Q. 1) Who Was King Tutankhamun ?

Tutankhamun, colloquially known as King Tut, was the 12th Pharaoh of

the 18th Egyptian dynasty, in power from approximately 1332 to 1323 B.C.E.
King Tut was born circa 1341 B.C.E. in ancient Egypt. After taking
power, the boy king changed his name to Tutankhamun, which means "the
living image of Amun."
King Tut was the son of the powerful Akhenaten (also known as
Amenhotep IV). His mother was probably one of Akhenaten's sisters.
Around 1332 B.C.E., the same year that Tutankhaten took power, he
married Ankhesenamun, his half-sister and the daughter of Akhenaten and
Queen Nefertiti. While the young couple had no surviving children, it is known
they had two daughters, both likely to have been stillborn.
At the time of his birth, ancient Egypt was going through great social and
political upheaval. Tutankhaten's father had forbidden the worship of many gods
in favour of worshiping one, Aten, the sun disk. For this, he is known as the
"heretic king."

...2/-
 -2-

During his reign, Tutankhamun accomplished little. However, his

powerful advisers restored the traditional Egyptian religion, which had
been set aside by his father, Akhenaten, who led the "Amarna Revolution."
Tutankhamun was trained in the military, and there is some evidence
that he was good at archery. However, it is unlikely that he saw any
military action.
After his death at age 19, King Tut disappeared from history until the
discovery of his tomb in 1922. Since then, studies of his tomb and remains
have revealed much information about his life and times, making
Tutankhamun one of the best known ancient Egyptian kings.
There are no surviving records of Tutankhamun's death. Research
suggests King Tut died circa 1323 B.C.E. from a gangrene infection at age
19. The infection was possibly the result of a broken leg. DNA analysis
conducted in 2010 showed the presence of malaria in his system, leading to
the belief that a combination of malaria and Kohler disease II led to his
death.
Q.2) How old was he when he died ?

As per researches, King Tut died circa 1323 B.C.E. from a

gangrene infection at age 19. But there are no surviving records of
Tutankhamun's death.
In 2005, a CT scan report showed that he had suffered a compound
left leg fracture shortly before his death, and that the leg had become
infected. DNA analysis conducted in 2010 showed the presence
of malaria in his system, leading to the belief that a combination of
malaria and Kohler disease II led to his death.
Q. 3) What was the cause of his death ?

There are no surviving records of Tutankhamun's death. The cause of his

death has been the subject of considerable debate and major studies have been
conducted to establish it. A CT Scan taken in 2005 showed that he had suffered a
compound left leg fracture shortly before his death, and that the leg had become
infected. DNA analysis conducted in 2010 showed the presence of Malaria in his
system, leading to the belief that a combination of malaria and Kohler disease II
led to his death.
In 2005, research using CT scans on the mummy found that he was not
killed by a blow to the head. New CT images discovered congenital flaws, which
are more common among the children of incest. Siblings are more likely to pass on
twin copies of deleterious alleles, which is why children of incest more commonly
manifest genetic defects. It is suspected he also had a partially cleft palate, another
congenital defect.
Additionally left foot, malaria, and a complex bone fracture of the right
knee, which occurred shortly before his death., some reports said, he suffered from
mild flat feet, hypophalangism of the right foot, bone necrosis of the second and
third metatarsal bones of the of the left foot, malaria, and a complex bone fracture
of the right knee, which occurred shortly before his death.
Q.4) What was the Pharaoh’s curse ?
For many years, rumours of a "curse of the pharaohs" persisted,
emphasizing the early death of some of those who had entered the tomb. The
most prominent was George Herbert, 5th Earl of Carnarvon, who died on 5
April 1923, five months after the discovery of the first step leading down to
the tomb on 4 November 1922.
A study of documents and academic sources led The Lancet to
conclude that Carnarvon's death had nothing to do with Tutankhamun's tomb,
regardless of whether because of a curse or exposure to toxic fungi. The
cause of Carnarvon's death was pneumonia supervening on erysipelas (a
streptococcal infection of the skin and underlying soft tissue). Pneumonia
was thought to be only one of various complications, arising from the
progressively invasive infection, that eventually resulted in multiorgan
failure".
A study showed that of the 58 people who were present when the tomb
and sarcophagus were opened, only eight died within a dozen years; Howard
Carter died of lymphoma in 1939 at the age of 64. The last survivors included
Lady Evelyn Herbert, Lord Carnarvon's daughter who was among the first
people to enter the tomb after its discovery in November 1922, who lived for
a further 57 years and died in 1980, and American archaeologist J.O.
Kinnaman who died in 1961, 39 years after the event.
Q. 5) What were the treasures that were discovered in his tomb and who
discovered it ?

