John Deere strike imminent?

Clonehomer

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
26,833
24,941
113
No, single payer does the same. Plus the free market in a lot of areas.

Well yeah single payer would also control that. But we don't get to have nice things. But in the end, single payer is just a larger version of health insurance companies without that pesky need for profit.
 

ISUCyclones2015

Doesn't wipe standing up
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Dec 19, 2010
14,618
10,907
113
Chicago, IL
A lot of manufacturing in the US is a combo of high and low tech. Takes a lot of capital to phase out old stuff and if that company is growing it's hard to just shut down whole lines and replace them while still keeping up with orders. At least in the few places I've worked as an engineer.

Never been to any auto plants but from what I know those might be the places with the most automation.

As for robots replacing everyone I will say this. I think we're further from that than people think. Right now robots are really good at repeatably doing something but they cannot adapt like humans can and handle lots of variation. In the future we will need a more educated workforce to run and service all the automation. I'm definitely for more tech schools teaching how to work with and on robots and automation. Can never find enough good maintenance techs for these things.

"As for robots replacing everyone..."

Imagine you're a horse in the early 1900s. They had all sorts of jobs. And it only took a couple decades to be replaced by cars and tractors and trains. Yea there's technically still jobs for horses but not the millions as before
 

houjix

Well-Known Member
Jul 21, 2021
1,917
1,919
113
A lot of manufacturing in the US is a combo of high and low tech. Takes a lot of capital to phase out old stuff and if that company is growing it's hard to just shut down whole lines and replace them while still keeping up with orders. At least in the few places I've worked as an engineer.

Never been to any auto plants but from what I know those might be the places with the most automation.

As for robots replacing everyone I will say this. I think we're further from that than people think. Right now robots are really good at repeatably doing something but they cannot adapt like humans can and handle lots of variation. In the future we will need a more educated workforce to run and service all the automation. I'm definitely for more tech schools teaching how to work with and on robots and automation. Can never find enough good maintenance techs for these things.

A lot of automation can be done in some parts of manufacturing, but assembly still is predominantly a human job, especially bigger, mechanical things like tractors. I've toured quite a few other factories and assembly plants as well. Winnebago in Forest City, Maytag(RIP) in Newton, Lisle Corporation in Clarinda, and so on. They all have increased levels of automation over the years, but like you said, the human element is still very crucial at certain points in the process.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: CloniesForLife

jmax71

Active Member
Oct 21, 2006
70
120
33
Yep, because a union hourly employee has never, ever accidentally driven a tractor into something inside the plant.:rolleyes:
Somehow that salaried employee must not have been required to get certified on Operating Power Vehicles inside the factory. Must have been an over site!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cyclones1969

clone52

Well-Known Member
Jun 27, 2006
8,320
4,460
113
Well yeah single payer would also control that. But we don't get to have nice things. But in the end, single payer is just a larger version of health insurance companies without that pesky need for profit.

Similar, but not quite. #1, the pesky need for profit is a pretty big deal. #2, you won't get the ******** that a procedure might cost 10x the amount if you have no insurance as it does if you do have insurance. #3, all procedures would cost the same to every person, at least at the same location. #4, hospitals would not have to account for unpaid bills when determining the cost of procedures.
 

LeaningCy

Well-Known Member
Jan 18, 2008
3,348
6,220
113
michael-scott-forklift.gif
 

agrabes

Well-Known Member
Oct 25, 2006
1,686
510
113
"As for robots replacing everyone..."

Imagine you're a horse in the early 1900s. They had all sorts of jobs. And it only took a couple decades to be replaced by cars and tractors and trains. Yea there's technically still jobs for horses but not the millions as before
The idea of robots or AI (as you've said upthread) replacing everyone is still not correct. It's hype. Robotics and automation in manufacturing have existed for decades. I think it's clear at this point that robotics and automation will not simply replace all human employees.

The current hype around AI replacing white collar workers is also overblown. Current AI technology is capable of replacing some white collar jobs such as phone based customer services. But just look at self-driving cars - it's clear the technology is not there to replace humans. It's sort of like the idea of cold fusion - always 20 years away. There is a step change breakthrough needed. People get super hyped about it because it would be a game changer, but it isn't here yet and we don't have a defined path to get there. Current machine learning and AI techniques are good at certain things but incapable of others. There's a reason why we don't have self driving cars yet, despite continual optimistic projections by people like Elon Musk. Machine learning is good at teaching software how to do things that are high frequency tasks that generate high volumes of data that can be used for comparison and learning. We don't current know how to teach machines judgment - how to decide what to do when an unknown situation occurs. We only know how to teach them to recognize scenarios they've been taught.

