EPTI'd say he did pretty well.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3257
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12361 Posts
I'd say he did pretty well. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On March 10 2016 12:44 Introvert wrote: Please get Bernie to the general. Bernie 2016 nominee, give them a REAL choice between outsiders. Attorney General Loretta Lynch testified Wednesday that the Justice Department has “discussed” taking civil legal action against the fossil fuel industry for “denying” the “threat of carbon emissions” when it comes to climate change. The BlazeDuring Lynch’s testimony at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said that he believes there are similarities between the tobacco industry denying scientific studies showing the dangers of using tobacco and companies within the fossil fuel industry denying studies allegedly showing the threat of carbon emissions. He went on to point out that under President Bill Clinton, the Justice Department brought and won a civil case against the tobacco industry, while the Obama administration has “done nothing” so far with regard to the fossil fuel industry. Whitehouse concluded his comments by posing a question to the country’s top law enforcement officer. “My question to you is, other than civil forfeitures and matters attendant to a criminal case, are there other circumstances in which a civil matter under the authority of the Department of Justice has been referred to the FBI?” he asked. “This matter has been discussed. We have received information about it and have referred it to the FBI to consider whether or not it meets the criteria for which we could take action on,” Lynch answered. “I’m not aware of a civil referral at this time.” What an answer, Lynch. Keep 'em coming! Hell, given the current climate (no pun intended), this might be a real legal fight in the next generation. These companies concealed the very real evidence that the earth is warming and civil penalties will follow! | ||
|
oBlade
United States5769 Posts
On March 10 2016 12:51 Belisarius wrote: You're missing the point, as is the person who started this with: First, l the tool I posted comes from the scientific literature. The paper is in the quote. That doesn't put it beyond reproach by any means, but if you want to dismiss it casually you'd better be an expert on the subject. Second, I'm a biochemist so I have at least a passing understanding of what's involved in medicine. In this particular case, the point is not that physicians will be completely replaced by patients interacting with computers. The point is that the highly skilled decision-making involved in diagnosis and treatment could be built into an expert system, which would be operated by a technician interacting with the patient. This reduces a function that requires dozens of years of training to a mid-tier function requiring a couple of years at college. Highly skilled specialists would obviously still be essential for troubleshooting, oversight, design and training, but would you still need a half dozen of them in every clinic? Probably not. I'm not sure what tool or paper you're referring to. | ||
|
Belisarius
Australia6233 Posts
Many aspects of diagnosis and treatment can certainly be automated and thus shifted onto lower skilled workers, but you're right that a physician is always going to need to have responsibility. On July 16 2015 10:38 Belisarius wrote: Just on that, here's a fun little toy that predicts how likely a given job is to be automated. The full document/paper is here. Top 20 least likely to be automated: + Show Spoiler + 1. Recreational therapists 2. First-line supervisors of mechanics, installers and repairers 3. Emergency management directors 4. Mental health and substance abuse social workers 5. Audiologists 6. Occupational therapists 7. Orthotists and prosthetists 8. Healthcare social workers 9. Oral and maxillofacial surgeons 10. First-line supervisors of fire-fighting and prevention workers 11. Dietiticians and nutritionists 12. Lodging managers 13. Choreographers 14. Sales engineers 15. Physicians and surgeons 16. Instructional coordinators 17. Psychologists 18. First-line supervisors of police and detectives 19. Dentists (general) 20. Elementary school teachers (except special education) Top 20 most likely to be automated: + Show Spoiler + 1. Telemarketers 2. Title examiners, abstracters, and searchers 3. Hand sewers 4. Mathematical technicians 5. Insurance underwriters 6. Watch repairers 7. Cargo and freight agents 8. Tax preparers 9. Photographic process workers and processing machine operators 10. New accounts clerks 11. Library technicians 12. Data entry keyers 13. Timing device assemblers and adjusters 14. Insurance claims processing and policy clerks 15. Brokerage clerks 16. Order clerks 17. Loan officers 18. Insurance appraisers, auto damage 19. Umpires, referees and other sports officials 20. Tellers | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23488 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States43262 Posts