In 1915, George Herbert, 5th Earl of Carnarvon, the financial backer of

the search for and the excavation of Tutankhamun's tomb in the Valley of the
Kings, employed English archaeologist Howard Carter to explore it. After a
systematic search, Carter discovered the actual tomb of Tutankhamun
(KV62) in November 1922, and unsealed the burial chamber.
On 4 November 2007, 85 years to the day after Carter's discovery,
Tutankhamun's mummy was placed on display in his underground tomb
at Luxor, when the linen-wrapped mummy was removed from its golden
sarcophagus to a climate-controlled glass box. The case was designed to
prevent the heightened rate of decomposition caused by the humidity and
warmth from tourists visiting the tomb.

Tut's chest, now in the Cairo Museum

Inside one of the chambers, murals were painted on the walls that told
the story of Tutankhamun's funeral and his journey to the afterworld. Also in
the room were various artifacts for his journey — oils, perfumes, toys from
his childhood, precious jewelry and statues of gold and ebony.

...2/-
 -2-
There were 5,398 items found in the tomb, including a solid gold
coffin, face mask, thrones, archery bows, trumpets, a lotus chalice, food, wine,
sandals, and fresh linen underwear. Howard Carter took 10 years to catalog the
items. Recent analysis suggests a dagger recovered from the tomb had an iron
blade made from a meteorite; study of artifacts of the time including other
artifacts from Tutankhamun's tomb could provide valuable insights into
metalworking technologies around the Mediterranean at the time.

His tomb was robbed at least twice in antiquity, but based on the items
taken (including perishable oils and perfumes) and the evidence of restoration
of the tomb after the intrusions, these robberies likely took place within
several months at most of the initial burial. The location of the tomb was lost
because it had come to be buried by debris from subsequent tombs, and
worker's houses were built over the tomb entrance.
In January 2019, it was announced that the tomb would re-open to
visitors after nine years of restoration.
****
 It is having that effect

I think the biggest problem with technology these days is how fast new
technologies are coming out. As soon as you learn about one, a new one comes out
to replace that one. It is making it very hard for people to maintain their
employment. If people do get laid off, it is really hard to find another job because
what the person learned in their career is now outdated.

 Probably it will

It is indeed likely that some people will become unemployed due to new
technology that comes out on a daily basis here in the United States of America
and the rest of the world as well. I am sure that already people have lost their jobs
and become unemployed due to technology already.

 Yes, technology will lead to higher unemployment.

Many people believe that one of the reasons that businesses exist is to provide
employment, but that is not the case. In a capitalist society, the imperative is
always to improve profit margins. Replacing employees with automation will
almost always lead to long term profit increases. It is more likely that we will
devise a better way to share the fruits of capitalism more equitably with displaced
workers than that we will find some way to stem the rising tide of automation.

 Yes, unemployment will rise due to technology.

I think that the unemployment number will rise due to the advent of new
technology. I think that more and more people will not be able to compete with
some technology that replaces them to do everyday jobs. I think that technology is
advancing at such an amazing level that almost all jobs will be done by computers.

 No, new technology decreases unemployment by creating new types of jobs.

No, new technology will not lead to fewer jobs available to workers, and it should not
cause unemployment rates to rise. Technology constantly changes work as we know it,
often by changing they ways workers perform labor and are paid for it. Technological
changes over the past couple of decades have given freelance workers and independent
consultants many new opportunities, so even if there aren't new jobs on corporate
payroll ledgers, there are more individual opportunities to earn money in exchange for
work or services performed.

 This is not really true. People don't hold onto old technology. They don't have
to. Things are not custom programmed anymore, it's out of box.

Microstrategy. There is no where to learn this but only if your company sponsors you.
To buy a class by yourself is $1400 a course and you need several to learn anything. So
I have no way to learn this on my own, so now I am no longer being trained. My job
prospects become more narrow and the MS jobs grow, I am shoved out.
 Yes :-

I think that the unemployment number will rise due to the advent of new
technology. I think that more and more people will not be able to compete with
some technology that replaces them to do everyday jobs. I think that technology is
advancing at such an amazing level that almost all jobs will be done by computers.

 Redundancy and Automation is continuously replacing human labour.

