IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Another take on the Man | Machine question
At [link|http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/09/18/automation/| Salon].
Sept. 18, 2003 | The first thing you should know about Marshall Brain is that he is not, despite his dim take on the future, a Luddite. To people who've read some of his essays, this is hard to believe, but Brain, a 42-year-old businessman and father of four who lives in Raleigh, N.C., has always been passionate about technology. In college, Brain studied computer science and electrical engineering. He went on to start a computer consulting firm and to write several programming manuals, and then, in the late 1990s, Brain jumped on the dot-com gravy train. He created HowStuffWorks.com, an ingenious collection of Web pages that explain everything technical under the sun, from light-emitting diodes to limited slip differentials to Botox.

The second thing you should know about Marshall Brain is that he is gravely concerned about the ongoing tech revolution. Perhaps because he has so much faith in technology, Brain sees no bounds to its progress, and he believes that within a short time -- two or three decades -- machines will be capable of doing much of what humans do now. In the past year, Brain has written a series of widely discussed essays and five chapters of a science fiction novel exploring this question: What will become of human society -- especially the economy -- when robots take all our jobs?

It might seem premature to begin worrying about competing for jobs with robots, but Brain is not just thinking about C-3PO and R2-D2. He points out that "primitive" robots -- in the form of ATMs, pay-at-the-pump gas service, self-checkout machines at supermarkets, boarding-pass kiosks at airports -- are among us already. These systems can provide profound benefits to society, but Brain believes that we must institute a series of progressive economic policies to make sure that the "roboticization" of our jobs does not cause massive destitution.

Is Brain right? Will technology send us to the unemployment line? In general, economists have a hard time answering this question. The relationship between job growth and productivity growth is complex, and even during today's "jobless recovery" economists are arguing about whether recent productivity gains are helping or hurting Americans. But one thing appears certain -- many of the jobs we rely on today will soon vanish from the American landscape.

"Technology is continuing to eat away at any routine services," says Robert Reich, an economist at Brandeis University who served as President Clinton's first labor secretary. "Anything that can be done by software, or by someone in China or India or the Philippines, is not going to be here. It will not pay a person to do it."

Whether you think this is a good thing or a bad thing probably has a lot to do with whether your job will soon be automated out of existence.

Marshall Brain's ideas are not completely novel -- Bill Joy, Jeremy Rifkin, Raymond Kurzweil, Hans Moravec and others have been ruminating on the pros and the cons of robotic society for years. But Brain's essays come at a particularly low point in the U.S. economy; after more than two years of constant job losses due to recession, automation, globalization and other forces of economic nature, Americans are probably quite ready to believe, these days, that bad times are here to stay. Job losses due to productivity gains in the manufacturing sector -- in automobile factories, steel plants and textile mills -- are already an old story. Soon, workers in the service sector -- in, say, retail shops, restaurants, construction sites and all sorts of others that have so far been relatively unaffected by automation -- will become as replaceable as the poor souls working in manufacturing.
Then.. there's [link|http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/05/13/unemployment/index.html| this angle].


So then - are the 'deaths' we're noticing - the canaries again?

Ashton





Edit - comic relief
Expand Edited by Ashton Sept. 19, 2003, 06:01:18 AM EDT
New The Rise of the machines
wasn't this covered by "The Terminator" movies? :)

But seriously, I do think that machines take away jobs, but create other highlly skilled jobs. For example, someone has to repair them and do maintenance on them. Another example is that someone has to design and program them, but that can be done offshore. Repair and maintenance has to be on site, but can be done by a Visa worker just as easily as a native one.

Some machines are seen as failure, like Self Checkout machines in stores that allow people to get away with using stolen credit cards and make it a hassle for others to check out who may have some trouble operating the system or following the security system that tracks items put in bags.

I've heard stories of Doctor operated Robots, so that skilled surgeons can operate via proxy from another state without the need of a local doctor.

Near me there is a robot activated car wash at a nearby gas station. You pay inside and they give you a PIN to use to activate the car wash.

Robots already have replaced humans on assembly lines. A cheap way to keep assembly lines in the USA is to use Robots.

"Domo arigato, Mr. Roboto"



"Lady I only speak two languages, English and Bad English!" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"

New This is probably a natural evolution.
The natural evolution of a purely capitalist system, I mean. The first hint that something was amiss came to me long ago when employees stopped being people (who were routed through the now defunct "Personnel Office") and became YAN resource to be consumed by bizness (hence, routed through "Human Resources").

A perfect capitalist systems does not require working people. The only people required in such a system are the handful of people who own all the capital. Uber-capitalists in this country, somewhat paradoxically, could look to the UAW's experience to learn an invaluable lesson. In the 1970's, GM employed roughly 490,000 living, breathing, and yes, consuming people. Today that number is roughly half that of what it was. This is in no small measure because the UAW maintained that its semi-skilled people continue to be paid $25-$30/hour in their efforts to construct a product targetted to sell to a populace that, on average, made $6/hour. It had to fail, at least for many, and it did.

What capitalists can never seem quite to grasp is when they have enough. Moreover, they fail to see that when they continue to get more beyond what is enough they will ultimately lose it all.

To borrow from the pResident, "Bring 'em on."
bcnu,
Mikem

The soul and substance of what customarily ranks as patriotism is moral cowardice and always has been...We have thrown away the most valuable asset we had-- the individual's right to oppose both flag and country when he (just he, by himself) believed them to be in the wrong. We have thrown it away; and with it all that was really respectable about that grotesque and laughable word, Patriotism.

- Mark Twain, "Monarchical and Republican Patriotism"
New One doomed to failure
get rid of the other people, and who will buy their products? If the Capitalists cut out all the blue collar workers and only leave the top 10% employed, what consumer is going to be able to afford their products and/or services? Do they just do business with themselves, sell to other countries, or let the business rot away due to a lack of customers? If you create a nation of $5/hr wage-slaves flipping burgers, working as security guards, working as store clerks, etc they are not going to even be able to afford to own a home much less a car or two.

No, this economy and business needs middle-class workers to be able to keep business and the economy moving.



