IEET > Rights > Economic > Vision > Contributors > Federico Pistono > Futurism
Robots will steal your job, but that’s OK: how to survive the economic collapse and be happy
Federico Pistono   Feb 10, 2012   Ethical Technology  

You are about to become obsolete. You think that you are special, unique, and that whatever it is that you are doing is impossible to replace. You are wrong.

As we speak, millions of algorithms created by computer scientists are frantically running on servers all over the world with one sole purpose: do whatever we used to do, but better. These algorithms are intelligent computer programs, permeating the substrateof our society. They make financial decisions, they predict the weather, they suggest which countries will wage war next. Soon, there will be little left for us to do: machines will take over.

Does that sound like a futuristic fantasy? Maybe so. This argument is proposed by a growing, yet still fringe, community of thinkers, scientists and academics, who see the advancement of technology as a
disruptive force which will soon transform our entire socio-economic system, forever. According to them, the displacement of labour by machines and computer intelligence will increase dramatically over the next decades. Such changes will be so drastic and quick that the market will not be able to abide in creating new opportunities for workers who lost their job, making unemployment not just part of a cycle, but structural in nature and chronically irreversible. It will be the end of work as we now it.

Most economists discard such arguments. Many of them don’t even address the issue in the first place. And those who do claim that the market always finds a way. As old jobs are replaced by machines, new jobs are created. Thanks to the ingenuity of the human mind and the need for growth, markets always find a way, especially in the ever-connected and globalized mass-market we live in today.

I don’t think we should approach this issue based on our beliefs, hunches, or gut feeling. Rather, let’s use logic and reason based on the evidence that we have so far.

Consider this. The exponential expansion of technology has been growing remarkably smoothly for a long time. And I’m not referring to the well-known Moore’s law, which states that the number of transistors that can be placed on an integrated circuit doubles approximately every two years. Integrated circuits are just a tiny fraction of the whole spectrum of change that pervades technological advancement.

Kurzweil notes that Moore’s Law was not the first to do so, but rather the fifth paradigm to provide accelerating price-performance. Computing devices have been consistently multiplying in power (per unit of time),
from the mechanical calculating devices used in the 1890 U.S. Census, to Turing’s relay-based “Robinson” machine that cracked the Nazi enigma code, to the CBS vacuum tube computer that predicted the election of Eisenhower, to the transistor-based machines used in the first space launches, to the integrated-circuit-based personal computer which Kurzweil used to dictate the very essay that described this phenomenon in 2001.

To get an idea of what exponential growth means, look at top graph below, which represents the difference between a linear trend and an exponential one.

A curve that explodes out of the normal graph looks like a straight line on a logarithmic plot. You’ll understand why we utilise logarithms when talking about exponentials: there simply isn’t enough space to show the curve.

The other graph, underneath, represents growth of computing over the last 110 years, on a logarithmic plot.

It is not a straight line. It is another exponential curve. In other words, there is exponential growth in the rate of exponential growth. That’s fast.

Computer speed (per unit cost) doubled every three years between 1910 and 1950, doubled every two years between 1950 and 1966, and is now doubling every year. Computer power is not simply increasing. It is increasing faster and faster.

We can see already the consequences of this today, as technology progresses at an unprecedented rate. Computers used to cost hundreds of millions of dollars; they required huge rooms for storage, cooling, maintenance, and a lot of power. Now they can easily fit in your pocket. They are thousands of times more powerful and cost millions of times less. That’s a billions-fold increase in just thirty years. As we progress even more, the changes will be so rapid that we will hardly be able to keep up. Things will change dramatically in a matter of months. Or weeks. The long awaited dreams of science fiction are becoming a reality.

We already have autonomous cars that drive hundreds of thousands of miles without a problem, and with no human intervention. They are perfectly safe, and they even outperform highly trained human drivers.

And, unlike us, they can only get better and better.

We have coordinated groups of autonomous robots that can do the job of building workers, constructing a six meter high tower without any human intervention.


We have new and smart ways of building houses. Typically, it can take anywhere from six weeks to six months to build a 2,800-square-foot, two-story house in the U.S., mostly because dozens of human beings do all the work. But a new prospect may change everything. It is possible than within this decade Contour Crafting (a sort of large scale additive manufacturing) will have become so advanced that we will be able to upload design specifications to a massive robot, press print, and watch as it spits out a concrete house in less than a day. No humans required, except for a few supervisors and designers.

Don’t think that’s possible? Think again.

