Election Year or Fear!

[Trickytreesreds]

No idea how that ‘puts me right’…and this may come as a surprise, but technology is rarely faultless. It does go wrong.

Not as much as human error. You can build in extra redundant systems to cover anything you want.
So I;ll say again, why does an operator even if needed , needs a pay greater than a fighter pilot?
Which is why trains all over the world are going driverless.

You may not be aware of this, but an airliner can land itself without a pilot doing anything, if they wish. The autopilot isn't just for slow climbs and cruising
Airbus lead the way on this.
A passenger plane can land by itself using the autopilot through a system that is often referred to as ‘autoland’. The pilots can program the autopilot to carry out the landing automatically whilst the pilots carefully supervise the manoeuvre.

[ramAnag]

Not as much as human error. You can build in extra redundant systems to cover anything you want.
So I;ll say again, why does an operator even if needed , needs a pay greater than a fighter pilot?
Which is why trains all over the world are going driverless.

You may not be aware of this, but an airliner can land itself without a pilot doing anything, if they wish. The autopilot isn't just for slow climbs and cruising
Airbus lead the way on this.
A passenger plane can land by itself using the autopilot through a system that is often referred to as ‘autoland’. The pilots can program the autopilot to carry out the landing automatically whilst the pilots carefully supervise the manoeuvre.

I don’t dispute it, Tricky. Raises the question of why you are so dismissive of train drivers, calling them ‘plebs’…but don’t have the same disregard for airline pilots.

I’d also query some of your salary stats, but it’s a fairly futile argument which you’ve obviously just got a bit of a ‘bee in your bonnet’ about.

[swaledale]

Not as much as human error. You can build in extra redundant systems to cover anything you want.
So I;ll say again, why does an operator even if needed , needs a pay greater than a fighter pilot?
Which is why trains all over the world are going driverless.

You may not be aware of this, but an airliner can land itself without a pilot doing anything, if they wish. The autopilot isn't just for slow climbs and cruising
Airbus lead the way on this.
A passenger plane can land by itself using the autopilot through a system that is often referred to as ‘autoland’. The pilots can program the autopilot to carry out the landing automatically whilst the pilots carefully supervise the manoeuvre.

Trains all over the world going driverless eh? So part from metro/tube systems which are self contained and easy to program, and some self contained freight routes or docks and industry. Please come up with examples of driverless passenger trains then.


It is true that planes can take off and land automatically in certain instances, though one should perhaps remember the Air France Airbus that plunged into the sea whilst en route from Buenos Aires whilst on auto pilot!!

But would you or anyone else on here travel by either train or plane that had no human operator? because that is the issue apart from the complexities of trains that operate on non self contained lines where there are passenger trains of varying speeds, freight trains and many conflicting movements.


But great to see your all in favour of a world where AI dominates and there are no jobs for people, perhaps you can explain what happens to society at that point?

[Geoff Parkstone]

That final point is the crux of the matter. If you automate most all jobs and "free mankind from the necessity of work", where does society go? No work = no wage, thus everyone effectively given flat wage / benefit by state from corporate taxes? No entrepreneurs, no incentives. We all become faceless automatons of the state, but with nothing to do. That might appeal to some, but not me.

Work may "enslave people" but no work would enslave them even more. I can't get my head around where AI and automation is taking us. But I don't think I'd like it, but fortunately will be dead soon enough to avoid finding out. Mankind faces a very dystopian future.

[ramAnag]

That final point is the crux of the matter. If you automate most all jobs and "free mankind from the necessity of work", where does society go? No work = no wage, thus everyone effectively given flat wage / benefit by state from corporate taxes? No entrepreneurs, no incentives. We all become faceless automatons of the state, but with nothing to do. That might appeal to some, but not me.

Work may "enslave people" but no work would enslave them even more. I can't get my head around where AI and automation is taking us. But I don't think I'd like it, but fortunately will be dead soon enough to avoid finding out. Mankind faces a very dystopian future.