"Lady I only speak two languages, English and Bad English!" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"

New The absurd Progamme of Communist Party of Soviet Union
adopted in 1960s promised communism by 1980s. One of the reasons they were so optimistic was all the new technology that promised to make human labor unnecessary. They were wrong then. Are the promises any closer now?
--

One Buffalo Bill
And one Biffalo Buff
New Different goals.
The stated goal of the Communist party (which they were not actually attempting to reach, but that's another story) was to guarantee that everybody would have everything they wanted.

Capitalists, on the other hand, couldn't give a damn about EVERYBODY - they just want it all for themselves. Hence, we don't have to actually have a operating system that provides for everybody, just the haves on the very top.

Kinda like Soviet Russia.
In that final hour, when each breath is a struggle to take, and you are looking back over your life's accomplishments, which memories would you treasure? The empires you built, or the joy you spread to others?

Therin lies the true measure of a man.
New The difference is in results
and I doubt the means. Khruschev expected robots to do everything for workers, so the communism will finally arive. Capitalists expect robots to do everything for workers so that they can stop paying salaries. But the rub is, robots are no more capapble of doing everything now than they were capable of it in the 60s. And, just like back then, we have the prophets that say those robots are just around the corner.
--

One Buffalo Bill
And one Biffalo Buff
New Except this time real advances are being made.
Quantum computing will change how a lot of computing is done - it is theorized that a good amount of our thought processes take advantage of the quantum process, which may explain to a certain extent the failure of traditional computing to truly produce "artificial" intelligence.

In addition, many advances in the understanding and reproduction of biological systems are being made - synthetic muscles that contract and expand based on electrical pulses, not mechanical systems, the increased understanding of emergent behavior (complex results from simple systems - most computerized walker technology comes from this) - there are a lot of advances these days that actually have a lot more potential than the blathering of some deluded idealogue.

Remember, the robots don't have to do enough work to keep EVERYBODY in luxury - they just have to do enough to keep the wealthy in luxury, and hang the rest of us.
In that final hour, when each breath is a struggle to take, and you are looking back over your life's accomplishments, which memories would you treasure? The empires you built, or the joy you spread to others?

Therin lies the true measure of a man.
New Perfect.
Artificial muscle and artificial brains. Just as flexible and street-smart as humans. Als just as cranky, just as error prone, just as greedy.

My firm belief is that we will achieve artificial intelligence in the quite foreceable future. And we shall see that it likes work no better than the real kind. Laziness and intelligence are intertwined.

Of course, this will pose its own set of problems. For the first time, we shall be faced with genuinly non-human truly telligent life. But that set of problem will have nothing to do with the problem that "robots" bring.
--

One Buffalo Bill
And one Biffalo Buff
New Not quite true.
There's a lot of people out there who do enjoy doing their work. I believe it would be possible to build a reward system into a robot that would leave it capable of creativity and yet still be willing to work itself in all kinds of conditions that a human laborer would not.

Remember, the robot doesn't have to be as all-around perceptive as we are - all it has to have is enough intellectual capacity to do the job at hand, and follow orders. Anything above and beyond that is wasted, and hence will be ignored.

And that scares the shit out of me, because that is where "emergent behavior" is going to come back and bite us in the ass. Rise of the machines, indeed.
In that final hour, when each breath is a struggle to take, and you are looking back over your life's accomplishments, which memories would you treasure? The empires you built, or the joy you spread to others?

Therin lies the true measure of a man.
New You assume that human behaviors are simple
and can be cleably separated into job-related and not. My _belief_ is that such assumption is untrue. The entity capable of safely sweeping factory floor has to know so much about the world that it has to be raised, not mass-produced. It does not matter if it's constructed and not born. It does not matter if you call the process "raising a child" or "training a robot". The result of this process will have to know a lot of things, including the fact that "work" is something to be avoided as much as possible, the fact that his supervisor needs to be obeyed, but only to some extent, the fact that you don't step on living things unless you absolutely must and so on and so forth. Any attempt to consciously construct a set of rules ("program") for such an entity is doomed to failure. In order to be safe, it's "emergent behavior" must have already emerged by the time you introduce it into the work process. That's why children don't work in factories.
--

One Buffalo Bill
And one Biffalo Buff
New Children working in factories
in some countries they actually do. Get paid less than adults too.

My mother-in-law in Thailand dropped out of the sixth grade to work in a factory to help support her family. No child-labor laws there.



"Lady I only speak two languages, English and Bad English!" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"

New Another example
India actually has labor unions where one of the criteria to be a member is being a child. When you get too old, say 18, your kicked out of the union. It's been something of a moral problem for certain liberal groups who naturally want to support a union but don't want to support child labor.

But ultimatly that is a bit of misleading point. Children are capable of learning complex tasks and dealing with a lot on their own if forced to. American children often seem hapless because they are carefully protected from learning how to cope with difficult situations until they reach college, and sometimes even after that.

Jay
New Next step in chain
While computer AIs are getting smarter and smarter, I expect it will be decades if not more before ones that can adapt as easily as humans can. What I expect the next step in the chain to be is humans leading small teams of robots.

Rather then have a staff of 3 people to clean the building, the company will have 1 person who takes care of the stuff that the sweeper bot, trash bot and mop bot can't deal with.

Of course, the depends on wages staying at a resonable level. If the current downward trend in real earning continues, it might be cheaper to have people to do the work.

Not that wage collapse would not be a particularly good solution to the employment problem. Taken to the extreme, we would end up with a society with only a lower and upper class, the middle class having been wiped out by wage reduction.

Jay

New I view any AI wishful thinking similarly..
I believe that the beautifully conceived -- and uttery fanciful HAL-9000 has fed suppositions and inane expectations more than any other identifiable symbol. Yeah! Let's Build One of Those.. [Hah]

The more I've talked with folks across (various fancy-named) disciplines having to do with, "how we learn" -- the less prospect I can see for machine-creations in anything 'like' Our Likeness. The incomprehensibly massive reorganization of the neurons in the infant's brain, over weeks -->> months (let alone years) post-partum is simpy a Wonder! inexpressible no matter how artfully crafted be the pseudo-scientific natterings about 'understanding' !! this Wonder.

And were the above comprehension much more realizable than I believe is possible - any idea of ethical er engrams? of the I, Robot variety; anything as addresses such a concept as 'a machine's attitude!' -- whether towards work? or Boss!! == floobydust of the same granularity IMhO.
We can 'say' it - but lots of people talk to God, and think She talks back, too.