3D printing is already a billion dollar industry. It’s growing exponentially, and it’s going to revolutionize the way we think about manufacturing forever. We can print a physical object ourselves, both as individuals and as part of small research centers. Not just toys, tools, and simple objects for the house, but also prosthesis, teeth, and even human organs. Things become better, more reliable, cheaper, customizable, personalized. And most important of all, easily sharable, either with a market place similar to iTunes, Amazon, and Android, or even for free. Legally. Or not. Either way, once the information is out there you can’t stop it. Once the technology becomes available, you can’t un-invent it. It’s out of your control.

Where does this lead us? I know some of you technoskeptics will think this whole thing is a fad, and very little will change. On the other side, I know there are many technoenthusiasts who believe this will finally liberate us from this 18th century mentality that keeps us behind, and project us into a Star Trek-like future of abundance, wonder, and exploration. But before that, there is a very real problem that needs addressing, right now. Not in 10 years time, not in 100 years time. Now.

The following data is taken from the U.S. Bureau Labor of Statistics, 2011.

Take a good look at the table above. Now answer this: how many occupations were created in the last 50 years? There are 7 main occupations listed above, making up 43.88% of the U.S. Workforce. How many new types of jobs were introduced because of the advances in technology? Not a single one.

The reality is that the new jobs created by technology employ a very small fraction of people, and they tend to disappear soon after they are created. They require a high level of education, flexibility, intelligence, and entrepreneurship. Most people have not been trained to be like that. In fact, our entire educational system was created just after the industrial revolution, with the idea of creating factory workers. Manual jobs. Repetitive jobs.

So, I have one simple question:

What will the millions of middle-age, unskilled workers do when they are displaced by technology?

I have discussed this with economists, entrepreneurs, futurists, and not a single one was able to give me a convincing answer. Technology is advancing simply too quickly for the newly unemployed to learn new jobs. In the past, we have seen automation cutting the workforce, but unskilled workers all gravitated towards places like Walmart to find an easy (even though very unsatisfying) job. Now, if Walmart begins automation, competitors will have to do the same, in order to stay alive in the market. There would be no coming back for the shopping industry. It is an irreversible process; the replaced jobs will not come back.

The same will happens for millions of drivers, construction workers, and many others. But having these jobs removed, what will people do? So far, nobody has been able to answer that question. The reason for this, I
think, is because there is no answer. Not in this system, not in the way it’s designed to work. The displacement of human labour in favor of automation will have a snowball effect on everything. With unemployment levels at 30% or 40%, the economy will collapse.

Without a backup plan to adjust to a new paradigm, we can expect the worst. Civil unrest, riots, police brutality, and general distress of the population will continue to rise until critical levels are reached, at which point the whole socioeconomic system will crumble upon itself. This has negative repercussions across the whole spectrum of the population, and it is against the interest of everyone on this planet, even of the richest and wealthiest people.

I think that if we want to solve this challenging problem of our time, we will have to rethink our whole economic and social structure. Rethink our lives, our roles, our purposes, our priorities, and our motivations. It’s time for a paradigm shift, one that will radically revolutionize our social system.

Have we ever considered the possibility that finding job replacements, no matter what, might be the wrong choice to being with? Have we ever stopped and wondered if the only possible economic systems are capitalists and socialists, and everything just lies in between? Have we ever conceived of the notion that maybe the need for constant growth is not just ecologically unsustainable, but also diminishes the quality of our lives?

Too often we treat things as separate subjects, not realizing the interconnected nature of our reality. This mistake has made us weak and vulnerable. Over the last 70 years, we have set the stage of our own demise, we have become increasingly discontent, the quality of our relationships has fallen, and we have lost track of what really matters. Today, everything is amazing, and nobody is happy. It’s time to take a step back and think about where we are going.

Let us begin the journey.

Federico Pistono is an award-winning journalist, writer, and activist, author of the non-fiction book Robots Will Steal Your Job, But That’s OK and the Sci-Fi novelette A Tale of Two Futures.


Excellent article!

This is the kind of reflection and forward thinking we need to help change world view and ensure that future sufferings are minimised.

I have commented here before regarding my views on what humans could possibly do with their time and to supplement work and personal aspirations in future times of mass unemployment, so I won’t bother repeating myself - see my references in earlier articles to Jaron Lanier.

In case anyone missed it first time round, the excellent video presentation below aligns itself with this article perfectly.

