Many jobs we take for granted today could disappear in a short time due to automation. Artificial intelligence, neural networks, machine learning, and low-cost robots are some of the elements about to spark a new industrial revolution. The big question is: What is going to happen to human beings? Will a series of alternative jobs emerge that allow us to adapt? Or are we heading toward a labor apocalypse full of people without any occupation?
This weekend I came across a brief article about a robot capable of preparing 400 burgers per hour. The most notable thing is that those 400 burgers can be customized (you know, “leave off the pickle, remove the lettuce, and I want ketchup instead of mayonnaise”), but it immediately brought to mind all those young people working at a certain fast food chain I frequent. Automation of tasks will reach that market sooner or later... but it will get there. Major chains are already experimenting with self-service terminals, and 400 customized burgers per hour is a performance that surpasses that of a human worker. Moreover, this is not limited to the food market by any means. A server could be replaced in five or six years when a bot is intelligent enough to put together dozens of (more or less) coherent posts in a matter of minutes. This is not the first time humanity faces such a process, but deep down we all know it will be different. Why?
The latest Kurzgesagt video needs more than eleven minutes to explore the answer, but it can be condensed to this: Today's automation eliminates more jobs than it creates, and the difference in speed is alarming. The Industrial Revolution improved production and quality of life (although the transition process was not exactly cheerful), and the progression “agriculture-manufacturing-services” became natural, however, the so-called Information Age broke that cadence. In other words, the magic of innovation is as strong as ever, but halfway it changed the wand. An interesting example the video gives us is General Motors. Leaving aside the inflationary factor, to earn $11 billion in 1979 the company needed more than 800,000 employees. If we move to 2012, Google earned $14 billion with only 58,000 people, 7.25 percent. The economic comparison may not be fair, but what matters here is job creation.
Other cases closer in time are even more striking. Remember Blockbuster? 84,000 employees in 2004, with profits exceeding six billion dollars. Last year, Netflix surpassed the nine billion mark, and its entire operation is managed by 4,500 employees. Automation will only accelerate the process. Giants like Google, Facebook, and Microsoft work on artificial intelligence because in the end they want a big ship with a small crew. What we consider “complex tasks” is actually a set of defined and predictable subtasks, two conditions under which any machine shines. And we must add the constant collection of information. While I write this text in Google Docs, it is likely that there is an algorithm in the background learning and taking what it needs. Nor can we forget that the population grows and lives longer, therefore, new jobs are needed to sustain it... and they are fewer and fewer. With less work there is less consumption, and if our global economy depends on consumption... well. Still, history is far from over. Kurzgesagt is preparing a video with a much more positive outlook, and will explore some possible solutions, including universal basic income.