 If any business depends heavily on human labour, it tends to fail as it cannot cope up
with the competition from the technologically advanced competitors.
 Several kinds of jobs are increasingly getting replaced by technology. As per the reports,
there is a significant drop in the typists, weavers, construction workers etc.
 Low-skilled workers are the worst hit.

No :-

 Technology is not causing unemployment. It is just shifting human labour towards

different kinds of jobs.
 Though it is taking away some jobs, it is creating more jobs day by day. The net
employment opportunities are positive.
 With the advancement in technology, people no longer need to do repetitive
tasks, and hence more creative companies have born, giving employment to
many.
 Research by an English based Deloitte Consultancy analysed employment
trends for the past 140 years and reported that Technology created more jobs
than it took away.
 There was a misconception at the time of industrial revolution that machines
replaces human labour and hence creates unemployment. Contrary to that,
 machines caused opening of many industries and more employment
opportunities.
 The technological advancements are not fully tapped yet. Once technology is
utilized to the full extent, more employment opportunities will be created.

Conclusion :-

Technology made our lives easier and is indeed creating newer kinds
of jobs. It is inevitable that we should adapt to change and upgrade our
skills to mould ourselves into newer types of jobs.

Technological Unemployment
1. 1. TECHNOLOGICAL UNEMPLOYMENT
2. 2. Introduction • Technological unemployment occurs when developments in
technology and working practices cause some workers to lose their jobs. •
Such developments typically includes the introduction of labour-saving
"mechanical-muscle" machines or more efficient "mechanical-mind"
processes (automation). • Technological unemployment is considered to be
part of a wider concept known as structural unemployment. Visit
www.seminarlinks.blogspot.com to Download
3. 3. Humans' jobs have also been affected throughout modern history
4. 4. Historical examples include artisan weavers reduced to poverty after the
introduction of mechanized looms.
5. 5. Before 18th century • Prior to the 18th century both the elite and common
people would generally take the pessimistic view on technological
unemployment, at least in cases where the issue arose. • Due to generally
low unemployment in much of pre- modern history, the topic was rarely a
prominent concern.
6. 6. 18th Century • In the 18th century fears over the impact of machinery on
jobs intensified with the growth of mass unemployment, especially in Great
Britain which was then at the forefront of the Industrial Revolution. • Yet some
economic thinkers began to argue against these fears, claiming that overall
innovationwould not have negative effects on jobs. • During the second half of
 the 19th century, it became increasingly apparent that technological progress
was benefiting all sections of society, including the working class. • Concerns
over the negative impact of innovationdiminished. • The term "Luddite
fallacy"was coined to describe the thinking that innovationwould have lasting
harmful effects on employment. Visit www.seminarlinks.blogspot.com to
Download
7. 7. 19th Century • It was only in the 19th century that debates over
technological unemployment became intense, especially in Great Britain
where many economic thinkers of the time were concentrated. • Building on
the work of Dean Tucker and Adam Smith, political economists began to
create what would become the modern discipline of economics • While
rejecting much of mercantilism, members of the new discipline largely agreed
that technological unemployment would not be an enduring problem. • In the
first few decades of the 19th century, several prominent political economists
did, however, argue against the optimistic view, claiming that innovation could
cause long-term unemployment.
8. 8. 19th Century • Towards the middle of the 19th century, Karl Marx joined the
debates, presenting a deeply pessimistic view of technological
unemployment; his views attracted many followers and founded an enduring
school of thought but mainstream economics was not dramatically changed. •
By the 1870s, at least in Great Britain, technological unemployment faded
both as a popular concern and as an issue for academic debate. • It had
become increasingly apparent that innovation was increasing prosperity for all
sections of British society, including the working class.
9. 9. Early 20th Century • For the first two decades of the 20th century, mass
unemployment was not the major problem it had been in the first half of the
19th. • In the 1920s mass unemployment re-emerged as a pressing issue
within Europe. • Rural American workers had been suffering job losses from
the start of the 1920s; many had been displaced by improved agricultural
technology, such as the tractor. • The center of gravity for economic debates
had by this time moved from Great Britain to the United States, and it was
here that the 20th century's two great periods of debate over technological
unemployment largely occurred. • The peak periods for the two debates were
 in the 1930s and the 1960s. • In both cases the debates were not conclusively
settled, but faded away as unemployment was reduced by an outbreak of war
– World War II for the debate of the 1930s, and the Vietnam war for the 1960s
episodes.
10. 10. • In both cases, the debates were conducted within the prevailing