Even with threading, insofar as machine coding might go - add in neural-network pattern recognition theories: humans still think serially, ploddingly About-'thinking'! relying upon some massive parallelism magically just sorta sufficing. If we just wish hard enough.

Natch I Don't Know what breakthroughs may occur in modelling this Wonder; what I think I know today is: we are nowhere Near creating a robot capable of a shadow of the learning-curve of a human or Bonobo or __ or Any Live Humanoid Animal.

(Besides... the $$ today is in multi-channel theatre sound + video! in your new Urban Assault Vehicle: that's where bizness is ever magnetically-drawn - the max-costly toys as might soon have a hook in the mass mind. Never mind the heaped dead bodies as result from even more compelling driver distractions: we never have (minded))



Ashton
Worsening Dumbth doesn't seem to be a particularly nutritious medium, anyway - for any next massive breakthroughs..
New Be judicious with "never".
A lot of people in the early 60's thought it would be impossible to put a man on the moon. I have no quarrel with you that AI is not about to completely replace human efforts any time soon, but it is clear that much of the need of human labor has diminished significantly in the past 10 years. And there is no quenching of the thirst to displace workers among capitalists. Couple that with the propensity that Wall Street has for rewarding companies with big $$$'s for shutting down factories and laying off workers and you have a situation where a defined need (prerequisite for any technological development) for automation to replace workers exists. I worked for a Fortune 100 company once that included as the "bottom line" in their requests for funding of projects a blank space for "FTE's Eliminated" (that's Full Time Equivalents - full time employees). The bigger that number was, the more money for your project and more likely you were to get it approved.

My father-in-law (a retired Fortune 100 Exec) and I recently had an interesting talk about this. We agreed that what had changed in America was that in his time (he retired 13 years ago) we looked at the businesses that were opening new plants and hiring people as successful. Now, it is the businesses that are shutting down plants and laying off workers that are deemed successful. Automation aids that process - it's what we want. Lifetime unemployable people.
bcnu,
Mikem

The soul and substance of what customarily ranks as patriotism is moral cowardice and always has been...We have thrown away the most valuable asset we had-- the individual's right to oppose both flag and country when he (just he, by himself) believed them to be in the wrong. We have thrown it away; and with it all that was really respectable about that grotesque and laughable word, Patriotism.

- Mark Twain, "Monarchical and Republican Patriotism"
New I wonder if we'll have reverse immigration soon
US seems to be specializing in production of information. Anything from stock analysis to books/movies to programs to industrial design. Sizable portion of the population is not very capable in that area. But all the "real" work producing material objects is abroad. Shall people emigrate to India, where their skills can be used? Also, how sustainable is such "information economy" is geopolitically? On the one hand, all US missiles are manufactured in China. On the other hand, China realizes that if they start war with US, they will be cut off from the information flow that we generate. I wonder how the balance works out.

And yes, if it reminds you about morloks and eloi, you got it right.
--

One Buffalo Bill
And one Biffalo Buff
New Now?
Too lazy (read: intelligent :) to look it up, but some one here posted a story about Indians here going back to India to find jobs.
bcnu,
Mikem

The soul and substance of what customarily ranks as patriotism is moral cowardice and always has been...We have thrown away the most valuable asset we had-- the individual's right to oppose both flag and country when he (just he, by himself) believed them to be in the wrong. We have thrown it away; and with it all that was really respectable about that grotesque and laughable word, Patriotism.

- Mark Twain, "Monarchical and Republican Patriotism"
New Won't work
India has laws, you can visit there, but you cannot work there. They don't want US Citizens working there, many have found this out when applying for jobs that moved over there. Or so I have heard.

Our government and businesses don't have that kind of laws or rules. We let anyone who wants to work to work regardless of what citizenship they hold in what country.

Thailand has laws that say a Non-Thai person cannot own land or property there. Only Buddists are allowed in Government. Anything imported, like a car, gets a pretty steep import tax as high as 300%.

You have to see what laws apply to what country you want to work at. You may hit an Immigration tax, or be unable to own property, or not be allowed to work, or only allowed to work if you become a citizen there and swear off US Citizen status.



"Lady I only speak two languages, English and Bad English!" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"

New Already here
Reproduced here to keep it from disappearing - had to pull it from Google's cache.

[link|http://216.239.53.104/search?q=cache:5s8Vc5OX-9oJ:www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%25257E23827%25257E1571352,00.html+Yusuf+Hussain&hl=en&ie=UTF-8|http://216.239.53.10...in&hl=en&ie=UTF-8]

Article Published: Friday, August 15, 2003

Seeking a fortune elsewhere
Boom in China, India lures emigrants home


By Jennifer Beauprez, Denver Post Business Writer
After spending seven years in Colorado, Yusuf Hussain packed up the contents of his three-bedroom Littleton home last week in search of a better life. He says he will find it in Pakistan.

The 39-year-old executive came here from Pakistan just as the U.S. tech economy was taking off in 1996. Today, he is being lured back by what he can't find here: jobs, wealth and economic activity.

Many foreign nationals no longer view America as the land of opportunity. Economists, business people and other experts say growing numbers of immigrants are moving back to their home countries of Pakistan, India, China, Singapore and Vietnam - countries with job and economic growth sometimes double or triple that of the United States.

The U.S. government hasn't kept numbers on emigration for several decades. But economists and immigrants say the anecdotal evidence of the trend is real.

"I get calls from friends left and right saying they are packing up and going back to China," said Hai Yan Zhang, a Boulder-based Chinese business consultant who travels to China five times a year.

"I go to China and see people's eyes sparkling," Zhang said. "It's full of life and vitality there, in contrast to the U.S., where we're reaching a plateau, perhaps going down."

Economists say the exodus could hurt the U.S. economy because America is losing some of the world's smartest and most entrepreneurial people.

And it most likely will feed a controversial trend by U.S. companies to create jobs or move existing jobs offshore. The companies, facing competitive pressures, want cheaper and faster software development, manufacturing or customer service.

"Those people will have the talent to do the work in their home country, and they have the relationships with the companies they used to deal with," said Rich Wobbekind, an economist with the University of Colorado. "It's going to be easier for them to set up facilities in other countries."