Agreeing with that. The point raised by Swale and ‘run with’ by yourself about a future without work is of infinitely greater interest and consequence than any amount of wittering on about the relative value of train drivers.

[Andy_Faber]

That final point is the crux of the matter. If you automate most all jobs and "free mankind from the necessity of work", where does society go? No work = no wage, thus everyone effectively given flat wage / benefit by state from corporate taxes? No entrepreneurs, no incentives. We all become faceless automatons of the state, but with nothing to do. That might appeal to some, but not me.

Work may "enslave people" but no work would enslave them even more. I can't get my head around where AI and automation is taking us. But I don't think I'd like it, but fortunately will be dead soon enough to avoid finding out. Mankind faces a very dystopian future.

Call me a luddite by all means but I don't see, and all the definitions I can find sort of back me up on this, any actual revolution in AI, other than maybe the speed of learning. Everything 'AI' does could be done five, ten, sometimes fif**** years ago and its just the processing power/speed of computers that's changed. That's EVOLUTION not REVOLUTION and as such doesn't require, or deserve, a ***y epithet like AI, other than as something for IT companies and the media to hang a hat on. Back to my spinning jenny I guess, or maybe a chat with Zager And Evans

[ramAnag]

Anyway…back on topic. I see that the latest U.S. election figures suggest 47% support for Harris v 44% for Trump.
One can but hope!

Biggest issues would appear to be 1) The economy - 38%. 2) Abortion - 16% and 3) Immigration - 11%.

Suppose the eventual destination of Robert F Kennedy Jnr’s 3-5% of the proposed vote will play some part. Seems about as crackers as the deluded orange man tbh, but in a closely fought contest those votes could be important.

[swaledale]

Anyway…back on topic. I see that the latest U.S. election figures suggest 47% support for Harris v 44% for Trump.
One can but hope!

Biggest issues would appear to be 1) The economy - 38%. 2) Abortion - 16% and 3) Immigration - 11%.

Suppose the eventual destination of Robert F Kennedy Jnr’s 3-5% of the proposed vote will play some part. Seems about as crackers as the deluded orange man tbh, but in a closely fought contest those votes could be important.

The most promising sign is Trump losing it and his rambling incoherent diatribes about Harris. here's hoping he gets crazier as the year moves on

[Trickytreesreds]

The black hole, wails Starmer.
He claws back 1,8 billion from pensioners, whilst giving away £12 billion to other countries for their "green" projects.
Perhaps he ought to give this some thought as well?
Record numbers of migrants living in Britain and not working are costing the taxpayer an estimated £8 billion a year, a new report warns.

Official figures show 1,689,000 non-UK nationals are either unemployed or classed as economically inactive because they are not looking for a job.

The figure for the second quarter of 2024 surpasses the previous high of 1,676,000 recorded at the start of the year, according to analysis of Office for National Statistics data.

The Centre for Migration Control put the cost to taxpayers at £8.5 billion a year

But right now, smoking outside a pub seems to be his priority?

Never has a man become so hated inside 50 days.

[ramAnag]

The black hole, wails Starmer.
He claws back 1,8 billion from pensioners, whilst giving away £12 billion to other countries for their "green" projects.
Perhaps he ought to give this some thought as well?
Record numbers of migrants living in Britain and not working are costing the taxpayer an estimated £8 billion a year, a new report warns.

Official figures show 1,689,000 non-UK nationals are either unemployed or classed as economically inactive because they are not looking for a job.

The figure for the second quarter of 2024 surpasses the previous high of 1,676,000 recorded at the start of the year, according to analysis of Office for National Statistics data.

The Centre for Migration Control put the cost to taxpayers at £8.5 billion a year

But right now, smoking outside a pub seems to be his priority?

Never has a man become so hated inside 50 days.

You seem to be confusing election and immigration again Tricky.
Maybe you should start your own immigration thread. Oh no, you did that didn’t you? Dedicated it to me for some obscure reason. Remind me…how many responses did it get, was it three or four…all but one with love from you to you!