The Robots Coming to Take Your Job?

[easye]

A thread to chat a bit about automation in the news.

Robots are pouring drinks in Vegas. As AI grows, the city's workers brace for change


www.npr.org/2023/09/04/1197138244/vegas-ai-workers-brace-for-change

Walk any direction in Las Vegas and it's easy to find machines doing human work.



Check-in kiosks have replaced people at the front desk of hotels. Text-bots now make restaurant recommendations instead of a concierge. Robots can serve food, and behind the bar, machines are pouring out drinks.



Automation and technology replacing jobs has long been a conversation in Nevada's most populated city. Studies show that between 38% to 65% of jobs there could be automated by 2035.



With the use of artificial intelligence on the rise, the economy of this city --which relies on tourism and hospitality — is at an inflection point, as companies look to technology to reduce labor costs.

Meanwhile, companies are so desperate to reduce labor costs we also need to change the laws on child labor too! /s

[herzlos]

I *think* a lot of the robot waiter stuff will be a bit of a novelty; people will usually prefer dealing with people.

But I am pretty curious as to what'll happen when robots can take over most human tasks, especially in this capitalist environment. If we all become unemployed overnight, then who has the money to pay for robot services?

[Haighus]

Sept 6, 2023 2:22:46 GMT -5 herzlos said:

I *think* a lot of the robot waiter stuff will be a bit of a novelty; people will usually prefer dealing with people.

But I am pretty curious as to what'll happen when robots can take over most human tasks, especially in this capitalist environment. If we all become unemployed overnight, then who has the money to pay for robot services?

I think that depends on your level of preferred social interaction. I have social anxiety and routinely prefer self-checkouts for that reason (or even better the scan-as-you-go option).

Probably a subsistence-level UBI under the current system- allowing people to openly starve would generate too much unrest to contain. So the next best option (for capitalists) is shell out the minimum possible to keep people from rioting whilst controlling the output from all the robots.

[herzlos]

I'm a bit odd in that regard. I *hate* talking to people on the phone but I'm fine in person, and despite working in IT, technology doesn't get on with me.

So I'd rather deal with a person than a self service machine, because at least half of my self service machine attempts involve waiting for a person to fix it.

I do use vending machines, etc. when it's more convenient to do. I'd be pretty wary of using a robot to do anything that required intelligence or deviations. So they are great for lazer cutting / CNC type stuff, parking cars in a closed lot etc, but terrifying for dentistry.

[Haighus]

I don't think we will see any dentistry robots any time soon. What we will see first is robotic tools that are operated by dentists and assist them in their tasks. Over time things will become more and more automated until a handful of dentists will be overseeing lots of robotic devices. This will be a gradual change.

A good example is robotic surgery. This is still performed by a surgeon, but rather than having their hands directly in the patient's fleshy bits, robotic equipment does the actual surgery with the surgeon operating this. It has been shown to increase consistency and improve outcomes in some important surgeries where precision is very important (mainly resections of colorectal cancer or prostate and bladder cancers where the margins are very tight). Robots are doing the surgery, but not autonomously. Over time, these will gain more assistive features until they do more and more autonomously.

One I've seen at work is AI reporting of xrays. It is currently just a training deployment but we can view the AI reports when looking at the XRs. It started off a bit crap with lots of over-reporting of rib fractures that were not actually there, but it has gotten better and generally doesn't miss stuff. I can see this being really useful for screening if the sensitivity is high enough, with only positive findings reviewed by a human. This frees up radiologists and radiographer practitioners to report more complex scans like CTs and MRIs- reporting capacity is often more limited for these than the actual physical scanner capacity.

[easye]

I think this will be the first time where we will see automation coming for Service sector, Management, and Creative jobs in a meaningful way.

I am interested to see how the political system reacts to those jobs being under threat, compared to how the political class reacted to Blue Collar jobs.

[mdgv2]

I think it’ll be some time before a robot can do my job, thankfully.

You can programme it to follow rules, sure. That’s…..what programming is.

But, you can’t, to the best of my knowledge, programme compassion, subtlety, and knowing when the strict application of rules isn’t in fact fair and reasonable, because nothing is ever that black and white.

Some of my best work has involved applying genuine professional discretion. I’ve presented arguments to Serious Higher Ups, and carried the day. I’ve decided cases based on seeing what isn’t in the available evidence - usually because one side or another has been very, very carefully Not Said.

I’ve no doubt that is programmable. I mean, we’re kind of programming in our own bonces. But I don’t think it can be coded right now.

[Disciple of Fate]

Unfortunately a lot of companies won't care, there was the scandal a while ago of a US health insurance having an automated process to reject applications that a doctor just signed off on.

Human emotions are just an obstacle to making more money for a lot of companies.

Edit: www.propublica.org/article/cigna-pxdx-medical-health-insurance-rejection-claims

[mdgv2]

When your provider does that? I’m the one that sorts it out.

[skyth]

Difference between the UK and the US.

[adurot]

What, you thought you got to Use the insurance you were paying for?

[easye]

This story is the reverse actually.....

Walmart, Costco and other companies rethink self-checkout

www.cnn.com/2023/11/13/business/self-checkout-stores-shopping/index.html

But now, retailers are rethinking self-checkout. They have found that self-checkout leads to higher merchandise losses from customer errors and intentional shoplifting — known as “shrink” — than human cashiers ringing up customers.

Shrink has been a growing problem for retailers, who have blamed shoplifting for the increase and called for tougher penalties. But retailers’ self-checkout strategies have also contributed to their shrink problems.

[mdgv2]

Sept 7, 2023 9:54:24 GMT -5 adurot said:

What, you thought you got to Use the insurance you were paying for?

Example of my work, from my career in Insurance (so before current job).

Car Insurance claim. Our policy holder’s car was parked on their drive. Some absolute melt came off the road at speed, smashing up our insured vehicle, another vehicle on the same drive, and came through the wall into if memory serves the living room.

Now, that’s four individual, no-fault claims yeah? Literally nothing our Insured could’ve done to prevent any of it, right? 

Sadly not. Said absolute melt’s insurer was claiming “agony of moment”. That’s a genuine legal principle, where dangerous acts don’t create liability, because the person was under duress. 

Here, the associated “agony of moment” circumstance was that someone was about to throw, or had thrown, a brick at his car. This caused him to lose control, and hence the incident occurred.

Higher ups were about to write off the claim as unrecoverable - as were the other insurers involved (other Car, Home Contents and Buildings insurance). I was bored, and asked to have a read as I hadn’t seen an Agony Of Moment case before (or in fact since).

Picking through it, I found the Police Report. Various statements and interviews. One however was illegible in the file. But, that turned out to be our Insured’s statement so I already had some idea of its content. Of particular interest was an interview with the guy whose car did the damage. Where the Police repeatedly asked “did you know the person you said was throwing a brick”. And got different answers. And when asked “did you deliberately aim your car at him”. To which the absolute melt replied “no comment”.

Now that’s not entirely conclusive on its own. Not really. No Comment = No Comment, not “gaw blimey guv’nor you’ve got me bang to rights, ‘ave a bar-nar-bar”. But there was something bugging me about the whole file.

I stepped back, made a cuppa and snuck off for a crafty ciggie. And that’s when it hit me. Something crucial was missing from the Police Report. See….they named the alleged Brick Thrower. So they knew who he was - which means they must’ve known where to find him. Yet…no actual interview with him. Nothing under arrest or even under caution. Just…nowt.

Back to my desk, said “don’t write it off yet, I want to try something” and contacted the investigating officer. Took a week or two as these things are wont to do. Police confirmed they spoke with the alleged brick thrower. But didn’t arrest him. Because he was the victim of absolute melt. Who was a known member of a OCG. Drugs, or something.

