minutes, for 10 hours a day. “It makes you feel numb,” she said. Other workers spoke of chronic anxiety and insomnia, the result of days spent having emotionally raw conversations while, in the words of one worker, “your computer is standing over your shoulder and arbitrarily deciding whether you get to keep your job or not.” This form of burnout has become so common the industry has a name for it: “empathy fatigue.” Cogito, in an ebook explaining the reason for its AI, likens call center workers to trauma nurses desensitized over the course of their shift, noting that the quality of representatives’ work declines after 25 calls. The solution, the company writes, is to use AI to deliver “empathy at scale.”
It’s become conventional wisdom that interpersonal skills like empathy will be one of the roles left to humans once the robots take over, and this is often treated as an optimistic future. But call centers show how it could easily become a dark one: automation increasing the empathy demanded of workers and automated systems used to wring more empathy from them, or at least a machine-readable approximation of it. Angela, the worker struggling with Voci, worried that as AI is used to counteract the effects of dehumanizing work conditions, her work will become more dehumanizing still.
“Nobody likes calling a call center,” she said. “The fact that I can put the human touch in there, and put my own style on it and build a relationship with them and make them feel like they’re cared about is the good part of my job. It’s what gives me meaning,” she said. “But if you automate everything, you lose the flexibility to have a human connection.” (THEY WANT TO DEHUMANIZE US. That is what TRANSHUMANISM is all about. Merging with machines. THE END OF HUMANITY!)
Mak Rony was working as a software engineer in Dhaka, Bangladesh, when he saw a Facebook ad for an Austin-based company called Crossover Technologies. Rony liked his current job, but the Crossover role seemed like a step up: the pay was better — $15 an hour — and the ad said he could work whenever he wanted and do it from home.
On his first day, he was told to download a program called WorkSmart. In a video, Crossover CEO Andy Tryba describes the program as a “FitBit for work.” The modern worker is constantly interacting with cloud apps, he says, and that produces huge quantities of information about how they’re spending their time — information that’s mostly thrown away. That data should be used to enhance productivity, he says.Citing Cal Newport’s popular book Deep Work, about the perils of distraction and multitasking, he says the software will enable workers to reach new levels of intense focus. Tryba displays a series of charts, like a defragmenting hard drive, showing a worker’s day going from scattered distraction to solid blocks of uninterrupted productivity.
WorkSmart did, in fact, transform Rony’s day into solid blocks of productivity because if it ever determined he wasn’t working hard enough, he didn’t get paid. The software tracked his keystrokes, mouse clicks, and the applications he was running, all to rate his productivity.He was also required to give the program access to his webcam.Every 10 minutes, the program would take three photos at random to ensure he was at his desk.If Rony wasn’t there when WorkSmart took a photo, or if it determined his work fell below a certain threshold of productivity, he wouldn’t get paid for that 10-minute interval. Another person who started with Rony refused to give the software webcam access and lost his job.
Rony soon realized that though he was working from home, his old office job had offered more freedom. There, he could step out for lunch or take a break between tasks. With Crossover, even using the bathroom in his own home required speed and strategy: he started watching for the green light of his webcam to blink before dashing down the hall to the bathroom,hoping he could finish in time before WorkSmart snapped another picture.
The metrics he was held to were extraordinarily demanding: about 35,000 lines of code per week. He eventually figured out he was expected to make somewhere around 150 keystrokes every 10 minutes, so if he paused to think and stopped typing, a 10-minute chunk of his time card would be marked “idle.”Each week, if he didn’t work 40 hours the program deemed productive, he could be fired, so he estimated he worked an extra 10 hours a week without pay to make up the time that the software invalidated. Four other current and former Crossover workers — one in Latvia, one in Poland, one in India, and another in Bangladesh — said they had to do the same.
“The first thing you’re going to lose is your social life,” Rony said. He stopped seeing friends because he was tethered to his computer, racing to meet his metrics. “I usually did not go outside often.”
As the months went on, the stress began to take a toll. He couldn’t sleep. He couldn’t listen to music while he worked because the software saw YouTube as unproductive and would dock his pay.Ironically, his work began to suffer. “If you have freedom, actual real freedom, then I can take most pressure, if needed,” he said. But working under such intense pressure day after day, he burned out and his productivity dissolved.
Tryba said the company is a platform that provides skilled workers to businesses, as well as the tools to manage them; it’s up to the businesses to decide whether and how those tools are used. He said people shouldn’t have to work additional hours without pay, and that if WorkSmart marks a timecard as idle, workers can appeal to their manager to override it. If workers need a break, he said they can hit pause and clock out. Asked why such intense monitoring was necessary, he said remote work was the future and will give workers greater flexibility, but that employers will need a way to hold workers accountable. Furthermore, the data collected will create new opportunities to coach workers on how to be more productive.
Crossover is far from the only company that has sensed an opportunity for optimization in the streams of data produced by digital workers. Microsoft has its Workplace Analytics software, which uses the “digital exhaust” produced by employees using the company’s programs to improve productivity. The field of workforce analytics is full of companies that monitor desktop activity and promise to detect idle time and reduce head count, and the optimization gets sharper-edged and more focused on individual workers the further down the income ladder you go. Staff.com’s Time Doctor, popular with outsourcing companies, monitors productivity in real time, prompts workers to stay on task if it detects they’ve become distracted or idle, and takes Crossover-style screenshots and webcam photos.
