you'd like to think so, but keep up your petty flame attempt. doesn't alter the fact you're wrong and making yourself look pettier and stupider w/ each reply.
After 16 years i've left local gov
- Thread starter [TFU] Thegoon84
- Start date
- Status
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 3,592
- Location
- Exile
People can be very heartless until they experience things for themselves. Luckily your mother had you helping her, so many do not have help and simply become a statistic to be looked over and dismissed by the less intelligent.
Your contribution to a sensitive subject has been to laugh, ridicule and ignore facts. You then make personal attacks and bizarrely think you have the moral high ground.
I no longer believe you're a real account, you're just a bot designed to waste everyone's time.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 3,592
- Location
- Exile
Here's an interesting article about the care cuts...
Research linking care cuts to 120,000 deaths ‘is fresh evidence austerity kills’
So whilst they say no firm conclusions can be drawn, the cuts are likely to be the main cause, and are backed up by other research done.
Research linking care cuts to 120,000 deaths ‘is fresh evidence austerity kills’
So whilst they say no firm conclusions can be drawn, the cuts are likely to be the main cause, and are backed up by other research done.
You see my error was that I failed to understand that horses were automated. Because automation is defined as a process not requiring human assistance, guidance or control.
I will never look at horses in the same way again.
P.S. If anyone has ever successfully delegated the ploughing of a field to a horse, I'd love to hear about it.
I love the fact that you cross-referenced a post of mine form 2015 to label me as a communist/socialist. Nice
I shall also start a sentence with "in practice".
In practice, under capitalism the world has seen wealth and monetary distribution flow from the bottom to the top, always. Especially this is true of the past decade since the "financial crash". The elites have been increasing their share, to the point now that less than 1% of the population own >50% of all wealth, money and assets. With this share significantly increasing year on year.
Not only that, but our legal system has locked in their power and control. In many sectors now new entrants are locked out due to the overwhelming control and power of the biggest corporations. Examples include Monsanto, etc.
Capitalism as practised currently endorses, encourages and rewards unshackled greed without restraint. That's is reality. And our legal system is currently allowing itself to be influenced directly by lobbyists and donors - those with money to burn. No surprise then that our justice system is so obviously two-tiered (or multi-tiered). There are of course countless examples of the legal system being used to bankrupt a smaller competitor - even when there is no valid legal complaint to begin with. The use of the legal system to bankrupt those with less wealth is not an uncommon tactic!!
I really don't need to start listing examples of pension funds plundered, or companies where the owners have extracted all cash reserves and assets, then let the company fail leaving their employees with no jobs and no pension (oh but the govt can bail out the pension so it's all A-OK).
Lastly it's well documented that the very poorest in this country, and other capitalist countries, have been seeing their living standards drop. We've been moving steadily backwards towards the Victorian era Work Houses.
Additionally the up-and-coming capitalist societies of India, etc, are not seeing living standards for the poor rise in line with the country's overall increased wealth. The "trickle-down" model is once again failing. Whilst India, Africa and China now have thriving middle-classes who all drive BMWs, these also staggering levels of poverty at the bottom. But once again we see that human nature is to take care of yourself, take what you can, and enjoy it.
Capitalism rewards selfish behaviour and self-centred outlooks. By design.
No your error was to try and belittle people in the internet in an effort to look smart sadly it backfired because you confused automation (using technology to do something with minimal or reduced human intervention) with something being fully automated.
Hopefully you will learn from this embarrassment
I think you're redefining automation there. Reduced human effort/labour does not count as automation. A tractor is not automation. Neither is a horse.No your error was to try and belittle people in the internet in an effort to look smart sadly it backfired because you confused automation (using technology to do something with minimal or reduced human intervention) with something being fully automated.
Hopefully you will learn from this embarrassment
When you start listing horse drawn plough as an example of automation I'm afraid you've lost the plot.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 53,766
- Location
- Welling, London
I moved from DLA to PIP for my heart condition and stroke. I was lucky (if you can call it that), that my condition was very cut and dry and backed up with letters from specialists, so I got it straight away. However, when the decision came through the post following the assessment, even though I’d got it, it was still full of errors. One notable example being that I could only walk 20 yards and follow a journey unaided, when I had clearly explained that I could not follow a journey unaided but could walk about 100 yards. What would have happened if she had thought I could follow a journey unaided and also walk 100 yards? I’d have been refused higher rate and had to go through a traumatic appeal process.
I never followed it up because I somehow had got what I deserved and it’s not worth rocking the boat, but it made me think how many people have to go through a load of crap to get what they deserve because of silly mistakes and ineptitude from the assessors.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 30,264
A Tesla is semi-autonomous but needs a human still....
Would that be why it's called semi-antonymous, and not antonymous? Just a hunch.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 53,766
- Location
- Welling, London
Spelling go a bit dodgy there?
The thing is I already answered the question you posed - Did you forget about the link you were shown yesterday? An article about automation on wikipedia which contains a few details relating to the history of automation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automation#Industrial_Revolution_in_Europe
automation has been happening for over 200 years now...
Yeah and I remember also drawing a line between simple mechanisation and automation. And you not liking that.
