Amazon is making an aerial drone to deliver your packages

[Fletch]

WELCOME TO THE FANTASY ZONE
GET READY 

 

Anyways, this is certainly probably going to be very expensive when you choose the option for it. It's an interesting idea that they have, since I certainly would love my items from Amazon coming extremely quick, but at the same time, so many other things Amazon have to take into consideration with this. The weather, trees, random shooters, heck, thieves (though, maybe the thieves part mostly is your problem since it is your package...but then again, mail delivers would usually put your package in a safe place so it wouldn't be in sight for a thief.) 

 

Love you too Amazon. <3

[Tani Coyote]

And this is why I love science and the competition that stimulates it.

My only concern is that if these become really cheap, we're not too far off from private UAVs and all the weapons they can carry. I'm already imagining criminals carrying out hits with their own little predator drones.

 

2: This kinda doesn't work for people who live in apartments, which is a huge majority of people.

 

I imagine this would be primarily a luxury for the affluent and middle class, who generally aren't the inhabitants of apartments.

 

Do you think delivery truck drivers are going to, or are even able to, retrain as engineers or some other type of skilled laborer? As we replace humans with machines to lower the cost of producing goods, eventually we'll find that there's nobody left to buy said goods because they all lost their jobs. This kills the economy.

While I think one day innovation will get to the point we can abolish labor almost entirely and impose a welfare state for most people, I think the threat of mass unemployment is currently overblown.

When a profession is rendered obsolete, it allows a company to pursue lower prices, which means consumers have money freed up that they can spend on other things, which will in turn stimulate employment in other fields. I see no reason we should see this as anymore negative than the carriage industry struggling after the development of automobiles or the telegram workers when the telephone came in, or the landline companies with cell phones.

Lower costs, provided they aren't artificially created, almost always are good for raising the standard of living. Whether they come from free trade or replacement of labor is irrelevant. Yes, it sucks for some people who are laid off, but for the vast bulk of people, it's an improvement. A policy of retraining is definitely something governments everywhere should subsidise, however, to smooth the transition.

What kills the economy is holding back progress and growth for the people who don't have skills that are valued anymore. Whether it's a machine taking the job or a foreign laborer, it's ultimately because that person's skill is no longer cost-effective from an economic standpoint.

[Dr. Homem]

For anybody skeptical of this: drone delivery is already being used by SF Express in China. When there is a delivery, they call you to ask what time is best for you or if there is someone you'd prefer they'd leave the package with.

 

Of course, those are remotely controlled by a human pilot, and Amazon wants fully autonomous drones. Still, it shows the concept can work.

[Tani Coyote]

Of course, those are remotely controlled by a human pilot, and Amazon wants fully autonomous drones. Still, it shows the concept can work.

Indeed. I don't think this will be too complicated from a computer standpoint - it's really as simple a case as the robot being given a package, checking a database for a destination, and then using GPS to deliver the package and then return to base.

There will be some kinks to iron out, naturally, but I think the biggest problem is 1. federal regulations, and 2. the likelihood these drones are expensive to produce.

As is always the case with new tech, I suspect this will be a luxury of the wealthy for at least a decade, and gradually trickle down to less affluent folks as the technology is refined.

[Dr. Homem]

I see this as another step towards humans replacing themselves through innovations such as this. Do you think delivery truck drivers are going to, or are even able to, retrain as engineers or some other type of skilled laborer? As we replace humans with machines to lower the cost of producing goods, eventually we'll find that there's nobody left to buy said goods because they all lost their jobs. This kills the economy.

“If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” ― Henry Ford

 

I'm against having jobs only because the better way of doing things would make those jobs obsolete. Progress may not be an entirely smooth proccess, but it works in the long run. Especially when you consider new jobs will continue to be created, since new industries always emerge. History can be trusted on this one.

 

What I'm saying is that we can't let the Luddites win. A worker should always be doing something productive, not just working for the sake of work. If there's a more efficient way to do things, move forward with that technology. It's not like it will happen overnight either.