So robots can run a factory and work 90,95,99%+ of the time. We still need a human to diagnose errors. And depending on the type of work and how varied the tasks and possible results and scenarios, robots and AI can be more or less suited to do it. Many, many jobs simply cannot be done using current AI technology no matter how much it improves. Sort of like you can make the best blimp in the world and it can do a lot of great things, but it can't do what an airplane can do. And knowing how to make an amazing blimp, while still flying, doesn't make you better at making airplanes.
 

jmax71

Active Member
Oct 21, 2006
70
120
33
Ya
"Crashed" is an overstatement; scuffed is more like it. But let's make it look as bad as possible if it feeds the narrative.
Sorry to tell you but that is the exact same write up the Company would use if it was a near miss report involving a wage employee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C.John

ISUCyclones2015

Doesn't wipe standing up
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Dec 19, 2010
14,618
10,907
113
Chicago, IL
The idea of robots or AI (as you've said upthread) replacing everyone is still not correct. It's hype. Robotics and automation in manufacturing have existed for decades. I think it's clear at this point that robotics and automation will not simply replace all human employees.

The current hype around AI replacing white collar workers is also overblown. Current AI technology is capable of replacing some white collar jobs such as phone based customer services. But just look at self-driving cars - it's clear the technology is not there to replace humans. It's sort of like the idea of cold fusion - always 20 years away. There is a step change breakthrough needed. People get super hyped about it because it would be a game changer, but it isn't here yet and we don't have a defined path to get there. Current machine learning and AI techniques are good at certain things but incapable of others. There's a reason why we don't have self driving cars yet, despite continual optimistic projections by people like Elon Musk. Machine learning is good at teaching software how to do things that are high frequency tasks that generate high volumes of data that can be used for comparison and learning. We don't current know how to teach machines judgment - how to decide what to do when an unknown situation occurs. We only know how to teach them to recognize scenarios they've been taught.

So robots can run a factory and work 90,95,99%+ of the time. We still need a human to diagnose errors. And depending on the type of work and how varied the tasks and possible results and scenarios, robots and AI can be more or less suited to do it. Many, many jobs simply cannot be done using current AI technology no matter how much it improves. Sort of like you can make the best blimp in the world and it can do a lot of great things, but it can't do what an airplane can do. And knowing how to make an amazing blimp, while still flying, doesn't make you better at making airplanes.

We absolutely know how to teach cars to improvise. The question then becomes more philosophical. Are we gonna let the car kill a pregnant woman in the street or the driver? We can teach it either way but we're running into those issues when it comes to robots. The tech of just regularly driving around is well established and proven, people are just afraid of 1 in a million stuff happening like that women who died in Arizona walking a bike across the street in pitch black darkness and got hit. A human would've hit her too but at least you have someone to blame in that scenario.

Who are you gonna blame when a self driving car kills someone in an impossible situation? The car company? The person who wrote the code? The "driver"? The person who is dead?

Tech itself not a big deal. What to do with it is everything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: khardbored

Sousaclone

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2006
1,853
1,179
113
North of Seattle
corpo bootlickers are awesome in here

Yeah, well in order to have a discussion on a topic you typically want to have both sides of the argument otherwise it's just a big circle jerk.

I'm on the corporate side for a heavy civil marine contractor and for the most part, I have no issue with unions. Hell, at some level they make my life easier (nobody constantly ******** about how much they get paid vs somebody else) They exist for a very good reason.

My grievance always comes from when they try to get out from under the agreement that was made. If you hold me to the letter of the contract don't ***** and complain when I do the same.
 

Sousaclone

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2006
1,853
1,179
113
North of Seattle
Ya

Sorry to tell you but that is the exact same write up the Company would use if it was a near miss report involving a wage employee.

Yeah. That writeup response is probably saved on someone's computer for the 6-8 times a year they have to use it. Change the equipment type, the location, and what was damaged and send it off to corporate.

I am a little surprised there isn't a bollard protecting that column though.
 

BryceC

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 23, 2006
26,463
19,633
113
Ya

Sorry to tell you but that is the exact same write up the Company would use if it was a near miss report involving a wage employee.

Nowhere in the write up does it say "crashed".
 

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron