Thanks for following our blog. We end our blog with a paper. I hope you will like it.
greetings Anton and Willem

My statement blog paper versie 2.1


The science of destroying jobs.

I’ve been reading “The second machine age” written by Andrew McAffee and Erik Brynjolfsson. Due to time limitations I couldn’t finish the book to make this article but let’s get to the jest of it. I’ll put a link to an excerpt (the first chapter of the book) so you can see if it’ll intrest you.

The book describes the new age that we’re quickly heading into and shows why we should be optimistic about it, yet also discusses the challenges it will bring.

Enter Creative Destruction:

The Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter described capitalism as constantly evolving as innovation and progress disrupt older technology. He used this term to describe the way in which technological progress improves the lives of many, but only at the expense of a smaller few.

Creative destruction first became an issue of debate during the industrial revolution, when machinery began to improve the manufacturing process, and inventions like the assembly line came to dominate craft and artisan production. While the economy as a whole benefited from such improvements, those craftsman who were displaced saw their jobs destroyed, never to return again. Economic theory predicts that the negative effects will be relatively short-lived; that those displaced workers will have job opportunities created by new fields and industries. For example, one hundred years ago, no one thought about becoming an airline pilot or a software engineer.

Enter the Optimistic View:

The authors discus three aspects of the immense innovation. Firstly that most of the things needed to head forward are already here (or in the next 15 years), the building blocks are ready to be used. Secondly, they state that automation is great, more efficient, cleaner, better living for all with less strain on the earth. and lastly they talk about the difficulties of innovation, the creative destruction that is in it’s own a good thing with for the older technology (or the servants of the older technology) the end. So new tech makes people working with or for the old tech obsolete. Yet I must say they see things on the bright side of life. The beneficiaries of the technological advancements will conclude on the midlong term all parties who lost with the destruction of the old technology.

What I would like to take away from this as a question for you readers:

Should we stop hanging on to older technology to make the shift more disruptive but also less painful in the mid-long term for everyone? (like removing a band-aid in one go). For example: supporting outdated hardware with operating systems, Support for old data technologies, …

Excerpt of the book:

From poverty to prosperity

Two weeks ago was Bill gates at the American Enterprise Institute. He was there as a guest to speak about the future economics. Bill Gates believes that people underestimate the chance of the labor market. He thinks that people aren’t ready for this big change. He thinks in the next 20 year there will be a great loss of labor. He speaks about the software substitution. Labors like nurses and waiters will be replaced by software. He is against the raise of the minimum wage because that will mean that for companies the choice between a human worker and a software worker will be made much more easy, the software substitution.
The chance that a big man like this, with all his experience in the technological and economical world is right, is more likely and I agree with his statements. For example, I think that indeed many waiters will be chance to a software substitution. First half of the waiters will be fired. think about not ordering through a waiter but through the table. Only to get you your drinks you will have a waiter.

Table to order your drinks.

The bar can then easy erase products that are out of stock. So that the menu never have to chance. and of course the cost of an extra waiter will be very good for the economics of the bar. And maybe you can say, what about the social contacts between waiter and customer? If that is an priority to a customer is will be longer available. Butt if the cost is more an priority then this way maybe your first choice. And then of course you will only have one Barman who looks at the orders and fills the robot waiters who will deliver your drink. Maybe of ease you at the and only have an automate and just a lovely designed bar with a beautifull view.

The only thing I don’t want to agree right away is the increase of decrease of the human wage. Especially in Belgium, with a high social system decreasing minimal wages will end up in more support of the country etc. The social influence of this decrease of jobs is not an easy calculation of decreasing jobs so increasing poverty.

From poverty to prosperity/

something to confess

Okay so I have something to confess, my last article wasn’t actually me. it was an automated message. A cheap (free) one.

There is a more advanced version of this, obviously not free to test out.

Aside from the fact that it isn’t in my particular writing style, I don’t see many holes in the article. This then proves I am rapidly becoming obsolete on this blog page.

With this comforting thought I leave you to comment on your opinion on the automated article. Did you like it? Do you find it reads almost easier than student written articles?

Is Automation Destroying Intellectual Jobs?

A common theme surrounding the state of the labor market following the Great Recession of 2008 is whether or not technological progress has effectively taken away employment opportunities. While the unemployment rate has fallen steadily to just about 5%, many of the jobs lost prior to the financial crisis have not returned. Rather, many of the working- and middle-class individuals being hired now find themselves earning a lower real wage.

Creative Destruction

The Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter described capitalism as constantly evolving as innovation and progress disrupt older technology through a process of creative destruction. He used this term to describe the way in which technological progress improves the lives of many, but only at the expense of a smaller few.

Creative destruction first became an issue of debate during the industrial revolution, when machinery began to improve the manufacturing process, and inventions like the assembly line came to dominate craft and artisan production. While the economy as a whole benefited from such improvements, those craftsman who were displaced saw their jobs destroyed, never to return again. Economic theory predicts that the negative effects will be relatively short-lived; that those displaced workers will have job opportunities created by new fields and industries. For example, one hundred years ago, no one thought about becoming an airline pilot or a software engineer.

Fast forward to today’s information age: The internet and increasing computing power has certainly caused creative disruption in a wide range of industries. As information technology continues to progress, the question becomes, will intellectual jobs – those that require a human mind – also become obsolete with artificial intelligence? (For more, see: How Technology Is Replacing Workers.)

Technology Has Already Made Some Jobs Obsolete

While the industrial revolution saw technology displace human workers in manufacturing and production work, the computer age has seen a displacement of service jobs better mediated by a website or mobile app. The internet automated many jobs involving a broker or middle-man matching the seller of a good or service to a willing buyer, and at a great reduction in cost.

Travel agents, stock brokers, bank tellers, tax accountants, language translators, toll booth attendants, phone operators, postal workers, and job recruiters are just a small sample of the kinds of work that have become automated. While this trend has made these services less expensive and more accessible to a wide range of consumers, those previously employed in these fields have had a difficult time finding new work. (See also: 20 Industries Threatened by Tech Disruption.)

The types of jobs that have not been automated thus far have been those that require the intellect, creativity, and the flexibility of the human brain. Some of the most highly paying jobs today are for managers, lawyers, doctors, and financial professionals. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) estimates that in the next five years, these kinds of jobs will be in particularly high demand.

The BLS predicts that jobs for market research analysts will grow by over 40% through 2020. Financial advisors are expected to grow by 32% and software developers by 30%. Architects, biomedical engineers, and medical scientists are also expected to see job growth at above average rates.

These lines of work all share the fact that they rely on human intelligence and, so far, have not been automated. The march of progress, however, continues unabated and even these jobs may be at risk in the future. (See also: 2015 Tech Trends.)

AI and the Future of Creative Disruption

MIT economist Erik Brynjolfsson is co-author of The Second Machine Age, a book that tries to anticipate which jobs will remain once computers, software, and artificial intelligence (AI) take over the jobs now reserved for human beings. He considers what will happen when the art of writing an article, driving a car, translating speech in real time, or diagnosing a medical condition will no longer need a human brain. The pace of technological progress in the digital age is accelerating such that new industries may not be able to soak up displaced workers quickly enough.

Moore’s Law states that computational power will double and become cheaper every 18 months. Moore’s Law has held up surprisingly well since it was suggested in 1965, and it appears likely to continue to hold up in the future. Unlike the advent of the steam engine or automobile, which took place over many years and created many more new jobs than they took away, developing software to replace intellectual pursuits can happen very quickly and the effects may be permanent. (See also: 5 Top Jobs of the Future.)

Computers and automation now have greater ability to replace human activity than ever before. Computers can be programmed to win at chess against the world’s greatest master player, to win at Jeopardy! by processing and quickly analyzing language and nuance, and can predict stock market outcomes by crunching an enormous amount of data in a very short amount of time. While the automation of the past made labor more productive by engaging in repetitive and tedious tasks, the automation of the future will be fluid, adaptable, and intelligent. The rate of societal change to made adjustments to employment trends is no match for Moore’s Law, which would predict an increase in computing power of 10 times in just five years.

Those workers with high tech skills, such as advanced computer programming and electrical engineering, will be at a great advantage when this comes to pass. Computers will begin to master intellectual property, organizational capital, and originally generated content and adapt to changes as they occur.

The first human jobs to go in this scenario are middle-skilled, white collar jobs involved in routine data processing tasks such as accountants, legal services, and nursing. Lawyers and doctors will last, but legal aides whose duties include research and data analysis will be quickly overpowered by the search and data crunching ability of software. Automated nursing stations, which dispense the correct dosage of the proper medicine, will not make harmful mistakes such as administering the wrong drug. Furthermore, software will be able to identify and adjust medications based on allergies, potential drug interactions, or brand new results from clinical trials. Sympathetic or emotional simulations run with artificial intelligence and natural language processing may have a better bedside manner than some human doctors. Such systems could be used in place of a psychologist or as aides for the elderly.

Driverless cars that combine GPS technology with that of mapping, real-time sensors, distributed networking, and a voice-activated interface may come to dominate the roads, eliminating all sorts of jobs that rely on a skilled human driver. Driverless trucks and heavy machinery may also become ubiquitous as means of transporting goods and repairing roads. Not only that, but advanced software may begin undertaking the more intellectual work of designing and engineering new automobiles, optimizing them for performance and efficiency. (See also: Self-Driving Cars Could Change The Auto Industry.)