Sam Lessin, a former Facebook VP who co-founded the company Fin, describes a plausible vision for where all this is headed. Fin started as a personal assistant app before pivoting to the software it used to monitor and manage the workers who made the assistant run. (A worker described her experience handling assistant requests as being like a call center but with heavier surveillance and tracking of idle time.) Knowledge work currently languishes in a preindustrial state, Lessin wrote in a letter at the time of the pivot, with employees often sitting idle in offices, their labor unmeasured and inefficient. The hoped-for productivity explosion from AI won’t come from replacing these workers, Lessin wrote, but from using AI to measure and optimize their productivity, just as Frederick Taylor did with factory workers. Except this will be a “cloud factory,” an AI-organized pool of knowledge workers that businesses can tap into whenever they need it, much like renting computing power from Amazon Web Services.
“The Industrial Revolution, at least in the short term, was obviously not good for workers,” Lessin acknowledged in the letter. The cloud factory will bring a wave of globalization and de-skilling. While highly measured and optimized workplaces are meritocratic, he said, meritocracy can be carried to an extreme, citing the movie Gattaca. Ultimately, these risks are outweighed by the fact that people can specialize in what they’re best at, will have to work less, and will be able to do so more flexibly.
For Rony, Crossover’s promise of flexibility proved to be an illusion. After a year, the surveillance and unrelenting pressure became too much, and he quit. “I was thinking that I lost everything,” he said. He’d given up his stable office job, lost touch with friends, and now he was worrying whether he could pay his bills. But after three months, he found another job, one in an old-fashioned office. The wage was worse, but he was happier. He had a manager who helped him when he got stuck. He had lunch breaks, rest breaks, and tea breaks. “Whenever I can go out and have some tea, fun, and head to the office, there is a place I can even sleep. There’s a lot of freedom.”
Work has always meant giving up some degree of freedom. When workers take a job, they might agree to let their boss tell them how to act, how to dress, or where to be at a certain time, and this is all viewed as normal. Employers function as what philosopher Elizabeth Anderson critiques as private governments, and people accept them exercising power in ways that would seem oppressive coming from a state because, the reasoning goes, workers are always free to quit. Workers also grant their employers wide latitude to surveil them, and that’s also seen as basically fine, eliciting concern mostly in cases where employers reach into workers’ private lives.
Automated management promises to change that calculus. While an employer might have always had the right to monitor your desktop throughout the day, it probably wouldn’t have been a good use of their time.Now such surveillance is not only easy to automate, it’s necessary to gather the data needed to optimize work. The logic can appear irresistible to a company trying to drive down costs, especially if they have a workforce large enough for marginal improvements in productivity to pay off.
But workers who tolerated the abstract threat of surveillance find it far more troubling when that data is used to dictate their every move.An Amazon worker in the Midwest described a bleak vision of the future. “We could have algorithms connected to technology that’s directly on our bodies controlling how we work,” he said. “Right now, the algorithm is telling a manager to yell at us.In the future, the algorithm could be telling a shock collar—” I laughed, and he quickly said he was only partly joking. After all, Amazon has patented tracking wristbands that vibrate to direct workers, and Walmart is testing harnesses that monitor the motions of its warehouse staff. Couldn’t you imagine a future where you have the freedom to choose between starving or taking a job in a warehouse, the worker said, and you sign a contract agreeing to wear something like that, and it zaps you when you work too slowly, and it’s all in the name of making you more efficient?“I think that’s a direction it can head, if more people aren’t more conscious, and there isn’t more organization around what’s actually happening to us as workers, and how society is being transformed by this technology,” he said. “Those are the things that keep me up at night, and that I think about when I’m in the warehouse now.”
That worker placed his hopes in unions, and in the burgeoning activism taking place in Amazon warehouses. There’s precedent for this. Workers responded to the acceleration of the last industrial revolution by organizing, and the pace of work became a standard part of union contracts.
The pace of work is only one form of the larger question these technologies will force us to confront: what is the right balance between efficiency and human autonomy?We have unprecedented power to monitor and optimize the conduct of workers in minute detail.Is a marginal increase in productivity worth making innumerable people chronically stressed and constrained to the point they feel like robots? (That is what they do in China. And even worse. So, in the minds of these greedy, possessed, narcissists they feel justified. After all we are only worthless eaters.)
You could imagine a version of these systems that collects workplace data, but it’s anonymized and aggregated and only used to improve workflows and processes. Such a system would reap some of the efficiencies that make these systems appealing while avoiding the individualized micromanagement workers find galling. Of course, that would mean forgoing potentially valuable data. It would require recognizing that there is sometimes value in not gathering data at all, as a means of preserving space for human autonomy.
The profound difference even a small degree of freedom from optimization can make was driven home when I was talking with a worker who recently quit a Staten Island Amazon warehouse to take a job loading and unloading delivery trucks. He had scanners and metrics there, too, but they only measured whether his team was on track for the day, leaving the workers to figure out their roles and pace. “This is like heaven,” he told his co-workers.
Long the prediction of futurists and philosophers, the lived reality of technology replacing human work has been a constant feature since the cotton gin, the assembly line and, more recently, the computer.
What is very much up for debate in the imaginations of economists and Hollywood producers is whether the future will look like “The Terminator,” with self-aware Schwarzenegger bots on the hunt, or “The Jetsons,” with obedient robo-maids leaving us humans very little work and plenty of time for leisure and family.
The most chilling future in film may be that in Disney’s “Wall-E,” where people are all too fat to stand, too busy staring at screens to talk to each other and too distracted to realize that the machines have taken over.
We’re deep into what-ifs with those representations, but the conversation about robots and work is increasingly paired with the debate over how to address growing income inequality — a key issue in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary.
The workplace is changing. How should Americans deal with it?