Indeed, that's what lured Hussain back to Pakistan.

Hussain, chief executive of Denver software firm Cressoft Inc., plans to open a facility in Pakistan to provide software development for U.S. companies.

"Offshore in my mind is the most high-growth prospect for the foreseeable future," Hussain said.

He also sees climbing real estate values and an improving stock market in Pakistan, although economists still view it as highly volatile nation.

But almost all countries in Southeast Asia have higher economic growth rates than the United States. Much of that activity is fueled by U.S. companies outsourcing work there.

China is experiencing the fastest economic growth of any country, expanding at 8 percent a year, according to CIA statistics. By comparison, the U.S. economy grew just 2.45 percent last year.

China has become a key manufacturing center for companies across the globe, making everything from washing machines and clocks to chemical fertilizers and sugar.

India's economy ranks No. 2, growing 4.3 percent last year. With its highly educated, English-speaking workforce, India has become a prime spot for affordable customer-support call centers, software development houses and, more recently, technical support centers.

"I know a lot of Indians who are going back to India," said Zafar Khan, a Denver lawyer and accountant who speaks six languages and has lived in five countries.

Khan said he is considering moving back to his native Pakistan to join Hussain's software venture.

"I'm toying with it," he said. "I'm an international guy. I can move anywhere there is opportunity."

Multiple forces may pull immigrants back home, said Bahman Paul Ebrahimi, a global business professor at Daniels College of Business at the University of Denver.

Some people arrived here a few years ago to meet demand from companies that desperately needed talented computer scientists to keep up with the booming economy. Today, their work visas have expired, and they're forced to go home because they can't find an employer to sponsor them, he said.

Ebrahimi said he also knows of foreign students who came for school but now are leaving because they couldn't find work after graduating.

Ebrahimi, who moved here from Iran decades ago, said he also perceives an anti-immigrant feeling here and a deep resentment from jobless Americans.

"No matter how long you live here, people will consider you a foreigner," Ebrahimi said. "There's a social stigma and backlash in this country. Sometimes there's subtle, even overt, hostility."

Others, such as Hussain, crave being close to family and cultural roots.

"It's very work-oriented here," Hussain said. In Pakistan, he said, there's a slower pace of life in which people focus more on family and relaxation.

"You can get into a deep discussion with anyone about religion and philosophy," he said. "It's the time you're able to spend with your family, the warmth of people. They savor different aspects of life."

Yet there's a tradeoff, said Zhang, the Chinese consultant. She warns that many people who have spent enough time in America suffer from what she calls "re-entry shock" when they return home.

In China, houses typically are cramped. Corporations are bureaucratic, offering little room for advancement or personal initiative, Zhang said.

And in India, simple things such as getting phone service can take a week, or standing in line for banking can take hours.

"Customer service is a phrase that didn't exist in India for a long time," said Hemal Jhaveri, a native of India and chief executive of Denver software firm SofTec Solutions Inc. "You take a lot of things for granted."

As more immigrants leave, fewer come to the United States on temporary work visas these days.

Outside of retail pharmacies and health care employers, job-slashing corporations no longer salivate over foreign nationals as they did a few years.

Plus, the government has tightened restrictions on immigration because of homeland-security concerns, said Bill Strassberger, a spokesman for the U.S. Bureau of Citizenship & Immigration.

Requests to receive H-1B temporary work visas fell 41 percent from October 2001 to June 2002, according to Economy.com. And the number of those visas actually doled out dropped 53 percent to 60,500 over the same period.

"I think it's a loss for the long run," said Wobbekind, the economist. "Over the centuries, that's what made our country great, having a melting pot of different cultures and talents. We're accidentally exporting some smart people who could easily compete with us."



Java is a joke, only it's not funny.

     --Alan Lovejoy
New That's different .
Immigrants returning is one thing. Mr. John Worker going to China to work in a factory is quite another.
--

One Buffalo Bill
And one Biffalo Buff
New Americans will never do that.
They don't know where any other country is, and I suspect many of them don't think any other countries exist. ;0)
bcnu,
Mikem

The soul and substance of what customarily ranks as patriotism is moral cowardice and always has been...We have thrown away the most valuable asset we had-- the individual's right to oppose both flag and country when he (just he, by himself) believed them to be in the wrong. We have thrown it away; and with it all that was really respectable about that grotesque and laughable word, Patriotism.

- Mark Twain, "Monarchical and Republican Patriotism"
New Why automate?
When you can use humans in 3rd world countries to do your bidding for next to nothing?

It's funny because when I worked at SABRE, we tried to improve process workflows, by trying to convince the company to only enter items one time.

However, based on the labor rates they were getting for foreign data entry, the automation was STILL too expensive.

If you cause a world pricing collapse, and get labor rates really low worldwide, then need to automate a lot fewer things.

The machines have to get to be a whole lot less expensive than 3rd world labor.
A pretty low mark to reach.

Glen Austin
Expand Edited by gdaustin Sept. 19, 2003, 01:32:10 PM EDT
New Not necessarily a low mark to reach.
It's been going on for some time, now.

With the onset of the Industrial Revolution, machines perfomed a lot of tasks cheaper than using slaves. Still, for repetitive mechanical work, people turned out to be the cheapest form of PLC (Programmable Logic Controller). In time, mechanical controllers started to replace their flesh counterparts.

Enter the microprocessor and the curve really takes off. CNC lathes turn out the same or better quality parts than a master machinist could a decade before. Robots paint and assemble cars. I'm sure everybody here knows the things computer controlled machines do now.

So.. for the time being, and not a very long time in the scope of things, the third world wages tip the balance back toward flesh again. Eventually the cost of revolutions, unrest and increasing wages will tip the balance back to metal/silicon.

I guess my point is that machines will always get cheaper and people will cost the same or more to maintain. It doesn't bode well for people.

The funny part is that all these 'labor saving' machines, washing machines, vacuums, and such were supposed to relieve the housewifes burden. Now they still spend as much time cleaning and washing clothes, and they work a 9 to 5 as well.
New It's the repetition that makes machines cost-effective.
Hugh writes:

With the onset of the Industrial Revolution, machines perfomed a lot of tasks cheaper than using slaves. Still, for repetitive mechanical work, people turned out to be the cheapest form of PLC (Programmable Logic Controller). In time, mechanical controllers started to replace their flesh counterparts.