‪The Great Scam of Human Labor


Fortunately the paradigm shift is taking place, to some extent. Increasingly people are questioning aspects of “employment” that we have taken for granted. The concept of the “lifelong career” is fairly clearly on its way out. Hierarchical professional relationships and abusive office environments are tolerated less and less, and we are voting with our feet. Financial insecurity remains a huge disincentive for most, but at least some of us are managing successfully to decouple our sense of worth, and belonging, from the five-day-a-week office job (or similar). Gradually, people start to take a more distant approach to money. It is still there, but its influence (except obviously in the financial sector and in times of financial stress, sadly and unnecessarily prevalent today) is less direct. The buzz in business is on the non-monetary means of motivation, marketing, building of client bases and partnerships: from the transactional model to the relationship model.

Too optimistic? Perhaps. But these trends do exist, even if there are also (arguably more powerful) countervailing ones. The problem is that progress is too slow, and the stresses, whether due to further automation or other causes, may overwhelm them.

As I may have commented elsewhere, Asimov suggests a system in which only the wealthy have meaningful jobs while the poor spend their time madly consuming goods to keep the economy going.

The problem with suggesting that work will be eliminated by automation is that it is likely all the wrong jobs that will be eliminated. The low end slave wage jobs will probably remain because it is cheaper and easier to use humans than to build and program a robot to flip burgers and serve customers. This will eventually change, but it is slow. The service industry and McJobs are among the fastest growing segment of employment.

The article also doesn’t account for the developing world and the slave labour employed there. Change will happen, but it will be slow and uneven. As Frederico says we need to start thinking and planning now.

I like this article, but some portions are uncomfortably close to Kurzweil’s talk entitled Exponential Learning & Entrepreneurship, presented at the Learning Without Frontiers Conference last month.

Great article! I featured it on our facebook page: The Automated Economy.
You might want to check it out as you’re writing your book. We’ve posted every web article we could find about automation technologies as they relate to unemployment. One thing I’ve noticed is that most authors rarely discuss solutions- and if they do, they often don’t make much sense. Marshall brain has a great article called Robotic Nation where he outlines a really elegant solution that could be implemented now and ramped up over time, yet I’ve never heard anyone discussing his ideas anywhere. Maybe your book could help get the discussion going.

Great Article!

My response got too long, so I turned it into a blog post:

Lets Light This Fuse!


The idea that economy market will solve the unemployment problem is old, and i don’t buy it. It’s fairly simple to see why people get fired because of robots, they do the job and don’t blame, or ask for rights.

If regulation is the respond, then fine, someone trying to protect the citizens is a good thing. But, the technological progress will not stop, and complex machines can do the jobs of much more men now than in the past, and tha’ts is something governments have to do something about.

@Bruno Coelho

OK but we shouldn’t repeat the mistakes of the past and call on governments simply to protect uncompetitive ways of doing business (i.e. not using robots). That’s a recipe for sclerosis. We need some means of managing the transition, and turning threats into opportunities. And opportunities there are: as the author notes, there is a lot to be said for not being a wage slave any more.

If your job is drudgery, it’s good that robot technology is stealing it.

One solution to unemployment is to create your own joyful job - in your backyard.

Create a thriving, rewarding, bird- and bee-filled garden to grow the food you usually buy, at great expense, at the store.

If you don’t have a backyard, create a sprout forest in your house, using containers. Sprouts contain the highest nutrition anyway, so urban dwellers could end up being the best fed.

Use extra sprouts/veggies to trade for things you need. Form community.

Don’t let robots get you down.

An excellent article Frederico. I have blogged about the same subject. I also offer a solution, as a Resource Based Economy. It involves the elimination of currency, and a restructuring of all our institutions to provide every person on Earth access to the resources they need.

The employment Problem:

Description of a Resource Based Economy:

Implementation Plan:

I too have thought about this for a long time and can’t say I have a solution, but here’s one naive-sounding view worth considering, which is this: perhaps this is nothing new.

Back in the day there were only very basic jobs: hunting, gathering, raising babies, cooking. Then technology came along and people developed more sophisticated jobs: farmer, trader, soldier.

Technology kept going and now there is an large percentage of people providing of sorts of service that were unthinkable until recently. The entertainment industry comes to mind, as it is huge and very varied.

So an extrapolation is that, as technology keeps going, the cultural industry will keep growing. Note that only humans can produce these cultural goods (books, plays, movies, art, designed objects), since they are based on ultimately primitive emotional drives that are unique to human evolution. The only AI able to replicate these would be machines that replicated these drives as well. Perhaps that will happen in time but that seems to be really far away.

At the end of a process in which every mechanical and routine job is automated, there should be enough wealth to support a population where most people are either a cultural producer, or a dependent of one. Mechanical and routine jobs would be a thing of the past, as remote-sounding as the job of hunting for food.

YOUR COMMENT Login or Register to post a comment.

Next entry: Moving Forward - Technological Unemployment

Previous entry: Multi-Tasking