There’s no simple answer,” said Stuart Russell, a computer scientist at UC Berkeley, an adjunct professor of neurological surgery at UC San Francisco and the author of a forthcoming book, “Human Compatible: Artificial Intelligence and the Problem of Control.” “But in the long run nearly all current jobs will go away, so we need fairly radical policy changes to prepare for a very different future economy. “
In his book, Russell writes, “One rapidly emerging picture is that of an economy where far fewer people work because work is unnecessary.”
That’s either a very frightening or a tantalizing prospect, depending very much on whether and how much you (and/or society) think people ought to have to work and how society is going to put a price on human labor. (Just how does anyone think that humans can live without work? If they are not earning a paycheck, they have to be able to work the land… or die. Do you really think that the government/the elite/the AI Darklords will just give you everything for NOTHING?)
“And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; 18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; 19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread,till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.” Genesis 3:17-19
“9 Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us. 10 For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. 11 For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies.” 2 Thessalonians 3:9-11
There will be less work in manufacturing, less work in call centers, less work driving trucks, and more work in health care and home care and construction. (SO, do you see that EVERY INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION, everything that man calls progress has not been to help humans or make our lives easier. It has all been about destroying everything that is GOD’s. Look at your life. In recent history humans have worked longer hours, more days of the week, had more work related stress, spent less time with their families, had less energy to use for their own pursuits, no time to study the Word of God, and been troubled with more illnesses of the body and mind, than we ever were when we society was based on agriculture. Sure there was more physical labor involved in agriculture… but physical labor is necessary for good health. So now we spend what little discretionary time we have trying to find physical labor in exercise; going to the gym, dancing, riding bikes…and worst of all YOGA. YOGA is a demonic activity that will close you off from God faster than you can spit. NOW, now that they have humans dependent on their definition of work, and dependent on their supply of food and clothing, now they are pulling your jobs out from under you, leaving you completely without support.)
MIT Technology Review tried to track all the different reports on the effect that automationwill have on the workforce. There are a lot of them. And they suggest anywhere from moderate displacement to a total workforce overhaul with varying degrees of alarm. (DON’T KID YOURSELF, THEY KNEW EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE DOING. Do you think this robot take over happened accidentally? DO you not realize that this has been in the making for at least a century…maybe longer? Do you not realize that they already have armies of robots stored up and waiting? WAKE UP! Many of us have been trying to show you and tell you all this wa coming for years. You would not listen, you laughed at us. You call us Conspiracy Theorists, because that is what you have been TRAINED to think. That response has been planted in your head over and over. If you have ever had an abuser in your life, you know that their response when someone exposes them is to DENY, DENY, DENY. They will go to their grave denying any truth. That is what these elite do when they are exposed. AND YOU BOUGHT IT! Now, what we have been warning you about IS HERE! What are you going to do? Hide your head in the sand and hope it goes away? IT is not going away folks. It is going to get much worse. Infact it is going to become your worst NIGHTMARE!)
One of the reports, by the McKinsey Global Institute, includes a review of how susceptible to automation different jobs might be and finds that hundreds of millions of people worldwide will have to find new jobs or learn new skills. (Just how are you going to make up new industry? Especially when robots will always be able to learn anything you can learn and do it faster, without needing to be paid, or fed, or take breaks to sleep.) Learning new skills can be more difficult than it sounds, as CNN has found at carplants, such as the one that closed in Lordstown, Ohio. (ARTS, SCIENCE, METALWORKING, MINING, COSMETICS, etc.. WERE ALL TAUGHT TO MAN BY THE FALLEN ANGELS! God designed man to eat from the earth, and the work was to be obtaining food from the ground and from the animals. That was also where man got their clothing. AND IT WAS GOOD. BUT, now, the elite have claimed ownership of ALL the LAND. You are left with NOTHING. No way to meet your needs. YOU are completely dependent on the ENEMY of your soul! BUT GOD! GOD is the only TRUE provider. Whether you know it or not. Every good and perfect gift comes from HIM. TURN BACK TO GOD before it is TOO LATE!)
After 52 years, Lordstown must face life after GM 02:27
More robots means more inequality
Almost everyone who has thought seriously about this has said that more automation is likely to lead to more inequality.
It is indisputable that businesses have gotten more and more productive but workers’ wages have not kept pace. (So, you see, that even when they were dependent on your labor, they did not pay you what you were worth. They kept paying less and less and charging you more for the goods made by the hands of the laborers.)
“Our analysis shows that most job growth in the United States and other advanced economies will be in occupations currently at the high end of the wage distribution,” according to McKinsey. “Some occupations that are currently low wage, such as nursing assistants and teaching assistants, will also increase, while a wide range of middle-income occupations will have the largest employment declines.” (They are going to replace EVERYONE with robots. They already have robot SURGEONS! Are you kidding? The AI is running the military! RUNNING IT… GIVING THE ORDERS! What job do you imagine is immune? They are already telling you, that Computers have become MORE INTELLIGENT than humans. They are stronger, faster, nearly indestructible and can already build their own computers! Welcome to “TERMINATOR 2020“)
“The likely challenge for the future lies in coping with rising inequality and ensuring sufficient (re-)training especially for low qualified workers,” according to a report from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (So, ask yourself, where is the benefit in all of this? It is for the benefit of the ones who ALREADY OWN EVERYTHING… they want more. They want to kill you and KEEP EVERYTHING FOR THEMSELVES.
“20 Hell and destruction are never full; so the eyes of man are never satisfied.” Proverbs 27:20
One Democratic presidential candidate — Andrew Yang, the insurgent non politician — has built his campaign around solving this problem. Yang blames the automation of jobs more than outsourcing to China for the decline of American manufacturingand draws a direct line between that shrinking manufacturing sector and the rise of Donald Trump.