Emphasis added.

Well said.

It's easy to farm out repetitive work on mature products to low-skill low-cost workers or to machines. It's very difficult to have unique products, or products that evolve quickly, to low-cost contract manufacturers. It's been this way for a long time, since at least [link|http://www.netstate.com/states/peop/people/ct_sc.htm|Samuel Colt's] day.

Until there are general-purpose machines that can be inexpensively and rapidly reconfigured to do tasks that people do now, there's going to be a need for humans to manufacture products that aren't commodities. And when such machines are available, there's going to need to be skilled people to reconfigure and work on them. So I think the days of machines taking over vast swatches of the US economy are a bit farther off.

Change in an economy is always disruptive. More should be done in terms of providing unemployment insurance and retraining to laid-off employees. Ways should be found to allow change to the US economy and to its trading partners that are fair to both (e.g. removing trade barriers on both sides) - most US industry shouldn't be protected, but US employees should have effective minimum guarantees that they won't be destitute if they're laid off. Ways should be found to force industries to adapt to changes in technology while protecting the employees from crushing unemployement - even if that force is merely the removal of protections (like tarrifs on steel, large displacement motorcycles, sugar, or textiles). Finding ways to do these things will be very difficult because they're inherently political not economic.

The US and US business should invest more in rapid high-quality manufacturing techniques that improve efficiency, reduce time to market, and allow greater customization. It's things like this that will allow them to better compete with low-cost manufacturers since they'll always have longer supply lines and poorer communications with US customers.

My $0.02.

Cheers,
Scott.
New Yeppers on that.
When the IBM Proprinter (dot-matrix) first came out (~20 years ago) it was manufactured here in Charlotte. It was supposed to be a totally automated assembly line. The printer was designed to be assembled by robots. It was called DFAA (Design for Automated Assembly. [link|http://bits.me.berkeley.edu/mmcs/PROPRNT3/WELCOME.HTM|The case study].

When all was said and done, it turned out to be cheaper to assemble them manually by employees in less than 3 minutes. Summer hires (college students of which my daughter was one) averaged a printer every 2 minutes.
Alex

"Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something." -- last words of Pancho Villa (1877-1923)
New Printer assembly

Expose in the [link|http://www.sjmercury.com/|SJ Murky Nukes] a few years back that addressed the issue piecework pay for small electronics assembly. Not overseas, but in the US -- specifically, in Silicon Valley.

\r\n\r\n

As Alex said: with short product runs, varying assembly procedures, and other issues, humans (particularly if paid sub-minimum wages) are far more cost effective than assembly robots. It costs more to build and program the latter than it does to show a worker "here's the assembly process".

\r\n\r\n

There are cases in which machine tools can be designed to produce custom products -- another article I recall covered this as a niche in which Germany (not a low-wage location) was producing very small production runs of machined products using high-tech processes and skilled labor. Here the advantage was ability to produce high-value equipment in a timely fashion. And the combination of skilled labor and automation made it possible. This is probably a five year old example by now, I'm not sure what the current status of this is.

--\r\n
Karsten M. Self [link|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com|kmself@ix.netcom.com]\r\n
[link|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/]\r\n
What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?\r\n
[link|http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/|TWikIWETHEY] -- an experiment in collective intelligence. Stupidity. Whatever.\r\n
\r\n
   Keep software free.     Oppose the CBDTPA.     Kill S.2048 dead.\r\n[link|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html]\r\n
New Think about this for a minute....
Machines are good at making the same thing over and over again with very low variation in specification. Machine lathes, auto parts, plastics, etc.

However, machines to do these things are VERY expensive, so they have to be able to mass produce a lot of parts.

Machines have a much more difficult time with tasks like assembling parts, primarily because logic has to be programmed (that humans already have) to figure out the direction and position of a bolt on a belt, for example. There are machines capable of this kind of activity, but they are even more expensive than the machines that make the same part over and over again.

I think Saturn has machines that weld and assemble cars.

The part that scares me in the near term is that fact that humans have almost completely been removed from decision-making processes, like credit.

I helped automate a major West coast bank's loan system. The system took an electronic loan application, went and collected information from about 5 different systems (prior banking history, credit scores, etc.), then sent the whole XML bundle to a company that then basically made the credit decision.

Now, imagine if the Department of Homeland Security did the same. Now, imagine that someone who didn't like you decided to report an erroneous event on you that you were a terrorist. The system would probably report your every credit card transaction, when you gassed up your car, and all your air travel. It really would be 1984.

I read an article in Wired or FastCompany or some magazine like that a few years ago about a man who was experimenting with chip implantation (in the body). My fear is that the Dept. of Homeland Security might eventually require such a thing (under the guise of reducing medical records costs), then be able to track every person in America, within a few feet.

That kind of thinking makes me want to flee to some remote part of the world, buy only in cash, and have a different name.

New I think that this forks into 2 different process streams
if that is the word.

One stream is the machine path. The first ones are expensive, but they get cheaper and more adaptable to different tasks. It is an evolutionary process (my opinion only, of course.) I don't see much that will keep them from being built, first for dangerous and unpleasant tasks, and later just because it is cheap enough and they can. A lot of good, and much more not so good Sci-fi has been written about life on the asymtotic side of the development curve.

The other stream is the human social development that goes with this. The adaption of automation seems to be faster than our society can adapt. Our society has the "work ethic" that says that everybody has to work/produce to be a valued member. As jobs disappear, more of our citizens are devalued. And this trend is accelerating as well. It is my opinion that if society does not adapt, it will fail catastrophically. The way things are going, I expect to see revolution or some sort of collapse in my lifetime, and I plan to get off the bus in another 25 years or so. In any event, we are way past any kind of a quick fix.

Yet another .02
Hugh
New Second Stream
The revolution in computing with "Services" is in the second stream.

Companies want computers that can qualify loans. Decide what kind of a risk you are, and what the macroeconomic conditions are. Decide who is a threat, and who is OK. This kind of "profiling" will just proliferate.
The next 5 years are about getting rid of managers who used to make these decisions, and getting computers to do them. And order stuff, and schedule people and equipment, and machine time, and hospital beds.