On March 10 2016 13:55 Belisarius wrote: Having checked the original list, this whole thing started from someone misreading the post. Physicians are in the top 20 least likely to be automated, from that paper. Pretty much everything to do with health is. Many aspects of diagnosis and treatment can certainly be automated and thus shifted onto lower skilled workers, but you're right that a physician is always going to need to have responsibility. It doesn't distinguish between full automation and a complete retooling of the industry. The extremely high pay that physicians command will make them a far bigger target for automation than the guy taking the order at McDonald's, even though the challenge is greater. I would not be at all surprised if there are tools that do to physicians what MS Excel did to accounting. Now the irony is that although the invention of spreadsheet tools removed 99% of the work that accountants used to do the lower cost and time investment in spreadsheets meant that people started using more of them, not less. I would argue that automation will drastically alter the healthcare industry and could quite possibly automate what we currently perceive as the role of a physician. However both providers and consumers will adapt and make new demands. | ||
|
L_Master
United States8017 Posts
On March 10 2016 13:55 Belisarius wrote: Having checked the original list, this whole thing started from someone misreading the post. Physicians are in the top 20 least likely to be automated, from that paper. Pretty much everything to do with health is. Many aspects of diagnosis and treatment can certainly be automated and thus shifted onto lower skilled workers, but you're right that a physician is always going to need to have responsibility. I was initially arguing that some of the things on the least likely list are not as difficult as they be assumed to be. | ||
|
Slaughter
United States20254 Posts
| ||
|
Simberto
Germany11635 Posts
On March 10 2016 12:44 L_Master wrote: Just grabbing some links: www.bls.gov Assuming that is a reasonable and accurate representation, chart 2 becomes very important. That chart shows, crucially, percentage growth in labor productivity. Why is that important? Because percentage growth means exponential growth. Two percent growth can be written as x^1.02, which means the growth is always faster and faster. We see that throughout most of US history, the rate of growth OF the rate of growth was also growing, and it is only in the last 6 or so years that the rate of change of rate of growth has lessened at all. Aside from a big drop in the mid/early 70s. To me the takeaway is that not only is labor productivity still growing, it is growing exponentially. Now, one can make an argument that something fundamental has changed in the past 5-8 years and we will see that percentage change head toward zero (either no growth or linear growth), but I don't see that. Math correction (doesn't impact the rest of your argument) Two percent growth means prod(t)= prod(0)* 1.02^t=prod(0)*exp(t*ln(1.02)) not t^1.02, which is just very slightly more than linear growth, but nowhere near even quadratic. | ||
|
Slaughter
United States20254 Posts
I do think that Universities will have to reform themselves to some degree. They have become bloated in a lot of ways. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On March 10 2016 12:42 oneofthem wrote: i don't know how sanders got into chicago maybe it was really bad in the 60's Are you afraid that your SAT wasn't higher than Bernie's? | ||
|
oBlade
United States5769 Posts
The reason McDonalds or supermarkets or even airports can have self-checkout kiosks is that there's almost no need for human involvement - people are buying what they want to buy. It's between the people and the product. The cashier is convenient but not contributing substantially to the relationship. You'll note there's still no automated bagging, even though the packing problem is a fundamental thing in computer science. And there won't be for a while because it's just bagging groceries. That's the point I'm trying to make about healthcare. There's no streamlining left to squeeze revenue out of automation when it comes to getting amoxicillin from your PCP. And there's already tiers of skill, which is why there's nurses. The nurse is already the automation when they digitally weigh you and take your BP/heart rate. You can't make people less skilled in this field, because you want them working well within their comfort zone. In terms of someone walks into a clinic, says "there's a thing on my arm," I don't see where the automation happens. It'll be a cyst, wart, parasite, tumor - in so many cases like this, is there any way for automation to introduce more efficiency? It'd be a hindrance. Or radiology. A person tells you how to position yourself, they position the machine, and it images you. Where is the demand to invent some kind of meta-imaging machine that uses 20 cameras to construct a 3d image of you so its algorithm can control where the radio - all while the tech is sitting there providing oversight? Why doesn't the tech just take 30 seconds and do it? There are exciting things happening technologically in medicine (as always), like the fact that people in the first world are starting to keep consistent track of their basic vitals with smartwear, which might expand further, and the fact that there's companies like medibid popping up which are great for consumers. I am all for a decrease in administration so a greater proportion of the industry is actual healthcare, but I don't think basic medicine is where the automation is going to happen in