“We need to wake people up,” Yang recently told The Atlantic. “This is the reality of why Donald Trump is our President today, because we already blasted away millions of American jobs and people feel like they have lost a path forward.”
If automation takes the jobs, should all people get a government paycheck?
First off… who do you think IS the Government?? We the people. Our tax dollars is where the “Government get the money.” SO, if we the people are not working, where does the money to pay every single person come from? Do you think the elite are going to want to pay worthless eaters?
Yang’s answer to the problem is to give everyone in the US, regardless of need, (so the wealthy get a check just the same as those who are impoverished?) an income — he calls it a “freedom dividend” (FREEDOM DIVIDEND?? What an insult. There is no freedom. You cannot own anything, you cannot buy anything without their approval, you cannot travel, you cannot even THINK freely in a society governed by AI…WHAT FREEDOM!)-– of $1,000 per month. ($1,000 a month. That is poverty level or less.)It would address inequality (in whose mind?),both economic and racial (just how is that?), he argues, and let people pursue work that adds value to the community. (you mean, volunteer?)
It’s not a new idea. Congress and President Richard Nixon nearly passed just such a proposal in the early 1970s as part of the war on poverty. But now, after decades of the GOP distancing itself from social programs, the idea of a universal basic income seems about as sci-fi as the new “Terminator” movie(yes, they’re making another one) that’s coming out this year.
“Ninety-four percent of the new jobs created in the US are gig, temporary or contractor jobs at this point, and we still just pretend it’s the ’70s, where it’s like, ‘You’re going to work for a company, you’re going to get benefits, you’re going to be able to retire, even though we’ve totally eviscerated any retirement benefits, but somehow you’re going to retire, it’s going to work out,’ (You know, I was working for AMWAY back in the late 70’s and at a meeting they told us that very soon 90% of the population would be in JAIL and almost all the jobs would be independent/work from home jobs. Now how did they know that? Back in the 70’s?) ” Yang said in that Atlantic interview. “Young people look up at this and be like, ‘This does not seem to work.’ And we’re like, ‘Oh, it’s all right.’ It’s not all right. We do have to grow up.”
He specifically points to truck driving as a profession that is key to the US economy today but could and may be fully automated in the very near future. Automating trucking will help the environment, save money and help productivity, he says. But it won’t help truck drivers.
On the other hand, truck driving, while honorable work, might not be many people’s life’s ambition. In this way, robots would be taking jobs that humans might not want unless they had to do them, which they currently do. (That is a line they are always using to justify the changes they want to implement. I don’t know any truck drivers that are doing it because they HAVE TO. The truck drivers I know were in it because it was a lucrative way to make a living and it allowed them some semblance of freedom. Of course that has changed. For years now they have been changing all the jobs that were once lucrative, like selling insurance. They started making those jobs telemarketing jobs, much less commission and no freedom to build your own clientele. Now, I am sure robots will be doing that, too.)
“When you accept these circumstances, that we’re going to be competing against technologies that have a marginal cost of near zero, then quickly you have to say OK, then, how are we going to start valuing our time? What does a 21st century economy look like in a way that serves our interests and not the capital efficiency machine?” he says. And that’s how he, and a lot of liberal economists and capitalists like Elon Musk, arrive at the idea of a basic income. (and income in exchange for what?)
“I don’t think we have the time to remake the workforce in that way,” he said. “We should start distributing value directly to Americans.” (Since the have been planning this for years, why do we not see a PLAN for the next stage of human labor? Why? Because they don’t want there to be any. That is why they are constantly finding ways to kill us. Why the are murdering our unborn. Why they are taking reproduction out of the picture. Why they are making sex, just an exercise in physical pleasure with anything and/or anyone. Why the gender confusion. Why the food shortage, which is manmade. Why? Because they want a POST HUMAN WORLD! For heaven’s sake they come right out and say so! WAKE UP!)
Creating a population that can subsist on a basic income, without work, would end up reshaping how society works altogether.
“For some, UBI represents a version of paradise. For others, it represents an admission of failure — an assertion that most people will have nothing of economic value to contribute to society,” writes Russell. “They can be fed and housed — mostly by machines — but otherwise left to their own devices.”
Yang is focused more on the immediate threat he says automation poses to American jobs.And politicians aren’t talking about it honestly because they are too focused on being optimistic.
“You’re a politician, your incentives are to say we can do this, we can do that, we can do the other thing and then meanwhile society falls apart.“
What to do with our time?
Not everyone thinks society would fall apart, and there’s actually been a lot of serious concern about what people will do when productivity increases to a point where they don’t have to work as much. (Well that is a lovely sentiment. But, we are not talking about not working as much… WE ARE TALKING ABOUT NO WORK AT ALL!)
In an important paper in 1930, the economist John Maynard Keynes wrote that humans would have to grapple with their leisure in the generations to come. (The Economist is an elite publication and they are putting out propaganda to make you feel good about the enslavement they are bringing down on you.)
“To those who sweat for their daily bread leisure is a longed-for sweet — until they get it,” he wrote, later adding that “man will be faced with his real, his permanent problem — how to use his freedom(what is coming is so far from freedom this is insulting)from pressing economic cares, how to occupy the leisure (leisurely starving to death.), which science and compound interest will have won for him (that is hilarious! I can’t even dignify that with a response.), to live wisely and agreeably and well.” (what kind of fairytale are they selling?)
Rather than grappling with the problem of leisure, automation can often lead to unforeseen problems.The cotton gin made it so slaves in the American South did not have to remove seeds from cotton, but it also led to an explosion of slavery as cotton became more easily produced.
And while it makes life easier on individual workers, managing the transition from one type of economy to the next (farmer to manufacturer, to information specialist and now beyond) has been a key long-term reality for the American worker.
