But for Those Pesky Humans

Stephan Heck and Matt Rogers explore how the world could change given some of the known technology that has been developed and argue for a bright future.  They write about this in their relatively new book, Resource Revolution.  I hope that they are right.  I think that they are right.  I'm an optimist, too.  I'll need to read their book.

In this New York Times review, the author of the review points out very possible unintended consequences of the efficiency improvements that will come if we allow electric / autonomous / carpool systems to develop and improve to the point that they are ubiquitous.  We could just opt for more.  Its a good point, but misses the larger point.

As prices decrease (and technology helps drive down prices), we tend to consume more.  More efficient cars have allowed people living in the exurbs to still commute to the office at a reasonable total cost.  What might be a more compelling line of argument might be whether the goods that we'd be consuming in the future are more or less subject to the same resource intensity as in the past.  As more and more of goods that we consume are low cost to "manufacture" or duplicate (video games, on-line entertainment more generally), our resource intensiveness per unit of GDP should be expected to decline.  To be fair, the author is focusing on physical goods where real resources are consumed.  But if we could cut the number of required cars in this country by half by increasing utilization to 10% from 5%, that would be a substantial reduction in the use of real resources.  If we could cut automotive deaths from 33k to 1k per year, that would result in a substantial reduction in the use of real resources.  Will these be sufficient to offset our increased consumption?  Good question to debate, maybe.

Personally, I think that we are saturated in our interest in spending time in cars (or at least I am).  I can't imagine increasing my time spend in cars just because I don't have to drive.  It will be quite a bit more valuable to me if I don't have to spend the time/energy to drive, yes.  Bigger house, nope.  Mine is too big already.  That may not be true for others, though.  Really, the big problem with housing will come when the cost of renovations is dramatically reduced.  3D mapping and engineering technologies could make this happen (maybe?).  Our existing housing stock is huge compared to new housing built each year.

Too much of a stream of consciousness post, apologies.

Any Room for Us Humans?

My son made me sit down and watch the below video entitled, Humans Need Not Apply.  I'm not sure I agree 100% with his conclusions, but I think generally, he is on target.  I passed this link along to Tyler Cowen at Marginal Revolution and he included in his recent assorted links.

Enjoy the video first, and if you care to, check out my thoughts below.

For me, the question is more of not if, but when.  When does this really matter?  Here are my initial questions/thoughts (with some structure):

• What are the reasons that this won't happen?
• Luddites?
• How will regulatory structures evolve to support or thwart the use of robots in various rolls?
• "Hand made"
• What will frighten people when they see it in action?
• How significant would it be if just one sector (transportation) were fully automated?
• Will we start consuming more?
• Does this lead to more or less energy consumption?
• Can we afford to spend more of our income on expensive renewable energy as a result?
• Who gains the most?  Who loses the most?
• Professions, in particular
• Wealth distribution implications?
• What government structures facilitate or thwart this outcome?
• Do third world countries fall that much further behind?
• Does this further increase the immigration pressures?
• Can software really be written by 'bots?
• We can barely get OOP done right and its been 30 years . . .
• How does this disrupt the economies of scale in manufacturing?
• Shouldn't it be just as cheap to locate flexible assembly robots closer to customers and minimize your supply chain length?
• What are non-scale driven activities (or modestly scale driven)?
• How can I be a meaningful part of making this happen?
• How will we spend our money differently in such a robot-dominated world?
• Will "live" be at an even higher premium?
• Is creativity really just an illusion?
• If so, why isn't more pseudo-creative work being generated by computers / expert systems already?
• Music can be done, but can lyrics, as well?
• The human voice?
• In what ways will we seek out collective experiences in the future that are different from now?
• Will this lead to more or fewer people on the planet?
• Is this future an anathema to freedom?
• What are the next set of questions that we should be asking as a species?
• Is exploration (of earth, then space) a sufficient focusing force?
• Does health science provide enough upside to continue to develop improvements in the treatment of disease and elongation of life?

Dash!

I can still remember carpooling in the mid-90's and hearing ads for the world's largest bookstore on the radio.  Amazon has come a long way since then, and my life is better for it.  I am a big fan of Prime and "Subscribe and Save," but I'm looking forward to more.

If you are not aware, Amazon has introduced online grocery services, Prime Fresh.  Sadly, it's available "only in the Southern California and Northern California, CA Metro areas".  Those of us on the east coast are out of luck, at least for now.

Now, they go one step further and introduce the Dash.  This would have a special place in my kitchen if Amazon can ever make northern Virginia work for their grocery services.  I'm looking forward to additional retail innovations that Amazon brings forth (and am also lamenting the fact that competitors to Amazon are not spurring on the innovation).

3D Gets Real?

Amazon has opened a store front for 3D objects.  I'm sure that this is just an experiment on Amazon's part, but it appears to be a legitimate attempt to understand (and profit from) interest in items created on-demand from 3D printers.  This could be a game changer for retail for certain types of objects.

You can see from the above picture, they are focusing on relatively non-important items.  That said, this could be a good start for a more wide-ranging retail catalogue.  One could imagine a point in the future at which you could choose between waiting 2 weeks for a part to be made using traditional means or paying somewhat more for a 3D printed version of the part.  IMHO, this gets way more interesting when you are able to move to mixed materials (not just plastic, but plastic, metal and potentially wood).  You are not going to 3D print wood, so perhaps there is some CNC milling that could go along with this and then some simple assembly (even done by robots).

As my middle child always says, "The future is going to be awesome!"