paradigm at the time, with little reference to earlier thought. • In the 1930s,
optimists based their arguments largely on neo-classical beliefs in the self-
correcting power of markets to automatically reduce any short-term
unemployment via compensation effects. • In the 1960s, faith in compensation
effects was less strong, but the mainstream Keynesian economists of the time
largely believed government intervention would be able to counter any
persistent technological unemployment that was not cleared by market forces.
• Another similarity was the publication of a major Federal study towards the
end of each episode, which broadly found that long-term technological
unemployment was not occurring. • Though the studies did agree innovation
was a major factor in the short term displacement of workers, and advised
government action to provide assistance. Mid 20th Century
11. 11. • As the golden age of capitalism came to a close in the 1970s,
unemployment once again rose, and this time generally remained relatively
high for the rest of the century, across most advanced economies. • Several
economists once again argued that this may be due to innovation. • A number
of popular works warning of technological unemployment were also
published. • In general, the closing decades of the 20th century saw much
more concern expressed over technological unemployment in Europe,
compared with the U.S. • For the most part, other than during the periods of
intense debate in the 1930s and 60s, the consensus in the 20th century
among both professional economists and the general public remained that
technology does not cause long-term joblessness. Last Decades of 20th
Century
12. 12. 21st Century • The general consensus that innovation does not cause
long-term unemployment held strong for the first decade of the 21st century
although it continued to be challenged by a number of academic works. •
Concern about technological unemployment grew in 2013 due in part to a
 number of studies predicting substantially increased technological
unemployment in forthcoming decades. • In certain sectors, employment was
falling worldwide despite rising output, thus discounting globalization and
offshoring as the only causes of increasing unemployment.
13. 13. • The 21st century has seen a variety of skilled tasks partially taken over
by machines, including translation, legal research and even low level
journalism. • Care work, entertainment, and other tasks requiring empathy,
previously thought safe from automation, have also begun to be performed by
robots. • Concerns have included evidence showing worldwide falls in
employment across sectors such as manufacturing. • Professor Mark
MacCarthy stated in the fall of 2014 that it is now the "prevailing opinion" that
the era of technological unemployment has arrived.
14. 14. • At the 2014 Davos meeting, Thomas Friedman reported that the link
between technology and unemployment seemed to have been the
dominanttheme of that year's discussions. • A survey at Davos 2014 found
that 80% of 147 respondents agreed that technology was driving jobless
growth. • At the 2015 Davos, Gillian Tett found that almost all delegates
attending a discussion on inequality and technology expected an increase in
inequality over the next five years, and gives the reason for this as the
technological displacement of jobs. • 2015 saw Martin Ford win the Financial
Times and McKinsey Business Book of the Year Award for his Rise of the
Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future, and saw the first
world summit on technological unemployment, held in New York. • In an
October 2016 interview, US President Barack Obama said that due to the
growth of artificial intelligence, society would be debating "unconditional free
money for everyone" within 10 to 20 years.
15. 15. • Other economists, however, argue that long-term technological
unemployment is unlikely. • In 2014, Pew Research canvassed 1,896
technology professionals and economists and found a split of opinion: 48% of
respondents believed that new technologies would displace more jobs than
they would create by the year 2025, while 52% maintained that they would
not. • A number of studies have predicted that automation will take a large
 proportion of jobs in the future, but estimates of the level of unemployment
this will cause vary.
16. 16. European Union • In 2014, the economic think tank Bruegel released a
study, based on the Frey and Osborne approach, claiming that across the
European Union's 28 member states, 54% of jobs were at risk of automation.
• The countries where jobs were least vulnerable to automation were •
Sweden with 46.69% of jobs vulnerable • The UK at 47.17% • The
Netherlands at 49.50% • France and Denmark, both at 49.54% • The
countries where jobs were found to be most vulnerable were • Romania at
61.93% • Portugal at 58.94% • Croatia at 57.9% • Bulgaria at 56.56%
17. 17. A 2016 United Nations report stated that 75% of jobs in the developing
world were at risk of automation, and predicted that more jobs might be lost
when corporations stop outsourcing to developing countries after automation
in industrialized countries makes it less lucrative to outsource to countries
with lower labor costs. Developing Countries
18. 18. Developing Countries • In January 2016, a joint study by the Oxford Martin
School and Citibank, based on previous studies on automation and data from
the World Bank, found that the risk of automation in developing countries was