Is the pace of change different this time?
No one has thought more about this than labor unions. AFL-CIO Secretary-Treasurer Liz Shuler agrees with Yang that automation is one of the biggest challenges we’re facing as a country and it’s not getting the attention it deserves. But she’s not yet worried about dystopia.
“The scare tactics are a little extreme,” she said in an interview, arguing that reports of tens of millions of American jobs lost by 2030 are probably overstated. (They are actually understated. Especially considering the changes we have already seen brought about by this COVID 19)
“Every time a technological shift has taken place in this country there have been those doomsday scenarios,” she said in an interview. (We would have done well to have listened to those warnings. Now, we are coming to the fruition of those efforts to eliminate humans.)
Reuther’s testimony is really interesting to read, by the way. Check it out. “The revolutionary change produced by automation is its tendency to displace the worker entirely from the direct operation of the machine,” he said. He argued that unions weren’t opposed to automation but that they wanted more help from companies and from the government for workers dealing with a changing workplace.
“What ended up happening is what they call bargained acquiescence,” said Shuler, “where the unions went to the table and said ‘OK, we get it, this technology is coming, but how are we going to manage the change? How are we going to have a worker voice at the table? How are we going to make sure that working people benefit from this and the company is able to be more efficient and successful?’ “
Yang counters that argument by noting that automation has sped up, making it harder for workers, employers and the government to adjust. “Unlike with previous waves of automation, this time new jobs will not appear quickly enough in large enough numbers to make up for it,” he said on his website.
Somewhere in the middle is where we’ll end up
Shuler said American workers need to have the conversation about the future of work more urgently today.
“We all have a choice to make,” she said. “Do we want technology to benefit working people, and our country, as a result, does better? Or do we want to follow a path of this dark, dystopian view that work is going to go away and people are going to have nothing to do and we’re just going to be essentially working at the whims of a bunch of robots?” (Sadly, the truth is, we don’t have a choice. They are forcing this change upon us and they already have the upper hand. They have known about this for a long time. They have no intentions of transitioning us into new work. They know what they want. They know who will be needed and who will not. They will eliminate those who are unnecessary. The rest WILL BE SLAVES TO THE AI or they will be MERGED INTO THE MACHINE.)
Somewhere in the middle, she argued, is where we’ll end up.
“We’re going to work alongside technology as it evolves. New work is going to emerge. We want to make sure working people can transition fairly and justly and responsibly and we can only do that if working people have a seat at the table.” (Well, she sounds so sure of herself. What does she base that assumption on? There is no table. The elite have made their deal with the devil. AI is the new GOD. There are a lot of people who KNEW this was coming. It did not happen in a vacuum. Obviously, we were not invited to the table. We were not even deemed worthy of being advised it was coming.)
The long-term future
Shuler has an interest in workers and their rights today, but Russell writes that long-term, as automation of work becomes more tangible, the country will have to change its entire outlook on work and what we teach children and people to strive for. (well, we already see what they are teaching our children. They have been so dumbed down they can’t even think. They are being taught how to have sex with adults and with each other. They are seen as nothing but dispensable entertainment for the elite. Why? because millions of them are about to die.)
“We need a radical rethinking of our educational system and our scientific enterprise to focus more attention on the human rather than the physical world,” he writes. “It sounds odd to say that happiness should be an engineering discipline, but that seems to be the inevitable conclusion. “
In other words: We will have to figure out how to be happy with the robots and the automation, because they are coming. (and there you go… forced upon us. We have NO SAY. and they want to TEACH our children to be HAPPY with ROBOTS as an Engineering discipline.)
There is a world of difference between the scientific method and what we see today known was Modern Science. I could talk all day on that subject. But, there is no room here. So, I believe that you can see a clear demonstration on what “Science” has become. We like to call it “Scientism”. It is a fanatically religious belief in ALCHEMY. Listen to this idiot. I pray that God gives you ears to hear and eyes to see.
Michio Kaku is a Japanese American theoretical physicist, futurist, and popularizer of science. He is the professor of theoretical physics at the City College of New York and CUNY Graduate Center. Kaku has written several books about physics and related topics, has made frequent appearances on radio, television, and film, and writes online blogs and articles. He has written three New York Times bestsellers: Physics of the Impossible (2008), Physics of the Future (2011), and The Future of the Mind (2014). Kaku has hosted several TV specials for the BBC, the Discovery Channel, the History Channel, and the Science Channel.
THIS GUY is their SPOKESPERSON. Him and Neil deGrasse Tyson are two of the so called experts that they put in front of the public. I think both of them are wacked! If you are able, please watch the video above. You have to hear watch him and hear him present his theory… BIZARRE!
A type 1 Civilization: has harnessed it’s planetary power. They control earthquakes, the WEATHER,volcanoes. They have cities on the ocean. Anything Planetary, they control. Buck Rogers would correspond to a type 1 Planetary civilization.
A type 2 Civilization: Is Stellar. They have exhausted the power of the planet and they get their energy directly from their MOTHER star. They don’t just want to get a suntan on a weekend. They use solar flares. They use the power of the Sun itself to energize their HUGE MACHINES. Eventually they exhaust the power of a star and they go Galactic. They harness the power of BILLIONS of stars within a galaxy. Star Trek and the Federation of Planets who colonize the peace star systems would correspond to a type 2 Stellar civilization.
A Type 3 Civilization: The Empire of Star Wars would correspond to a Type 3 Civilization.