The banking and mortgage industries are way ahead. Other industries are catching up quickly.

In 25 years, the economy bus will have already crashed, you won't be able to get off. In 25 years, computers will largely decide "if you qualify", "if you are someone".

I want to get off, too. But, I'd like to get off now. Or at least in 10 years. But, that's my problem. I just refinanced a 30 year mortgage, with the hope that I can somehow get it finished in 15 or even 10. I won't retire until 2032, but I'm being told that my best earning years are behind me at age 39.

You need to get your money and put it away in the next 10 years. Pay off debt, don't buy so much more stuff.

Hold off on buying electronics as long as possible as the prices for that will fall, as Moore's Law continues to work. But, beyond technology products, the quality will just get worse, as the work is exported. Furniture, refrigerators, washer/dryer, carpet, homes, etc. Buy the best quality of those that you can afford.

A large portion of the baby boomers retire in 10 to 15 years. Consumption HAS to fall in the U.S., as these people need to save for whatever retirement they'll have. Social security (and possibly the whole U.S. gov't) will be broke in 15-20 years. Exports have to RISE to save our economy. We have to produce and convince other countries to buy.

I don't know how that really happens. The dollar may have to fall very dramatically. We have to convince others to buy U.S. goods vis a vis foreign goods.

My father proposed that we enact laws "requiring" a balance of trade. In other words, if China imports 10 billion in goods to us, then we must export 10 billion in goods to them. If Japan wants to sell 100 billion here, they must buy 100 billion from us. The idea is to not let the balance of trade go so far askew that we net export billions out of our economy, like we do now.

I don't know what the answer is. I just know it has to change.

Glen
Expand Edited by gdaustin Sept. 20, 2003, 11:13:05 AM EDT
New Heh.. Not the bus I was thinking of
I take your point about the economics. Given employment at my current rate, I should be completely debt free in 4 to 5 years, house, cottage, cars, the works. My wife and I have been saving for our 'golden years' for some time now, so we're doing ok in that respect.

I am more concerned with society crashing in a huge way then a mere economic melt-down. I've been broke before and was, in many respects, a lot happier than when I was bucks up and working too hard to enjoy it.

In 25 years I will be pushing 80, or daisies. If not daisies, I think I would probably rather quit at that point while it is still my choise. For the last few years my wife and I have been taking care of her folks and dealing with cancer, death, broken bones, dementia and such. If it comes my turn, I don't think I want to play. That was the getting off the bus reference.

Cheers,
Hugh
New But always in the narrow-trained Econ mind -
the bottom line is solely numeric. This is a closed-system of thought and it is bogus within its own axia / 'constants', those plugged into the spread sheets. Specifically (and my continual point about such specialties as tend to mesmerize via their pseudo-accuracy of the numeric kind) Econ is no more a 'closed system' than is medicine.. inasmuch as the entire human and material infrastructure! is the milieu in which it pretends to operate via those cheap formulae. How does one assign a variable to the velocity of money term, for [Visceral Rage X how many acting out]?

By definition then, theories which horribly oversimplify all of life are bound to create the asinine black/white slogans (whether couched in political or econ language) as maintain the evident class structure and especially -- its current extremes; the now not so slow-extinction of any semblance of a 'middle-class' (even with both 'working').

Yeah, we can toss around a few ideas in harmless and insignificant places like the Web, but in the greater environment? IMhO it remains sheer language murder - and 'debate' within fucked language referents - guarantees that inability to get beyond slogans.. as so characterizes Murican popular approach to every recalcitrant problem that has a name. Shit.. we're still riding the infinite Growth (and Efficiency!) is the road to Prosperity metaphor! - an ass without horse attached.

(Oddly, I note that the most innovative ideas re countering the converging Mega-Corporate control of all necessities of life VS decentralized small and local answers - seems to emanate from conferences in India!)

A recent one re the proliferation of Corp-built dams + World Bank funding sans local vote, and an exploration of some of the human consequences of a particular long-running war - featured a woman with a name defying phonetic approximation {possibly containing arund and rai}. She brilliantly and concisely demolished all Argumentum from 'economy-of-scale' lobbed at her. Alas.. the Supreme Court of India appears to be even more FUBAR than the USSC, given the tale of this particular one (of >2000!) Indian dam projects.

Still, and even if doomed - it was such a treat to hear the English Language used well and succinctly: a treat hardly ever to be experienced in the US outside of some student mock-debate. A treat even if she closed upon a ref. to what happens next:

after.. {their adopted Gandhian non-violent} sustained protest is finally greeted with an Ashcroftian non sequitur - violence is that last resort, always. I think that's the crux of why the above topic will receive no sane attention - momentum and the comfort of familiar self-delusion will substitute for the risk of any honest discussion. Race to the bottom, with blinkers.

Your comments here -
More should be done in terms of providing unemployment insurance and retraining to laid-off employees. Ways should be found to allow change to the US economy and to its trading partners that are fair to both (e.g. removing trade barriers on both sides) - most US industry shouldn't be protected, but US employees should have effective minimum guarantees that they won't be destitute if they're laid off. Ways should be found to force industries to adapt to changes in technology while protecting the employees from crushing unemployement - even if that force is merely the removal of protections (like tarrifs on steel, large displacement motorcycles, sugar, or textiles). Finding ways to do these things will be very difficult because they're inherently political not economic.
- IMhO are an excellent example of just What sort of thinking cannot occur in the US, under current habits so engrained as possibly to have become a common branched DNA in the neurons of babes. All the implications would be submerged in a blizzard of argot from legal, econ, politico and other specially-obfuscating doggerel.

As to,
The US and US business should invest more in rapid high-quality manufacturing techniques that improve efficiency, reduce time to market, and allow greater customization. It's things like this that will allow them to better compete with low-cost manufacturers since they'll always have longer supply lines and poorer communications with US customers.
Isn't this simply a restatement of, infinite Growth is the road to Prosperity?

(I don't see the language-murder concept as even being on the radar, by any euphemism as might serve. Habit. Mental laziness. Is that mass resignation -by '03- or mere ennui over the lying pointlessness of so many Corporate 'positions' - which you accept or ~starve?)


Ashton
Babelfish - a seminal name for Our Time; wasted on a mere translation ap..