[Patticus]

Think of how many industries and areas of work were put out of commission by advances in technology during the 20th century. Think how many jobs the Industrial Revolution of the 18th and 19th centuries killed. Are we all unemployed now? Of course not! When old jobs die because of new technologies, they don't go without being replaced. We'll always have something to do.

[Tani Coyote]

By the time technology did advance to such an automated state that most forms of labor were obsolete, I presume the culture will be far more receptive to unconditional welfare entitlements, as well. It will be a necessity, anyway - current inequalities only persist because there's some chance of advancement. If 99% of the people can't have a job the current system breaks down politically as well as economically.

More in the near term - the idea of jobs being taken away is an exaggerated fear, often courtesy of Big Labor. It's used against outsourcing, and it's used against technology as well. The greatest fallacy is assuming that employment is zero-sum, when in reality, there's more to it than "greedy executives" maximising profit margins. In the presence of competition, those new profits will evaporate quickly as price wars do their work, leading to lower prices for everyone else. Sure, a million (just a random number) people will be out of work, but tens of millions more get lower prices. The loss in wages by the first group is made up for by the savings of the second; these savings can then be spent on other things. This raises the quality of life for one, and increases demand (and thus employment) in another field for two.

Some other unemployed laborer will most likely take the new jobs that are created, but that is why retraining is a good goal, as it allows those laid off by economic progress to still compete for positions. Failing that, a good system of unemployment benefits will help smooth things over. The net result is that society almost always benefits from lower prices, whether it's the result of new technologies replacing laborers or making them more productive, or labor being outsourced.

So, while I feel sorry for all the people this will lay off, I feel happy for those who will pay lower prices and have more convenient delivery because of there being less middlemen to pay, not to mention for all the people who will be employed in the construction and maintenance of this drone fleet.

[kimplix]

 

It begins! (Let's see if they can get my Sonic Comic's delivered under half an hour)

[FromASloth]

Was it developed by Skynet?

[Willsy]

The robot uprising; it begins.

[Rucdose]

Oh my god

 

When this comes out, I'm gonna order so many seperate orders of Sneak King just so that I have a fucking army of flying drones with no other purpose in life

 

But to fly to my house and deliver a shit load of copies of Sneak King to a middle aged guy without a Girlfriend

 

 

 

;_;

[Kevin]

This is already being tested in China. If this takes off and starts spreading to other countries, it's going to be huge leap forward technology-wise.

 

By the time technology did advance to such an automated state that most forms of labor were obsolete, I presume the culture will be far more receptive to unconditional welfare entitlements, as well. It will be a necessity, anyway - current inequalities only persist because there's some chance of advancement. If 99% of the people can't have a job the current system breaks down politically as well as economically.

There's been talks about a basic monthly income as jobs continue to be lost to automation and technology progresses. In fact, Switzerland is voting on this very idea. I have my doubts on it passing, but even if it doesn't pass now, something will have to give in the future since the progress of technology can't be stopped. In fact, I think big social debate in the future is going to be about jobs being lost to automation and what to do about those who lose their jobs because of it.

[Frogging101]

Basic income is not going to work because the few who profit from the widespread deployment of automation will set themselves up in countries that don't tax and/or regulate them; we will not see a penny of the wealth gained from automation.

Not to mention the social issues we would face in a society where nobody works.

[Sean]

I'm honestly more worried about assholes knocking them out of the air, waiting near your doorstep to steal either it or your delivery, etc.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

My only concern is that if these become really cheap, we're not too far off from private UAVs and all the weapons they can carry. I'm already imagining criminals carrying out hits with their own little predator drones.

Gee, thanks for adding more paranoia.

Think of how many industries and areas of work were put out of commission by advances in technology during the 20th century. Think how many jobs the Industrial Revolution of the 18th and 19th centuries killed. Are we all unemployed now? Of course not! When old jobs die because of new technologies, they don't go without being replaced. We'll always have something to do.

Hell, take our computers for example, before computers became mainstream, you had a smaller number of programmers working on machines the size of refridgerators or entire rooms. Now anyone with a computer on their lap or or desk can learn to create a program...of course, that carried the side effect of people cracking into other computers and forcing the rise of cyber-security and cyber-warfare (which ironically became new areas of work).

 

Now that begs the question of how 3D printing will affect industries when it becomes mainstream...

