Jump to content

Donald Trump 2018

TheFlyingBoat

By TheFlyingBoat
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Longhorn94

Longhorn94 2427

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

This is a laughable claim.  IBM Watson is trying to mimic the mind of a doctor and they are many, many, many, many years away.

Most automation is done at the most basic, rules based level. For lawyers that means getting rid of the mundane things so they can bill more for the subjective/knowledge worker part of the gig.

 

 

There is absolutely NO WAY you can teach AI to fill in that form pleading better than me!!!! 

 

as someone who works in legal tech, we are not trying to replace lawyers. no, no, no, no. we are just trying to make lawyers' jobs easier. at least that's what i keep telling my law firm clients.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 44.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Hugo Stiglitz

    3593

  • retread

    1324

  • Brisketexan

    1195

  • jimmyjazz

    1186

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

M12BH
M12BH

SInce y'all seem to be my clearinghouse for all things political, let me tell a story.  A couple of them, actually.  Three, if you want to be specific. When I was 14 I went with a family frien

ConferenceRoom
ConferenceRoom
brown water
brown water

Slocum’s Razor

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, Captainant said:

You always mention how you aren't as well educated in certain topics. Maybe you should really keep that in your mind as you go through life rather than relying on your biases and what authoritarian figures tell you.

Just read your post and I don't disagree with your points. I do think there are some cutting edge things automation can do, like you've noted, but I do think like someone else said the main issue right now is being able to harness it and, because of that, automation is really only a threat to the high headcount/low skill low-hanging fruit. I could be wrong and the quote above is pretty accurate. I'm not a brilliant consultant or business mind. But I don't know that any authoritarian figures are telling me anything about automation (Google? You? TechCrunch?) or that I'm relying on my biases (which is interesting because I actually AM that low-skill worker IRL).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
Just now, bad_teammate said:

People often dramatically overestimate the complexity and difficulty of the work done by people "higher up". We're all just shaved apes poking around at things.

It's so true. Nobody is irreplaceable despite our luck and privilege to make a nice living doing whatever it is we've been blessed to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bama Chick

Bama Chick 28596

Posted
Posted

Automation isn’t only about replacing jobs, it’s about a reduction in the number of jobs/employees to do an equal volume of work.

A small insurance office, for example, 10-15 years ago may have needed 8-10 employees to do all the sales and service work needed to take care of an agent’s book of business.

Now instant interconnected databases of information and automated quote programs and online and mobile payment systems and multiple other technologies make what used to be manual, human performed tasks obsolete.

That same office can now operate with 3 employees and produce a higher volume of work than it did with 8-10 employees.

Just because you’re obtuse and think “Well, my lawyer isn’t a robot so automation isn’t going to impact people with REAL jobs” doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.

And I don’t know why I bother with you. You’re not just dumb. You actively resist learning.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18656

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

This is a laughable claim.  IBM Watson is trying to mimic the mind of a doctor and they are many, many, many, many years away.

Most automation is done at the most basic, rules based level. For lawyers that means getting rid of the mundane things so they can bill more for the subjective/knowledge worker part of the gig.

It means eliminating jobs for baby lawyers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Bama Chick said:

Automation isn’t only about replacing jobs, it’s about a reduction in the number of jobs/employees to do an equal volume of work.

A small insurance office, for example, 10-15 years ago may have needed 8-10 employees to do all the sales and service work needed to take care of an agent’s book of business.

Now instant interconnected databases of information and automated quote programs and online and mobile payment systems and multiple other technologies make what used to be manual, human performed tasks obsolete.

That same office can now operate with 3 employees and produce a higher volume of work than it did with 8-10 employees.

Just because you’re obtuse and think “Well, my lawyer isn’t a robot so automation isn’t going to impact people with REAL jobs” doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.

And I don’t know why I bother with you. You’re not just dumb. You actively resist learning.

Are you painting the above scenario as a bad thing for businesses?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
Just now, hayden_horn said:

oatmeal. stahp. 

think before you post.