The Bottom Line

As technology becomes smarter with the advent of AI, networking, and software development, many jobs that have remained human-only may begin to disappear. Because of the rapid pace of progress, this time might be different in the sense that those displaced workers may not have the opportunity to find employment in the new industries created by such change. Manual labor and many service jobs have already been dominated by automation. In the future, jobs requiring intelligence and adaptation may also go the way of computers. Perhaps the only jobs that will ultimately remain are those requiring pure human creativity. That, for the moment, remains out of the realm of automation.

Doctors or Algoritmes

Because there have been a lot of reaction on the Ethical problem of replacing doctors. I looked for some good articles to let you think about the situation.
The article goes about what can software in the form of a algorithm do with the healthcare. Vinod Khosla looked at what can technology do as a social impact on healthcare and education. He supprised himself with the anser that a lot of jobs for teachers and doctors will vanish. They will be replaced with a algorithm or a computer. The main problem will be the doctor-patient relationship. Even if we know that a computer will have better results then a doctor. Even than people will easier rely on “what the doctor said” then what the computer screen says.
I agree totally. And I think every scientist will agree on any other Data. If data 1 is less accurate then data 2 you use data 2. So we will have to convince everyone that data 2, the algoritm is just better then the doctor. We see doctors as people who are always right. But that is not the truth. You have always a human error. And by clouding all the solutions of previous doctors in an algorithm those errors will drop fall of.
Then there is the ethical part. Ask yourself this question, what happens when a doctors makes a mistake. With a mistake I don’t mean cut in the wrong Eye or something. I mean he thinks a person has an other disease than actually true. If He made a big mistake and the patient dies because of his failure. He has a trail to see if he could know. What they then do is asking a lot of other doctors what they would do and see if he made the error or did the patient had a very special disease or an special case.
Imaging now the algorithm, The algorithm already has the opinions of a lot of doctors. So the Jury at the end , if the algorithm is wrong, will just have to say. We need to add a little sidenote in the algorithme so that this will not happen again.
Instead of this happens with every patient with this disease who has a doctor who haven’t got this problem. It only will be ones global.

The longer the algorithme works, the higher it’s quality. Doctors will not disappear very fast , but the quantity will go down. Again a high payed Job that decreases in quantity.

When governments envy technology. Or fear it.

So this article isn’t directly linked to automation. But it does show the drive of competition in the technological race to superiority. The article states that a Chinese government hackers-group (?!) infiltrated ASML.
Most likely for the designs of the extreme ultra-violet light which ASML uses (or will use) for its newest generation of transistors.

George Orwell – 1984

I wanted to do an article on ASML’s newest eUV machines. A company like ASML keeps Moore’s law a reality. As it works with 13,5nm lightwaves (thusly way in the UV spectrum). This technology is one of the new leaps in direction of automation for the masses. as transistors keep getting smaller, more efficient and cheaper technology becomes available to everyone. The vast amount of transistors that can be packed into chips on this scale would mean large information density. Which in turn can be used to perform automated tasks at higher speeds. More intelligence for robots, smarter appliances, bugs carrying miniature computers around to show migrations in nature, nanotech operations inside the human body, … I’m just ball parking this, but you get the point, technology on a small scale has immense possibilities, even for large scale technology.



So, reading the article stated below (sorry for the native English speakers, I couldn’t find an adequate version in English) gave me goosebumps. We’ve all heard about the NSA spying on everyone, Russian intelligence services doing the same and well in China, the government has tight grips on what goes on in China. It was to be expected malpractices like these to occur. But why do they feel the need to steal for instance eUV tech? They can’t actually reproduce it, there are international courts for those kinds of things. Preparing for when the patent expires maybe? I don’t know. Looking a bit further i’ve found countless companies claiming to be hacked by theirs or other governments. Let us step away a bit from accusations, I would like to be still allowed into China for vacations. Let us once again move to a more philosophical point.

Why do we fear technology -and implicitly automation? Why do we envy it? I think the envy is simply not wanting to be left behind on the technological shore of poverty. Everyone wants to be at the top. For countries it often implies survival or prosperity. For people it means living better lives or maybe feeling better than others.

So what makes us fear technology? Since, seeing the comments on this wordpress, most of us don’t expect the world to turn automated tomorrow and all of us out of a job yesterday. why do we then fear technology? Fear of the unknown is in my mind not the same as fear of technology. Science is knowing, technology is applied science. It basically translates what we have learned into something we use. Automation is taking what we use and doing it more efficiently and independent of other systems (or people). I find that what we don’t know (yet) is what makes us wonder. It drives for us to learn more. Searching for answers is in a very taoistic way the answer to THE question. (see what I did there? taoism, something really nice, came from China 😉 )