Page views of this blog have been dominated by Russians, over four times as many as Americans. I can’t believe that there is more interest in this blog from Russia than from the U.S.
I am probably writing to the air, but I would rather know how many readers I have who are interested in what I write than how many are tempting me to go to some spam page.
Showing posts with label robots. Show all posts
Showing posts with label robots. Show all posts
Thursday, August 04, 2016
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Netflix busts Blockbuster, or the Changing Economy
As part of my notion that we don't have a weak economy but a changing economy, I've been thinking about a blog entry about how Netflix is reducing the need for video stores and their employees. Today the Star Tribune had a story about Blockbuster – "Shares of Blockbuster tumble after warning it may need to file for bankruptcy protection". The article states that one of the causes is competition from Netflix. "The company has had to close about 1,300 stores and wants to shut down hundreds more." Shutting stores means letting employees go. Think of all the other video stores in the same predicament. Think of all the other businesses whose reason to be has changed.
All the employees let go by video stores won't be able to get jobs at Netflix or at any other similar service. Think of the idealized Netflix operation. A customer signs up online and is accepted or rejected automatically. A customer places an order online. The computer orders a robot in the warehouse to fetch the DVD, put it in an envelope, print the shipping address on the envelope, and place it in a bin to go to the Post Office. Now humans get involved with a postal employee picking up the bins and driving them to a sorting center. The sorting center is mostly automated and the sorted packages are delivered in another truck or series of trucks. A mail carrier picks up the packages at the destination post office and delivers them to the customers.
Even the postal workers will be cut out of this system. As internet bandwidth gets larger and more people have faster computers, the customers will order movies to be sent directly to their computers ("streaming").
This scenario is being replicated across industry after industry. People not needed. And guess who demands this: people who want lots of goods for the least money and hassle.
I'll stop here and get off my soapbox about the trends too many of us aren't considering.
All the employees let go by video stores won't be able to get jobs at Netflix or at any other similar service. Think of the idealized Netflix operation. A customer signs up online and is accepted or rejected automatically. A customer places an order online. The computer orders a robot in the warehouse to fetch the DVD, put it in an envelope, print the shipping address on the envelope, and place it in a bin to go to the Post Office. Now humans get involved with a postal employee picking up the bins and driving them to a sorting center. The sorting center is mostly automated and the sorted packages are delivered in another truck or series of trucks. A mail carrier picks up the packages at the destination post office and delivers them to the customers.
Even the postal workers will be cut out of this system. As internet bandwidth gets larger and more people have faster computers, the customers will order movies to be sent directly to their computers ("streaming").
This scenario is being replicated across industry after industry. People not needed. And guess who demands this: people who want lots of goods for the least money and hassle.
I'll stop here and get off my soapbox about the trends too many of us aren't considering.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Do robots have rights? The ramifications of the answer
I was intrigued by the article in the latest issue of Wired: "Do humanlike machines deserve rights?"
It briefly described the latest Fisher-Price Elmo, Elmo Live, which kids readily relate to.
The Wired article also described some of the vicious things that people do to some of these life-like toys. It posed the question that if robotic devices become more human-like, should they have rights?
One commentator said that it is not what we are doing to the machines but what are we doing to ourselves.
Long ago I read that evil is treating other people as things. Are some of our things becoming so humanlike that we have a hard time distinguishing things from people? Or are some of our things so removed from humans that we don't even consider human beings in their use.
The 9/11 terrorists treated the people in the World Trade Center as things to be obliterated for their twisted goals. Some of the people in the World Trade Center treated people as things to be manipulated in the running of large corporations. Hamas treats Israelis as things, having no idea who their rockets hit. Israel considers the residents of Gaza as things who happen to be in the way of destroying Hamas. When a bomb strikes a building, is it only the handful of "bad guys" inside that are killed, or several kids that aren't even old enough to understand politics?
Country after country wants nuclear weapons so they can easily take care of their enemies. But who is the enemy? Do the vast majority of the people who would be obliterated by a nuclear weapon have anything to do with the grievances of the attacking country?
Hillary Rodham Clinton says she would obliterate Iran if it continues to develop nuclear weapons. How many Iranians are actually developing those weapons? Even if they support the development of those weapons, do they deserve to die because another country doesn't want Iran to have nuclear weapons?
We just had an inauguration in which God's guidance and help were invoked to help us through our various crises. But those who invoked God's guidance subscribe to the teachings of Jesus. Did Jesus not say "Love thy neighbor as thyself"? This has also been interpreted as "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you".
If we don't want others to have nuclear weapons, should we? If we don't want 500-pound bombs slamming into our houses, should we slam bombs into other people's houses?
It briefly described the latest Fisher-Price Elmo, Elmo Live, which kids readily relate to.
The Wired article also described some of the vicious things that people do to some of these life-like toys. It posed the question that if robotic devices become more human-like, should they have rights?
One commentator said that it is not what we are doing to the machines but what are we doing to ourselves.
Long ago I read that evil is treating other people as things. Are some of our things becoming so humanlike that we have a hard time distinguishing things from people? Or are some of our things so removed from humans that we don't even consider human beings in their use.
The 9/11 terrorists treated the people in the World Trade Center as things to be obliterated for their twisted goals. Some of the people in the World Trade Center treated people as things to be manipulated in the running of large corporations. Hamas treats Israelis as things, having no idea who their rockets hit. Israel considers the residents of Gaza as things who happen to be in the way of destroying Hamas. When a bomb strikes a building, is it only the handful of "bad guys" inside that are killed, or several kids that aren't even old enough to understand politics?
Country after country wants nuclear weapons so they can easily take care of their enemies. But who is the enemy? Do the vast majority of the people who would be obliterated by a nuclear weapon have anything to do with the grievances of the attacking country?
Hillary Rodham Clinton says she would obliterate Iran if it continues to develop nuclear weapons. How many Iranians are actually developing those weapons? Even if they support the development of those weapons, do they deserve to die because another country doesn't want Iran to have nuclear weapons?
We just had an inauguration in which God's guidance and help were invoked to help us through our various crises. But those who invoked God's guidance subscribe to the teachings of Jesus. Did Jesus not say "Love thy neighbor as thyself"? This has also been interpreted as "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you".
If we don't want others to have nuclear weapons, should we? If we don't want 500-pound bombs slamming into our houses, should we slam bombs into other people's houses?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)