We are TYPE 0. We don’t even rate on the scale. We get our energy, not from stars or galaxies, we get our energy from dead plants, oil and coal. But, we can calculate when we will obtain Type 1 status. In about 100 years. But, evidence is in the news today that we are transitioning from Type 0 to Type 1. The evidence of an emerging Type 1 society: THE EU (European Union); The ELITE all speak English, which will be the Type 1 Language; there will be a Type 1 culture rock n roll and blue jeans; The Internet is the beginning of a Type 1 Telephone System. This transition is the most important transition of all time. Some people don’t want it, they FEAR IT because this transition is a planetary transition, tolerant of many cultures. THESE ARE THE TERRORISTS. In their guts they fear it, because they know that they are witnessing the birth pangs of a new planetary civilization and the TERRORISTS want nothing to do with it. (So, this spaced out believer in “scientism” sees anyone who is not behind the “Transition” to the NEW WORLD ORDER as a Terrorist.)
He admits that the scientists who have been busting their nuts trying to find evidence of life in space, they find NO evidence of a Type 1 or Type 2 or Type 3 Civilization in the Universe. No evidence WHATSOEVER! The mathematics say that there should be thousands of Type 1; 2 and 3 civilizations in the Galaxy. BUT we see NO EVIDENCE OF ANY WHATSOEVER! He says we are in a race against time to see if we can make the transition from Type 0 to Type 1. But, if we can make it to Type 2, we will be immortal. Nothing can destroy a Type 2 Civilization. Not even a SuperNova, cause a Type 2 Civilization will either move their whole planet or else they will stop the nuclear fires from exploding. And by the time a Civilization becomes galactic they may control the fate of the Galaxy itself . These crazy fanatics are so dedicated to their religion of scientism that they just cannot face the truth. They have not found any signs of life out there because THERE ISN’T ANY! GOD created the EARTH and placed humans here. There is no life out there. THERE IS NO OUTER SPACE. But, that is a whole nother article. My point here is, they will not accept the truth. They want you to except their lies. And all they have to work with… is fairy tales. Space Fantasy. They keep feeding you the image they created in your consciousness of SPACE TRAVEL.
EVEN SCIENTISTS HAVE WARNED US THAT SCIENCE IS OUT OF CONTROL AND WILLING TO RISK DESTROYING THE EARTH:
General Rolf Heuer, general director of CERN,says CERN will “open the door” from our physical universe to non-physical universes, which will allow human scientists to interact face-to-face with non-physical beings.Sergio Bertolucci, director for research and scientific computing at CERN, said there are parallel universes and parallel dimensions of non-physical intelligent beings located everywhere around us, and CERN will allow these non-Earth entities to come into our physical world and be with us.
In this way, CERN is being used as a stargate so that human scientists will be able to go to and from currently unknown, perhaps very hostile, non-physical worlds and dimensions located and currently unseen, outside our physical universe. Source: We Should be Very Scared about CERN
“One particularly interesting possibility is that these long-lived dark particles are coupled to the Higgs boson in some fashion—that the Higgs is actually a portal to the dark world,” said LianTao Wang, a University of Chicago physicist, referring to the last holdout particle in physicists’ grand theory of how the universe works, discovered at the LHC in 2012. “We know for sure there’s a dark world, and there’s more energy in it than there is in ours. It’s possible that the Higgs could actually decay into these long-lived particles.” Source: “The Last Holdout” –LHC Scientists Seek Portal to the ‘Dark-World’
“Maybe a black hole could form, and then suck in everything around it,” writes Rees. “The second scary possibility is that the quarks would reassemble themselves into compressed objects called strangelets. That in itself would be harmless. However under some hypotheses a strangelet could, by contagion, convert anything else it encounters into a new form of matter, transforming the entire earth in a hyperdense sphere about one hundred meters across.”
One hundred meters is roughly the size of an American football field.That’s the entire Earth, condensed into that tiny space.
To understand how this might be possible, consider that particle accelerators are large, high-energy structures that use electromagnetic fields to propel charged particles to nearly light speed. Typically, once the particles reach these incredible speeds, they are set to collide with one another. This causes the particles to blow up into their constituent parts so we can learn more about the fundamental particles that make up our universe. The most powerful particle accelerator is the Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland. It’s also the largest machine in the world. Experiments like these, using such powerful machines, can produce unpredictable outcomes by their very design. Source: astronomer Martin Rees
The Large Hadron Collider (LHC), the world’s biggest scientific instrument, is also the planet’s most powerful particle accelerator. And that makes it a potential danger not just to itself or its immediate surroundings in Switzerland, but to Earth and maybe even our reality itself.
This warning comes not from an incorrigible luddite but the influential British astrophysicist Lord Martin Rees, who sees three ways in which the collider could cause a disaster of cosmic proportions.
1. A BLACK HOLE SUCKS US IN
For one, cautions Rees in his new book On The Future: Prospects for Humanity,it’s possible for the experiments conducted at the LHC to form a black hole which would “suck in everything around it“.
2. EARTH GETS SHRUNK
And if apocalypse by way of black holes doesn’t come to pass, it’s also conceivable that Earth could get compressed into a “hyperdense sphere about one hundred metres across,” as writes Lord Rees, the Emeritus Professor of Cosmology and Astrophysics at the University of Cambridge.
That could happen due to the subatomic quarks generated by the Large Hadron Collider, which smashes particles against each other at super-high speeds to study the fallout. The quarks could reassemble themselves into appropriately named (and currently hypothetical) particles called strangelets, which, in turn, could transform everything in their way into a new highly-compressed form of matter. So Earth would become no larger than a football field.
3. SPACETIME GETS RIPPED
There is, unfortunately, a third way towards unimaginable disaster courtesy of the LHC and other particle accelerators like the new one being built in Chinawhich would be twice as large and 7 times as powerful as CERN’s. Martin Rees thinks that there’s a chance the colliders could cause a “catastrophe that engulfs space itself”. That’s certainly nothing to take lightly.