 

Did I do something wrong? I can't help but get on the wrong side of some posters like Bama horn here and a few others, but I do come by it honestly as a humble peon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

In that it decimates paid workforce, yes.

but if your paid workforce is basically the equivalent of bridges to nowhere, just to hire people, aren't we just the "white collar" equivalent of China who uses laborers to build a ton of ghost cities and condos that nobody will buy or use just because they need to keep people working?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18656

Posted
Posted
Just now, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

but if your paid workforce is basically the equivalent of bridges to nowhere, just to hire people, aren't we just the "white collar" equivalent of China who uses laborers to build a ton of ghost cities and condos that nobody will buy or use just because they need to keep people working?

Capital needs buyers. Henry Ford realized this a long time ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11360

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

but if your paid workforce is basically the equivalent of bridges to nowhere, just to hire people, aren't we just the "white collar" equivalent of China who uses laborers to build a ton of ghost cities and condos that nobody will buy or use just because they need to keep people working?

when we automate away all the jobs, who is going to buy all the shit produced? how is a largely out of work labor pool have any consumer buying power?

this is the main question being posed here. capitalism requires a vibrant middle class.

Edited by hayden_horn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Francisco 2.0

Francisco 2.0 32333

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Automation isn’t only about replacing jobs, it’s about a reduction in the number of jobs/employees to do an equal volume of work.

A small insurance office, for example, 10-15 years ago may have needed 8-10 employees to do all the sales and service work needed to take care of an agent’s book of business.

Now instant interconnected databases of information and automated quote programs and online and mobile payment systems and multiple other technologies make what used to be manual, human performed tasks obsolete.

That same office can now operate with 3 employees and produce a higher volume of work than it did with 8-10 employees.

Just because you’re obtuse and think “Well, my lawyer isn’t a robot so automation isn’t going to impact people with REAL jobs” doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.

And I don’t know why I bother with you. You’re not just dumb. You actively resist learning.

 

maxresdefault.jpg

Edited by Francisco 2.0
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
Just now, hayden_horn said:

when we automate away all the jobs, who is going to buy all the shit produced? how is a largely out of work labor pool have any consumer buying power?

this is the main question being posed here. capitalism requires a vibrant middle class.

I think the argument would be the same argument for any innovation that seems scary to low skill workers. Did we go through this same panic with the digital revolution of PC's as well? I'm sure we are all too young to remember, but you can you imagine? "Oh no, this new fangled computer is going to eliminate jobs!".

The idea is that automation allows for people to do either upskill and do things that are more valuable (if they are able) but that it also opens up new, unforeseen lanes and industries and businesses. I'm not a technologist or visionary or growth hacker or whatever other douchey title CaptainAnt calls himself on Linkedin, though, so I'll defer to his opinions that automation will be the downfall of the American economy, way of life, and country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 27450

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

Just read your post and I don't disagree with your points. I do think there are some cutting edge things automation can do, like you've noted, but I do think like someone else said the main issue right now is being able to harness it and, because of that, automation is really only a threat to the high headcount/low skill low-hanging fruit. I could be wrong and the quote above is pretty accurate. I'm not a brilliant consultant or business mind. But I don't know that any authoritarian figures are telling me anything about automation (Google? You? TechCrunch?) or that I'm relying on my biases (which is interesting because I actually AM that low-skill worker IRL).

The biases jab was more about how you have a tendency to believe whatever the trump administration says and disbelieve disagreeing voices as a default even after they provide evidence to their claims. Not specifically in relation to this automation conversation, but I think it's fair to say that's a common occurrence.

7 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

Are you painting the above scenario as a bad thing for businesses?

Also the reason why this level of powerful and useful automation is bad for us normal people, and not corporation-people, is that worker pay is not going to reflect the increased productivity of each worker. Look at a pay trend chart since the 80's. It's been a negligible (and even negative) growth curve when compared against overall economic growth of the nation.

When big businesses succeed, their workers don't. Their shareholders do. This is primarily due to republican economic policy stemming from Reaganomics and the hate-fucking of regulations no matter if they're reasonable or not.