What came before was the mechanisation of basic manual tasks, such as grinding, weaving, etc.
What we're dealing with today is a automation that can replace office jobs, drivers and factory workers alike. Unless you're a creative or in R&D, for example, modern automation has the potential to replace you with software.
Won't take too long before unemployment reaches unsustainable levels in such a scenario. Because not everyone can be employed in the maintenance of automated systems. Moreover if all the workers made redundant due to automation were able to find jobs maintaining the automation, the goal of the automation would have failed. The goal being to remove the necessity of human labour (and paying human wages).
The very goal of automation is to make humans redundant. Apply that across all sectors and you see that in the no-so-near future, unemployment will go through the roof, if automation is successful in application across all sectors.
So... tell me where all these people will be employed ... a sector where automation will not be able to replace them. As noted, "maintaining the automated systems" cannot account for all the newly unemployed.
No I queried what you meant with regards to 200 years ago:
that isn't new, we've had computers, software etc.. for several decades now...
yet we have record high employment in spite of all the automation...
The problem here is that you're starting with a false premise that increasing automation means there won't be jobs - yet here we are, 200 years later, with record high employment levels and we're still constantly improving our ability to automate tasks...
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 2,616
- Location
- East Sussex
We are absolutely miles away from this being techically and economically viable - it will take decades for this to become an issue to society and even then it may just enable us to increase output rather than put everyone out of work, there are lots of things machines will never be any good for, even if it is technically possible for them to do them.
I'll never go to a robot strip club for example
Do you believe the in-scope job roles for automation today are the same as they were 200 years ago?
See I'm just not sure how you can resolve the idea that automation will eventually apply to all job sectors, with the conflicting idea that automation cannot increase unemployment. It's either one of the other.
Either automation doesn't in future apply to all job sectors or unemployment does increase due to automation.
You argument is "People have always said that" and nothing more. It's as if you believe that all problems are the same problem. That the situation today or the situation in future will be no different to the situation 200 years ago.
It's a bizarre viewpoint that demands all things be equal across literally centuries of time.
Probably true.
It'll be interesting if antonymouse vehicles do come online in the next 20 years or so in a meaningful way.
We will face our first real glimpse of what happens when an entire employment sector disappears. Not just is made less labour intensive/more efficient, but disappears entirely due to automation.
But even that is probably 20+ years away.
nope, I'm pointing out that automation has been occurring for over 200 yerars
automation is around us already, yet we've got plenty of jobs stilll
well it is true, you're just trotting out the luddite fallacy, we've already seen the effect of increasing automation
It doesn't demand things to be equal, things have continually improved over 200 years. We've had plenty of revolutionary inventions in that time period that have meant that various jobs can be freed up. The things you've highlighted, as pointed out already - computers, software etc.. we've had for decades... yet we've got record employment - why is that suddenly going to change now?
It is the sort of argument that requires some magical thinking - some fantasy view of AI, that we're suddenly just around the corner from "the robots" taking over everything and employment will end. It isn't really grounded in reality.
Who said anything about robots taking over? You're just being silly now.
We've barely scratched the surface with automation as well you know. You're just avoiding the question and going back to your "Things will always be the same no matter what" argument. Which still fails to take into account that things could change quite drastically as our automation becomes more capable in sectors which haven't previously been the subject of extensive automation.
And then the eventuality of all sectors being drastically altered by automation, which is yet to come.
No, things won't always be the same.
It's like you've never heard of the "tipping point/turning point", which is a point where things cannot continue as they were.
This "tipping point/turning point" occurs naturally in many fields, but you seem determined not to recognise it.
We've barely scratched the surface with automation as well you know. You're just avoiding the question and going back to your "Things will always be the same no matter what" argument. Which still fails to take into account that things could change quite drastically as our automation becomes more capable in sectors which haven't previously been the subject of extensive automation.
And then the eventuality of all sectors being drastically altered by automation, which is yet to come.
No, things won't always be the same.
It's like you've never heard of the "tipping point/turning point", which is a point where things cannot continue as they were.
This "tipping point/turning point" occurs naturally in many fields, but you seem determined not to recognise it.
but I've not said things will always be the same, I've pointed out that we've had increasing automation already for 200 years - things have continually changed and improved... they've NOT stayed the same and yet there is still record high employment
there is "automation" all around us
Perhaps you can point out what this tipping point is exactly? When is it supposed to occur? What does it look like? All I've heard from you so far is the flawed argument that wide scale automation will mean mass unemployment when we've already seen the opposite occur.
Apparently this is all due to change because of [reasons] and magically everything will be automated/jobs will disappear.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 3,592
- Location
- Exile
That was one of those rare moments when someone's mistake worked in your favour. I'm not completely sure how the point system works for Pip though, maybe if they had written down more than 100 yards but can't follow a journey, you would have got enough points to get what you needed anyway?
Personally I don't think someone in your situation should have to go to an assessment centre, the notes from a specialist and GP should have been enough.The stress of going through the process could have caused serious harm.
I'm glad you got what you needed to get and wish you good health for the future.
- Status