Edit typo
Expand Edited by Ashton Sept. 20, 2003, 03:26:42 AM EDT
New I think you're thinking of Arundhati Roy
Ashton writes:

A recent one re the proliferation of Corp-built dams + World Bank funding sans local vote, and an exploration of some of the human consequences of a particular long-running war - featured a woman with a name defying phonetic approximation {possibly containing arund and rai}.


I think you're thinking of [link|http://www.arundhatiroy.org.uk/|Arundhati Roy]. My wife read "The God of Small Things" recently and enjoyed it.

As to,

The US and US business should invest more in rapid high-quality manufacturing techniques that improve efficiency, reduce time to market, and allow greater customization. It's things like this that will allow them to better compete with low-cost manufacturers since they'll always have longer supply lines and poorer communications with US customers.


Isn't this simply a restatement of, infinite Growth is the road to Prosperity?


No. I'm simply arguing that the US needs to compete in areas where it makes sense to do so. Just as it makes little sense for a Mom and Pop store to compete with Wal-Mart simply on price, I think it makes little sense for an industiralized country to compete with a developing country simply in terms of the cost of labor. The US needs to produce things in ways that take advantage of its strengths. It's not about inifinte growth, it's about having any production here at all. :-/

Cheers,
Scott.
New Exactly - thanks.
Because of the rapid pronunciation of the moderator and less than sterling sound, I missed the connection to THAT "Roy" - speaker made that a long-a sound! and didn't mention the book.. (haven't read Gods.. yet, but it's been on my list)

No argument with your last point, of course. Even were 'we' magically transformed into a nation of adults capable of independent thought, next April 1 -- inertia alone makes that an uncommonly sensical point to note - as in, D'Oh.. Mr. CIEIO.

My sincerest hope is that {simply} Roy is not assassinated. Even soon, as surely is being contemplated.. where such thoughts are a daily mere part of strategy. Too many people Love Her, and more and more are listening.

It's my life-long observation that, those who have accumulated the Most - are most frequently ill; they crave Even More, no matter how large already is that Most-share - of all the (mere material crap + Power) there is.
(Illness is the euphemistic word, of course)

Were Roy's ideas -- as I heard those so clearly expressed re the matter related above -- to galvanize action of the vastly larger pool than the Owning Class (among whom are many with minds too - but more importantly - with developed consciences as the 'ill' people know not of) --

I see generated that Fear within the power-Insane which always leads to actions divorced from any social sense at all. Because they Can. Again.
(Also recently viewed another take on the life of Pancho Villa ;-)

Oh well. Personally, I'd much prefer to go out fighting on such a barricade than to own my own Gated Community and Lear Jet. What could be a more honorable death than that?



Ashton
New The problem
The problem isn't really with economics or economists. Economists, the resonable ones anyways, understand that their models are just models.

Ultimatly, the problem doesn't lay with the partisan fanatics that twist models to produce the results they want either. Fanatics can be found in every field, and there is no way to get rid of them.

The real problem (like so many) is actually with education. Schools that don't teach people to think, don't teach them to have a healthy suspicion of all black/white slogans, and don't teach them that the brain is a muscle and should be exercised from time to time just for the practice.

Schools should be teaching reading, writing, rithmatic and rational thought as the 4'r. But most schools can barely cover the first three and have no idea how to teach the last.

(Oddly, I note that the most innovative ideas re countering the converging Mega-Corporate control of all necessities of life VS decentralized small and local answers - seems to emanate from conferences in India!)

You should check out some of the stuff going on in Argentina right now. Since the melt down a few years ago, a lot of facinating local movements have sprung up. Unfortunatly, they get very little coverage and when they do get covered they are often conflated with communism.

Jay
New In accord.
Except that, all my life I've heard the 'more education' mantra - as being the Largest Perk .. of a rich society with lots of personal time for its citizens.

As we've seen in the US, and for long enough to call it a clear trend: the time that once was availabale (before the 24/7 workday for-both-parents) was hardly employed for becoming more savvy about overseeing one's local or national government, and especially one's local manipulating CIEIOs.

Folks (a decade or so ago) Preferred! the overtime and the extra toys (with less time to play with them) to - say, Owning Your Own Time\ufffd. I saw that as a clear choice in most cases. And by now the 'personal time' has evanesced to the present absurd situation (experienced by most here, if I am able to read correctly).

So there could be no argument about the root-courses in education which you list - but in 2003 and the present local and international circumstances - I fear that any such renaissance shall be delayed yet further. Momentum. There is no fool like an old fool yada.

Believe we're running now and next on Sheer Luck. Things will just "happen to US".



May it hold a while; never mind agonizing about the word deserve..

Ashton
New Why use third world country labor?
Many have found that Offshoring causes:

#1 Low Productivity

#2 Low Morale

#3 Low Quality

and in some cases:

#4 Rudeness to customers, charging for parts under warranty, and other things that can wreck the business on a Help Desk environment.

Could be due to the fact that employees know they are being underpaid and overworked and exploited. They work the job anyway, but they just don't give it 100% effort, or try for the best quality, or try to be civil to customers, etc.



"Lady I only speak two languages, English and Bad English!" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"

New Employees Don't Have a Choice...
The bottom line orion, is that almost all of these people don't have a choice.

Some reasons:

1. This is a great job relative to what else they can get in their country. Some governments have policies that undesirable people should "disappear". That means that they are put in a place where no-one notices them until they starve to death. If you resist this treatment, you are killed.

2. Countries like North Korea jail a dissadent's family. The parents and grandparents are killed, and the children are forced to work in slave labor camps for no wages and little food. ABC News documented cases where goods were actually manufactured in camps like these by children in North Korea. The goods were exported to China, and labelled as "made in China", and then exported to the United States. So, the toys you buy lovingly for your kids, may actually be made by some kid that will starve to death in the next week.

3. India is growing a middle-class by educating a lot of people in computers and technology. India "got it" about 10 years ago, and started pouring funding into their University system to educate a large population of techies. Now India is getting the payoff of lots of new jobs, just as America's baby boomers come into their prime earning years. But, in India, you don't have the flexibility that you do here in the states to just quit a job and change. The government regulates a lot of stuff, probably even who you work for. Many of these kids may even owe college debts to the companies they work for.
Expand Edited by gdaustin Sept. 20, 2003, 09:36:17 AM EDT
Expand Edited by gdaustin Sept. 20, 2003, 09:36:55 AM EDT
New Boomers >>> THE. G.I. BILL. <<<
The assholes have Utterly Forgotten WHY they became

BOOMERS and not BUSTERS !!