Capitalism works based on the flow of capital. If that money faucet to workers turns off because companies just don't need them anymore, where will the flow of capital come from? It's not going to be the people who just need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and save a little harder, to borrow a favorite republican refrain.

If you want to know what happens when workers don't have jobs anymore, look at coal country. Ironically enough, they're the canary in this situation. That's the future we have to look forward to when automation eliminates the vast majority of jobs and there is no safety net in place. Hope you like lots of crime, opiods, and meth.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mdmost

mdmost 42863

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

it could be argued that it was automation that helped to get him elected.

Definitely. The Midwest went for him because he promised them something that was impossible: getting back their factory jobs. Those jobs are gone due to automation and finding cheaper places, including other states, to move to. The one area I agree with Trump on is we gave the farm away with some of our trade deals. But you can't ungreedy big business. They will look for anything that reduces the bottom line because ultimately all they care about is shareholder value, right or wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Royal We

The Royal We 3065

Posted
Posted

It's starting to encroach on my profession somewhat already - very complex insurance brokerage.  We've had the people from IBM come in and pitch us on how we could use Watson to analyze policy wordings and optimize our own placements and use it to pick apart competitor's placements.  It's not there yet, but I have no doubt that it will be a powerful tool in another 5 years or so.

\derail over

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 27450

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Take the automation shit to a different thread.  This is for orange goblin bashing only.

My bad lol.

How bout the new friend of the court briefs filed by 13 other news orgs in CNN's suit against trump et al? We're about to have a bonafide war against the media.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
staboner

staboner 4958

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, The Royal We said:

It's starting to encroach on my profession somewhat already - very complex insurance brokerage.  We've had the people from IBM come in and pitch us on how we could use Watson to analyze policy wordings and optimize our own placements and use it to pick apart competitor's placements.  It's not there yet, but I have no doubt that it will be a powerful tool in another 5 years or so.

\derail over

what in god's holy name are you blathering on about?

i get your point on new shit coming to light and AI accelerating and such. i just can't separate the fear of AI from the fear of the cotton gin. same shit, different time. i do share a fear that people will fuck it up something fierce, because, thats what they do. but the technology in and of itself, at least i don't think, in the way you are thinking, is like you know. the problem man. 

even if radically accelerating computing i just can't see it radically accelerating decision making for a while. as you know business is slow. humans are slow. some guy's AI will be able to win a chess game against anyone for like 50 years before all chess players are out of work! oh wait. 

haven't you thought about that man? sir?

the plane is not going to crash into the mountain

wednesday's with the dude over. i will read that link you provided today for sure. thanks for posting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
Just now, staboner said:

what in god's holy name are you blathering on about?

i get your point on new shit coming to light and AI accelerating and such. i just can't separate the fear of AI from the fear of the cotton gin. same shit, different time. i do share a fear that people will fuck it up something fierce, because, thats what they do. but the technology in and of itself, at least i don't think, in the way you are thinking, is like you know. the problem man. 

even if radically accelerating computing i just can't see it radically accelerating decision making for a while. as you know business is slow. humans are slow. some guy's AI will be able to win a chess game against anyone for like 50 years before all chess players are out of work! oh wait. 

haven't you thought about that man? sir?

the plane is not going to crash into the mountain

wednesday's with the dude over. i will read that link you provided today for sure. thanks for posting.

Start an automation thread, I would love to read all y'alls thoughts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 45494

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Captainant said:

My bad lol.

How bout the new friend of the court briefs filed by 13 other news orgs in CNN's suit against trump et al? We're about to have a bonafide war against the media.

Yes, this is interesting.  I'm wondering how the rest of the media is going to react.  As has been mentioned before, they all banded together when Obama got huffy with Fox.  Doesn't appear so far anyone is displaying the same solidarity with CNN.  Are they just pussies who don't want dotard to redirect his nonsense onto them?  Let CNN have the brunt?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 27450

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Biff Tannen said:

Yes, this is interesting.  I'm wondering how the rest of the media is going to react.  As has been mentioned before, they all banded together when Obama got huffy with Fox.  Doesn't appear so far anyone is displaying the same solidarity with CNN.  Are they just pussies who don't want dotard to redirect his nonsense onto them?  Let CNN have the brunt?