I contacted all the other Insurers (absolute melt’s, other car etc) and brought them up to speed. Essentially, absolute melt was clearly talking bollocks. If the Police interviewed but didn’t arrest? No proof of agony of moment, therefore absolute melt’s Insurers were fucked. Sure enough, they ended up settling all the claims, in full. And I very much suspect absolute melt would’ve had the costs recovered from them.

Now, that’s just one example of me spotting when something is conspicuous by its absence. Seeing what isn’t there, and considering the impact of said absence. Which I trust you’ll agree worked out pretty bloody well for the right people. Can AI do that? I’d argue not right now. 

And yes, I am pretty sure that little bit of fun landed my proper job, as I used it as an example of investigatory excellence at my interview.

[easye]

Walmart experiments with AI to enhance customers' shopping experiences

www.npr.org/2024/01/10/1223889295/walmart-experiments-with-ai-to-enhance-customers-shopping-experiences

LAS VEGAS — Walmart has unveiled plans to dive further into the world of artificial intelligence — and drones — to improve its customers' shopping experiences.

In a Tuesday keynote at the CES trade show in Las Vegas, the nation's largest retailer announced it will be expanding its drone delivery to 1.8 million additional households in the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area later this year. Drones aren't new to Walmart — which has already completed 20,000 drone deliveries across seven states to date — but company leaders say that this expansion is a sign of growing demand and efficiency.

Walmart executives said no other rival has gotten this close to this type of drone concentration of households in a big metro market.

[Emblematic Wolfblade]

Not exactly a robot, but the NYT is suing OpenAI over it being used to bypass their paywall I think. I'll try to remember to update this later with more info but can't currently. www.nytimes.com/2023/12/27/business/media/new-york-times-open-ai-microsoft-lawsuit.html

Edit: Another source

www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/ny-times-sues-openai-microsoft-infringing-copyrighted-work-2023-12-27/

NEW YORK, Dec 27 (Reuters) - The New York Times (NYT.N) sued OpenAI and Microsoft (MSFT.O) on Wednesday, accusing them of using millions of the newspaper's articles without permission to help train chatbots to provide information to readers.

The Times said it is the first major U.S. media organization to sue OpenAI, creator of the popular artificial-intelligence platform ChatGPT, and Microsoft, an OpenAI investor and creator of the AI platform now known as Copilot, over copyright issues associated with its works.

Writers and others have also sued to limit the scraping -- or automatic collection of data -- by AI services of their online content without compensation.

The newspaper's complaint, filed in Manhattan federal court, accused OpenAI and Microsoft of trying to "free-ride on The Times's massive investment in its journalism" by using it to provide alternative means to deliver information to readers.

"There is nothing 'transformative' about using The Times's content without payment to create products that substitute for The Times and steal audiences away from it," the Times said.

OpenAI and Microsoft have said that using copyrighted works to train AI products amounts to "fair use," a legal doctrine governing the unlicensed use of copyrighted material.

On its website, the U.S. Copyright Office says "transformative" uses add "something new, with a further purpose or character" and are "more likely to be considered fair."

The Times is not seeking a specific amount of damages, but estimated damages in the "billions of dollars." It also wants OpenAI and Microsoft to destroy chatbot models and training sets that incorporate its material.

Talks to avert a lawsuit and allow "a mutually beneficial value exchange" with the defendants were unsuccessful, the 172-year-old newspaper said.

"We respect the rights of content creators and owners," OpenAI said in an emailed statement. "Our ongoing conversations with the New York Times have been productive and moving forward constructively, so we are surprised and disappointed with this development."

Microsoft did not respond to requests for comment.

I would love to hear how they're respecting creators (i.e. writers/artists) by scraping their works, not crediting them, and not paying them to use them. I seriously doubt OpenAI is protected by US Fair Use.