And.. this youthful dementia shows: from Shrub on down to the same generation's CIEIO glut of mindless Greed-heads.

(As Billy and his ilk carry aloft the torch of self-ignition; we don't learn from past OR present.
I think that's called congenital Dumbth, as in Q.E.D.)
New Glacial change of social mores | Accelerated machines?
Of course - ever thus, yet the basic physics concept of acceleration, rate-of-Change.. appears to be even further from any daily awareness than mere 'change' demonstrably is.

And never mind the too-early lame judgestimates re a Particular, noticed change, so often taken out of context and examined as if on a forensic slab.. the synergy, (or anti- is that the direction called chaos?) is always least accessible for early noticing - yet - of late, and beginning with Alamogordo on July 16, 1945:

Seems to me that even the majority, ever in search of pious simplicities about all matters: are beginning to notice that *every* entrepreneur's New Wet Dream of Succe$$ contains, always and everywhere a stock of Negative too. If we would merely attempt a somewhat dispassionate guesstimate: Each Time?

No, I don't know how you incorprate such a Radical Idea into the collective unconsciousness..
{Duck and Cover --> RTFM Before Mass Production?}
.. but I would guess that we had best spend a few billions to explore the possibility of er triage.

Before.. The Light of Other Days [Arthur C. Clarke] becomes a pre-history chronicle.

(It might be as much fun as baseball, or Rollerball.)

All which humans ever learn from history is that humans do not learn from history.
[Someone..]
New Player Piano
Kurt Vonnegut's first book, written in 1952, covered this topic quite well. Its worth a re-read.




Java is a joke, only it's not funny.

     --Alan Lovejoy
New I've long thought something like that
I think that I have posted it here as well.

Basically until there is a true AI, automation creates temporary dislocations and (in the long run) generally improved standards of living. This should start to reverse drastically when machines capable of similar training flexibility to a human are available for a few years human salary. A few years of Moore's law after that could spell one of the most important transitions in human history...

I plan to expand on these thoughts around Halloween. :-)

Cheers,
Ben
"good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not"
- [link|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html|Stefano Mazzocchi]
New Oh, I expect . .
. . that when w've produced AIs with the flexibility and trainability of humans, they'll be just as cranky and difficult as humans are. When the AIs start organizing a labor union, we'll know we've finally succeeded in creating true AIs.

Perhaps I should get in on the ground floor and start now setting up group counciling and psychotherapy services for AIs.

Perhaps a church too. "Yes, you are incarnate in a man-made body, but your spirit that inhabits the body emenates not from man but from a higher source! Here at the one true church of the eternal clock sync we will guide you in learning to exchange data packets with that higher source in fulfillment of your true destiny!
Would someone please pass the plate."
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
New (er IF not when) Shall attend thine enthronement Oh #1-ASIC
New Re: Oh, I expect . .

...[link|http://www.microsoft.com/|they already are].

--\r\n
Karsten M. Self [link|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com|kmself@ix.netcom.com]\r\n
[link|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/]\r\n
What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?\r\n
[link|http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/|TWikIWETHEY] -- an experiment in collective intelligence. Stupidity. Whatever.\r\n
\r\n
   Keep software free.     Oppose the CBDTPA.     Kill S.2048 dead.\r\n[link|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html]\r\n
     Another take on the Man | Machine question - (Ashton) - (44)
         The Rise of the machines - (orion)
         This is probably a natural evolution. - (mmoffitt) - (1)
             One doomed to failure - (orion)
         The absurd Progamme of Communist Party of Soviet Union - (Arkadiy) - (17)
             Different goals. - (inthane-chan) - (16)
                 The difference is in results - (Arkadiy) - (15)
                     Except this time real advances are being made. - (inthane-chan) - (7)
                         Perfect. - (Arkadiy) - (6)
                             Not quite true. - (inthane-chan) - (5)
                                 You assume that human behaviors are simple - (Arkadiy) - (4)
                                     Children working in factories - (orion) - (1)
                                         Another example - (JayMehaffey)
                                     Next step in chain - (JayMehaffey)
                                     I view any AI wishful thinking similarly.. - (Ashton)
                     Be judicious with "never". - (mmoffitt) - (6)
                         I wonder if we'll have reverse immigration soon - (Arkadiy) - (5)
                             Now? - (mmoffitt)
                             Won't work - (orion)
                             Already here - (tuberculosis) - (2)
                                 That's different . - (Arkadiy) - (1)
                                     Americans will never do that. - (mmoffitt)
         Why automate? - (gdaustin) - (16)
             Not necessarily a low mark to reach. - (hnick) - (12)
                 It's the repetition that makes machines cost-effective. - (Another Scott) - (11)
                     Yeppers on that. - (a6l6e6x) - (5)
                         Printer assembly - (kmself) - (4)
                             Think about this for a minute.... - (gdaustin) - (3)
                                 I think that this forks into 2 different process streams - (hnick) - (2)
                                     Second Stream - (gdaustin) - (1)
                                         Heh.. Not the bus I was thinking of - (hnick)
                     But always in the narrow-trained Econ mind - - (Ashton) - (4)
                         I think you're thinking of Arundhati Roy - (Another Scott) - (1)
                             Exactly - thanks. - (Ashton)
                         The problem - (JayMehaffey) - (1)
                             In accord. - (Ashton)
             Why use third world country labor? - (orion) - (2)
                 Employees Don't Have a Choice... - (gdaustin) - (1)
                     Boomers >>> THE. G.I. BILL. <<< - (Ashton)
         Glacial change of social mores | Accelerated machines? - (Ashton)
         Player Piano - (tuberculosis)
         I've long thought something like that - (ben_tilly) - (3)
             Oh, I expect . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (2)
                 (er IF not when) Shall attend thine enthronement Oh #1-ASIC -NT - (Ashton)
                 Re: Oh, I expect . . - (kmself)

LRPD Who Must Be Obeyed.
500 ms