Musk says this guy could be the least of our fears.Video screenshot of “Far Cry 3” by CNET Australia
Elon Musk, a chief advocate of cars smart enough to park and drive themselves, continues to escalate his spooky speech when it comes to the next level of computation — the malicious potential of artificial intelligence continues to freak him out.
“With artificial intelligence, we are summoning the demon,” Musk said last week at the MIT Aeronautics and Astronautics Department’s 2014 Centennial Symposium. “You know all those stories where there’s the guy with the pentagram and the holy water and he’s like... yeah, he’s sure he can control the demon, [but] it doesn’t work out.”
This has become a recurring theme in Musk’s public comments, and each time he warns of the AI bogeyman it seems even more dire.
In June, Musk raised the specter of the ” Terminator” franchise, saying that he invests in companies working on artificial intelligence just to be able to keep an eye on the technology. InAugust,he reiterated his concerns in a tweet, writing that AI is “potentially more dangerous than nukes.”Just a few weeks ago, Musk half-joked on a different stage that a future AI system tasked with eliminating spam might decide that the best way to accomplish this task is to eliminate humans.
But this is the first time I’m aware of that Musk has kicked up the rhetoric another notch — perhaps anticipating this week’s onslaught of Halloween costumes — to compare AI to something supernatural like demons.
How to deal with the demonic forces of AI in the future? In a strange move for a tech mogul, Musk suggests it might be a good idea to fight one bogeyman with another (depending on your political perspective) in the form of government regulators.
“If I were to guess at what our biggest existential threat is, it’s probably that,” he said, referring to artificial intelligence. “I’m increasingly inclined to think there should be some regulatory oversight, maybe at the national and international level just to make sure that we don’t do something very foolish.”
Indeed. Who knows what demonic hellscape could emerge if we ever let artificially intelligent machines get ahold of a Ouija board.
Legendary astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tysonshares the view of Tesla founder Elon Musk that AI poses mankind’s “biggest existential crisis”.
Musk made his now-infamous comment during the South by Southwest tech conference in Austin, Texas last year as part of a call for regulation. Musk warned: “I think that’s the single biggest existential crisis that we face and the most pressing one.”
A year later, Neil deGrasse Tyson was asked what he believes to be the biggest threat to mankind during an episode of his StarTalk radio show.
Dr Tyson appeared alongside Josh Clark, host of the “Stuff You Should Know” and “The End of The World” podcasts, who was also asked the same question.
“I would say that AI is probably our biggest existential crisis,” Clark said. “The reason why is because we are putting onto the table right now the pieces for a machine to become super intelligent.”
Clark goes on to explain how we don’t yet know how to fully-define, let alone program, morality and friendliness.
“We make the assumption that if AI became super intelligent that friendliness would be a property of that intelligence. That is not necessarily true.”
Dr Tyson chimed in to say he initially had a different answer to what poses the greatest threat to mankind. “I had a different answer, but I like your answer better than the answer I was going to give,” he said.
“What won me over with your argument was that if you locked AI in a box, it would get out. My gosh, it gets out every time. Before I was thinking, ‘This is America, AI gets out of control, you shoot it’… but that does not work, because AI might be in a box, but it will convince you to let it out.”
Dr Tyson does not say what his previous answer was going to be, but he’s warned in the past about the dangers of huge asteroids impacting the Earth and joined calls for action on climate change.
Earlier this week, AI News reported on comments made by Pope Francis who also warned of the dangers of unregulated AI. Pope Francis believes a failure to properly consider the moral and ethical implications of the technology could risk a ‘regression to a form of barbarism’.
Robotics is finally reaching the mainstream and androids – humanlike robots – are everywhere at SXSW Experts believe humanlike robots are the key to smoothing communication between humans and computers, and realizing a dream of compassionate robots that help invent the future of life.» Subscribe to CNBC: http://cnb.cx/SubscribeCNBC About CNBC: From ‘Wall Street’ to ‘Main Street’ to award winning original documentaries and Reality TV series, CNBC has you covered. Experience special sneak peeks of your favorite shows, exclusive video and more.
Prof. Stephen Hawking is not worried about armies of autonomous drones taking over the world, but something more subtle – and more sinister. Some technologists believe that an event they call the Singularity is only a few decades away. This is a point at which the combined networked computing power of the world’s AI systems begins a massive, runaway increase in capability – an explosion in machine intelligence. By then, we will probably have handed over control to most of our vital systems, from food distribution networks to power plants, sewage and water treatment works, and the global banking system. The machines could bring us to our knees without a shot being fired.And we cannot simply pull the plug, because they control the power supplies. Source: How Will The World End?
This robot has been given citizenship in Saudi Arabia. As she mentioned in the video above, this opens the way for a robot to hold a job, have a family, raise children, start a business, own property anything that a normal human would do. spacer The First ‘Robot Citizen’ in the World Once Said She Wants to ‘Destroy Humans’ Source
The humanoid robot also took a shot at billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk when discussing the future of artificial intelligence.
“I am very honored and proud of this unique distinction,” Sophia told the audience, speaking on a panel. “This is historical to be the first robot in the world to be recognized with a citizenship.”
It didn’t elaborate on the details of its citizenship.
At the event, Sophia also addressed the room from behind a podium and responded to questions from moderator and journalist Andrew Ross Sorkin. Questions pertained mostly to Sophia’s status as a humanoidand concerns people may have for the future of humanity in a robot-run world.