Media companies are displaying the same solidarity.

Quote

Other news organizations are now standing with CNN. In a statement Wednesday, The Associated Press, Bloomberg, First Look Media, Fox News, Gannett, NBC News, The New York Times, Politico, USA Today and The Washington Post, among others, said, "Whether the news of the day concerns national security, the economy, or the environment, reporters covering the White House must remain free to ask questions. It is imperative that independent journalists have access to the President and his activities, and that journalists are not barred for arbitrary reasons. Our news organizations support the fundamental constitutional right to question this President, or any President. We will be filing friend-of-the-court briefs to support CNN's and Jim Acosta's lawsuit based on these principles."

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11360

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Yes, this is interesting.  I'm wondering how the rest of the media is going to react.  As has been mentioned before, they all banded together when Obama got huffy with Fox.  Doesn't appear so far anyone is displaying the same solidarity with CNN.  Are they just pussies who don't want dotard to redirect his nonsense onto them?  Let CNN have the brunt?

the reaction has been markedly different than the fox-obama kerfuffle. it's actually rather unseemly. i cannot determine if it is because of the sheer newsworthiness of this administration (we cannot go through a single day without multiple absurd bombshells dropping) or if it is because nobody likes acosta, or if it is because the press is actually in fear of the administration. 

i think it's up to all major outlets to join this lawsuit, if possible, or at least express support. 

or else if could quickly turn into a "when they came for jim acosta's credentials, i said nothing" situation. 

edit: well, shit, captain proved it. it's the sheer amount of news to filter through. i did not see that solidarity.

Edited by hayden_horn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Biff Tannen said:

Yes, this is interesting.  I'm wondering how the rest of the media is going to react.  As has been mentioned before, they all banded together when Obama got huffy with Fox.  Doesn't appear so far anyone is displaying the same solidarity with CNN.  Are they just pussies who don't want dotard to redirect his nonsense onto them?  Let CNN have the brunt?

Libs love to unite with people who (1) hate them and (2) will knife said lib directly in the back at their first opportunity. This is a perfect example.

And the libs will keep doing it forever. Because one day Lucy will not pull the football back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SuingToGetAMessageBoard?

SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, SimonBolivar said:

Is it interesting that Fox News is in on this or am I reading too much into this?

I predict a separate amicus from them that is very guarded in words, or if there is a joint brief they sign it will be very milquetoast.  They'd be crazy to tell the President his attacks on the press are bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11360

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

I predict a separate amicus from them that is very guarded in words, or if there is a joint brief they sign it will be very milquetoast.  They'd be crazy to tell the President his attacks on the press are bad.

i'm not sure i believe that fox won't throw all the way in on this one, in light of the newscorp top execs meeting with mcconnell on monday. 

that may have been a heads up of sorts. 

or a propaganda meeting. 

one or the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 45494

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Have the FOX talking heads been disassociating themselves from the WH since that meeting between Mitch and Rupert?  I can't muster the strength to turn on that channel so I don't know if they have toned down the hysteria or not.

I have this same question.  It seems like the website was at least toned down for a couple of days.  But then there's the "wacky liberal plans" screenshot that we've seen floating around, what with the horrors of free college and universal healthcare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Junior Miller

Junior Miller 1502

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I don't agree.  I've worked in healthcare the past few years and have seen a major effort to allow more and more patients to self-schedule their appointments.  It's not fully automated and will most likely never be 100% automated but it requires fewer trained people to manage.  The employees only have to review the self-scheduling and jump in when issues occur.    

Now maybe your argument is that someone that manages a doctor's schedule is low skill but if that is the bar, then a large percentage of Americans have low skills.

This is only one small example of automation.   Automation doesn't always mean 0 employees required.   

 

Nm

Edited by Junior Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...