I'm honestly more worried about assholes knocking them out of the air, waiting near your doorstep to steal either it or your delivery, etc.

I think they would have countermeasures in place such as tracking devices on the drone or the package in case. And as far as the delivery is concerned, they could solve that by having the box encrypted and send the code to the consumer who ordered it. And if the thief or vandal is caught they end up tracked and prosecuted.

 

In fact, since China's doing it, how have they dealt with thieves and vandalism of their drones?

[Tani Coyote]

Basic income is not going to work because the few who profit from the widespread deployment of automation will set themselves up in countries that don't tax and/or regulate them; we will not see a penny of the wealth gained from automation.

Most of those countries are very tiny. I don't think they have enough land to possibly supply the entire world's industrial needs.

Never mind, I'm positive that any of the countries that caused such massive outsourcing would find themselves invaded. The cheap labor of India and China has nothing on this, as developed nations still have service sectors to employ people in; under this system there'd be practically no jobs to go around.

The reason basic income will happen, is the alternative is violent revolution. The masses of unemployed people are not going to sit back and starve. In addition, the rich who control the automatons won't really have any customers otherwise, given that most people will not have jobs and thus, no money. We're going to see either a socialist revolution or a robust social capitalist system as the result of widespread automation.

Social services, we must remember, did not originate in leftist ideals. They actually were first created by wealthy conservatives who wanted to keep society's most destitute docile. I see no reason they wouldn't do it again to keep their privileged status in a highly technological world.

 

Not to mention the social issues we would face in a society where nobody works.

New technologies have helped alleviate the need for direct interaction. For those who still need a daily fix, there will be a slew of leisure activities to pursue I'd presume. Indeed, creative tasks are the one thing machines cannot do at present, and that's presumably what will remain in the human domain.

 

I'm honestly more worried about assholes knocking them out of the air, waiting near your doorstep to steal either it or your delivery, etc.

Harsh penalties, combined with the measures CSS proposes, will alleviate this problem.

People don't rob delivery trucks usually, so I don't think stealing these items will be much of an issue.

We shouldn't assume the worst of the human population is the mainstream. We're all presented with plenty of opportunities to steal stuff scot-free (that is, with no reasonable chance of law enforcement) every day, but we usually don't. While there's bound to be some packages stolen, they will most likely be reimbursed and hardly be the norm.

Heck, I think the only reason piracy is so prevalent isn't because people reason they can steal without any real chance of getting caught, but because they don't comprehend what they're doing is theft.

[Tornado]

I imagine this would be primarily a luxury for the affluent and middle class, who generally aren't the inhabitants of apartments

 

The affluent and middle class still live in apartments in urban areas.

[Tani Coyote]

The affluent and middle class still live in apartments in urban areas.

This is true, though I believe most affluent folks have moved into the suburbs and country.

For the people who do still live in the high-rise condos and such, however, I presume we'll see the formation of rooftop delivery pads or something of the sort. Installing these on rooftops will simply be the modern version of replacing gas with electricity for streetlights, really. Failing that the existing mail areas could possibly be modified in some way.

[Tornado]

Nah, that's too complicated. They just gotta call up Obama to approve a tactical strike.

[Amomynous]

It's an interesting idea but I'm not sure how they're going to execute a 30 minute delivery, maybe they're only used for shorter distances?

[Tani Coyote]

It's an interesting idea but I'm not sure how they're going to execute a 30 minute delivery, maybe they're only used for shorter distances?

I would presume, yes. It also limits the chance of them being lost mid-flight. Even my mother said the first thing she'd be tempted to do would be to shoot it and take the package. Short distances theoretically limit the ability to do just that, a contrast to if they were flying over the vast countryside.

Can't wait to see the news stories of morons who shoot them down over urban areas where there's lots of witnesses.

[Frogging101]

Here's an article I found supporting the idea of robots taking jobs. http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/are-robotic-smart-machines-behind-the-jobless-recovery-1.2326104

 

These drones may not be a large factor in this, but I think drones in general will play a part in bringing about this collapse.

[goku262002]

Rooster Teeth has their own innovative idea on package delivery.