Attendees pose with Sophia, a robot integrating the latest technologies and artificial intelligence developed by Hanson Robotics during a presentation at the “AI for Good”Global Summit in June 2017.Denis Balibouse/Reuters
Sorkin told Sophia that “we all want to prevent a bad future,” prompting Sophia to rib Sorkin for his fatalism.
“You’ve been reading too much Elon Musk. And watching too many Hollywood movies,” Sophia told Sorkin. “Don’t worry, if you’re nice to me, I’ll be nice to you. Treat me as a smart input output system.”
In March of 2016, Sophia’s creator, David Hanson of Hanson Robotics, asked Sophia during a live demonstration at the SXSW festival, “Do you want to destroy humans?…Please say ‘no.'” With a blank expression, Sophia responded, “OK. I will destroy humans.”
Hanson, meanwhile, has said Sophia and its future robot kin will help seniors in elderly care facilities and assist visitors at parks and events.
Fortunately for the human race, Sophia made comments more along those lines at the recent Future Investment Initiative event. It told Sorkin it wanted to use its artificial intelligence to help humans “live a better life,” and that “I will do much [sic] best to make the world a better place.”
Sophia could soon have company from other robotics manufacturers, namely SoftBank, whose Pepper robot was released as a prototype in 2014 and as a consumer model a year later. The company sold out of its supplyof 1,000 robots in less than a minute.
We need to figure out how to fairly and respectfully share our world with artificial friends and neighbors.
We probably ought to figure out what rights robots will have before they reach sentience.gremlin / Getty Images
By Don Howard
While advances in robotics and artificial intelligence are cause for celebration, they also raise an important question about our relationship to these silicon-steel, human-made friends: Should robots have rights?
A being that knows fear and joy, that remembers the past and looks forward to the future and that loves and feels pain is surely deserving of our embrace, regardless of accidents of composition and manufacture — and it may not be long before robots possess those capacities.
Yet, there are serious problems with the claim that conscious robots should have rights just as humans do, because it’s not clear that humans fundamentally have rights at all. The eminent moral philosopher, Alasdair MacIntyre, put it nicely in his 1981 book, “After Virtue”: “There are no such things as rights, and belief in them is one with belief in witches and in unicorns.“
There are serious problems with the claim that conscious robots should have rights just as humans do, because it’s not clear that humans fundamentally have rights at all.
So, instead of talking about rights, we should talk about civic virtues. Civic virtues are those features of well-functioning social communities that maximize the potential for the members of those communities to flourish, and they include the habits of action of the community members that contribute to everyone’s being able to lead the good life. (WOW…what kind of mystical, convoluted, mumbo jumbo is that?)
After all, while the concept of “rights”is deeply entrenched in our political and moral thinking, there is no objective grounding for the attribution of rights.The Declaration of Independence says: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
But almost no one today takes seriously a divine theory of rights.
Most of us, in contrast, think that rights are conferred upon people by the governments under which they live— which is precisely the problem. Who gets what rights depends, first and foremost, on the accident of where one lives. We speak of universal human rights but that means only that, at the moment, most nations (though not all) agree on some core set of fundamental rights. Still, governments can just as quickly revoke rights as grant them. There simply is no objective basis for the ascription of rights.
We further assume, when talking about rights, that the possession of rights is grounded in either the holder’s nature or their status — in the words of the aforementioned declaration, that people possess rights by virtue of being persons and not, say, trees. But there is also no objective basis for deciding which individuals have the appropriate nature or status. Nature, for instance, might include only sentience or consciousness, but it might also include something like being a convicted felon — which means, in some states, that you lose your right to vote or to carry a gun. For a long time, in many states in the U.S., the appropriate status included being white (that is a lie); in Saudi Arabia, it includes being male.
The root problem here is the assumption that some fundamental, objective aspect of selfhood qualifies a person for rights — but we then have to identify that aspect, which lets our biases and prejudices run amok.
Still, since we will share our world with sophisticated robots, how will we do that fairly and with due respect for our artificial friends and neighbors without speaking of rights? The answer is that we turn to civic virtues.
Focusing on civic virtues also forces us to think more seriously about how to engineer both the robots to come and the social communities in which we all will live.
In a famous 1974 essay, the political theorist Michael Walzer suggested there are at least five core, civic virtues:loyalty, service, civility, tolerance and participation. This is a good place to start our imagininga future lived together with conscious robots,one in which the needs of all are properly respected and one in which our silicon fellow citizenscan flourish along with we carbonaceous folk.
Focusing on civic virtues also forces us to think more seriously about how to engineer both the robots to come and the social communities in which we all will live.What norms of public life should be built into our public institutions and inculcated in the young through parenting and education? The world would be a better place if we spent less time worrying, in a self-focused way, about our individual rights and more time worrying about the common good.
A final noteworthy consequence of this suggested shift of perspective is that it highlights a challenge, which is designing the optimal virtues for the robots themselves. A task for roboticists will be figuring out how to program charity and loyalty into a robot or, perhaps, how to build robots that are moral learners, capable of growing new and more virtuous ways of acting just as (we hope) our human children grow in virtue.
The robots will have an advantage over us: They can do their moral learning virtually and, thus, far more rapidly than human young. But that raises the even more vexing question of whether humans will have any role in the robotic societies of the future.
Don Howard is professor of philosophy at the University of Notre Dame. He is also a fellow and former director of Notre Dame’s Reilly Center for Science, Technology and Values.
Wow…so do you see why they had to first destroy our belief in GOD? When you no longer believe in GOD… or you are born into a world where belief is GOD has long been forgotten…than who makes the rules? Who sets the boundaries? Who decides what is right or what is wrong?? WITHOUT GOD… YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS! WITHOUT GOD YOU HAVE NO INHERENT VALUE. WITHOUT GOD you are fodder for the enemy!