the future, because it's not where it happens now. What happens is there's some guy, who's one of a few in the world, who can perform some procedure. And he's not cheap, although he may do - I forgot if there's a special word for pro bono with doctors - he may do the procedure for people who need it. But over time, new technology and new techniques make the procedure minimally invasive, and more people are capable of performing it, it's cheaper, it has fewer complications. That's the real effect of technology. Especially eye surgery has experienced this in recent memory, if I'm not mistaken. I think medicine is probably expanding right now (just a hunch) - I mean more than the base rate our society expands. And it should continue to for a long time. That's where I agree with the point about Excel. 1000 years ago, medicine could do fuck all (even though there were books, people had done dissections, and so forth) and people died by 40-50. Now people are living until they're 90. There's an expanded need for oncologists, thoracic surgeons, dentists because everyone's teeth fall out by then, etc. In telemarketing, it's literally a recording doing the talking. "Automation" has a real meaning in that context, or in the context of manufacturing. People get replaced for some or all of their duties. I don't think this works in a the context of healthcare. And that was my original point: careers that deal with people don't admit to significant automation, including healthcare, education, law, government, police, barber, journalism, or whatever. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On March 10 2016 12:41 ticklishmusic wrote: this is weak as shit, we talk about castro and the mods don't call out bernie about his support of the regime? EDIT: oh nvm faith restored I think Bernie's position on Castro is a plus. Certainly better than supporting the Saudis, Saddam, or Assad. | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
On March 10 2016 15:27 Slaughter wrote: For the education thing (I caught a bit about that). Wouldn't adding manufacturing jobs that don't require a college degree help a bit with the problem? If you supply legit jobs that do not need a degree that would decrease the number of people going to college and maybe that would lead to colleges having to compete for students (lower tuition) and also keep costs down if there is some government program to help fund college. It also would make college degrees worth more again instead of becoming glorified high school degrees. I do think that Universities will have to reform themselves to some degree. They have become bloated in a lot of ways. Yes, this is why free university is fucking dumb idea. So many of the jobs in America, don't need a university degree. They need vocational training for higher end manufacturing job. Vocational schooling in America is a complete joke right now. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On March 10 2016 15:36 wei2coolman wrote: Yes, this is why free university is fucking dumb idea. So many of the jobs in America, don't need a university degree. They need vocational training for higher end manufacturing job. Vocational schooling in America is a complete joke right now. Yeah knowledge about non-production related things is dumb. What we need is better workers in America who can work all day and love their fucking job to death, literally. | ||
|
Slaughter
United States20254 Posts
On March 10 2016 15:36 wei2coolman wrote: Yes, this is why free university is fucking dumb idea. So many of the jobs in America, don't need a university degree. They need vocational training for higher end manufacturing job. Vocational schooling in America is a complete joke right now. I don't think having free university is dumb. If you have viable career paths into the manufacturing people will go into it. There aren't many of those jobs left so people go to school. Having free University is fine but it would be better if people had options outside of it. It would ease the burden on the government cost for that tuition help. | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
On March 10 2016 15:39 IgnE wrote: Yeah knowledge about non-production related things is dumb. What we need is better workers in America who can work all day and love their fucking job to death, literally. Where in there did I say knowledge is dumb? The base education in America is a fucking joke for a developed nation. Improve education from K to 12, significantly, and there becomes a significant drop in necessity of the general knowledge gained in university. | ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4358 Posts
| ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4358 Posts
On March 10 2016 15:52 wei2coolman wrote: Where in there did I say knowledge is dumb? The base education in America is a fucking joke for a developed nation. Improve education from K to 12, significantly, and there becomes a significant drop in necessity of the general knowledge gained in university. Universities are regressing hard now too.Have heard that several have "safe spaces" or "destress zones" with play-doh, bean bags and toys.It's fucking bizarre. http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/03/22/opinion/sunday/judith-shulevitz-hiding-from-scary-ideas.html?referer=&_r=0 | ||
|
Jaaaaasper
United States10225 Posts
| ||
| ||