much higher than in developed countries. • It found that • 77% of jobs in China
• 69% of jobs in India • 85% of jobs in Ethiopia • 55% of jobs in Uzbekistan
were at risk of automation • A 2016 study by the International Labour
Organization found • 74% of salaried jobs in Thailand • 75% of salaried jobs in
Vietnam • 63% of salaried jobs in Indonesia • 81% of salaried jobs in the
Philippines were at high risk of automation
19. 19. USA • The Council of Economic Advisers, a US government agency
tasked with providing economic research for the White House, in the 2016
Economic Report of the President, used the data from the Frey and Osborne
study to estimate that • 83% of jobs with an hourly wage below $20 • 31% of
jobs with an hourly wage between $20 and $40 • 4% of jobs with an hourly
wage above $40 were at risk of automation. Visit
www.seminarlinks.blogspot.com to Download
20. 20. • A September 2017 report by McKinsey & Company found that as of
2015, 478 billion out of 749 billion working hours per year dedicated to
 manufacturing, or $2.7 trillion out of $5.1 trillion in labor, were already
automatable. • In low-skill areas, 82% of labor in apparel goods, 80% of
agriculture processing, 76% of food manufacturing, and 60% of beverage
manufacturing were subject to automation. • In mid-skill areas, 72% of basic
materials production and 70% of furniture manufacturing was automatable. •
In high-skill areas, 52% of aerospace and defense labor and 50% of
advanced electronics labor could be automated.
21. 21. Evidence of technological unemployment in the US? • Since 2000,
productivity growth has become detached from employment growth. • During
the early 2000s employment grew at a slower rate than productivity. • Since
the end of the great depression, employment growth has picked up (thoughin
a flexible labour market – many new jobs are low paid). • But, this might
indicate the gains in productivity from automation are leading to lower job
growth (though there could be other factors too)
22. 22. In this period from 2000, there was a sharp jump in corporate profits,
which suggests companies are gaining higher profit from increased
productivity.
23. 23. • This shows that labour (salaries, wages) are taking a smaller share of
GDP since 1990. • This also doesn’t reflect the rise in wage inequality and
growth in salaries of top 1%
24. 24. Canada • A 2016 study by Ryerson University found that 42% of jobs in
Canada were at risk of automation, dividing them into two categories - "high
risk" jobs and "low risk" jobs. • High risk jobs were mainly lower-income jobs
that required lower education levels than average. • Low risk jobs were on
average more skilled positions. • The report found a 70% chance that high
risk jobs and a 30% chance that low risk jobs would be affected by
automation in the next 10–20 years.
25. 25. Developed Countries A 2017 study by PricewaterhouseCoopers found
that up to • 38% of jobs in the US • 35% of jobs in Germany • 30% of jobs in
the UK, and • 21% of jobs in Japan were at high risk of being automated by
the early 2030s.
26. 26. • A November 2017 report by the McKinsey Global Institute that analyzed
around 800 occupations in 46 countries estimated that between 400 million
 and 800 million jobs could be lost due to robotic automation by 2030. • It
estimated that jobs were more at risk in developed countries than developing
countries due to a greater availability of capital to invest in automation.
27. 27. • However, not all recent empirical studies have found evidence to support
the idea that automation will cause widespread unemployment. • A study
released in 2015, examining the impact of industrial robots in 17 countries
between 1993 and 2007, found no overall reduction in employment was
caused by the robots, and that there was a slight increase in overall wages. •
In 2017, Forrester estimated that automation would result in a net loss of
about 7% of jobs in the US by 2027, replacing 17% of jobs while creating new
jobs equivalent to 10% of the workforce.
28. 28. • Another study argued that the risk of US jobs to automation had been
overestimated due to factors such as the heterogeneity of tasks within
occupations and the adaptability of jobs being neglected. • The study found
that once this was taken into account, the number of occupations at risk to
automation in the US drops, ceteris paribus, from 38% to 9%.
29. 29. • A 2017 study on the effect of automation on Germany found no evidence
that automation caused total job losses but that they do effect the jobs people
are employed in. • Losses in the industrial sector due to automation were
offset by gains in the service sector. • Manufacturing workers were also not at
risk from automation and were in fact more likely to remain employed, though
not necessarily doing the same tasks. • However, automation did result in a
decrease in labour's income share as it raised productivity but not wages.
Germany
30. 30. Solutions • Banning/refusing innovation • Historically, innovations were
sometimes banned due to concerns about their impact on employment. •
Gandhian economics called for a delay in the uptake of labor saving
machines until unemployment was alleviated. • The policy of slowing the
introduction of innovation so as to avoid technological unemployment was
however implemented in the 20th century within China under Mao's
administration. • Since the development of modern economics, however, this
option has generally not even been considered as a solution, at least not for
the advanced economies.
31. 31. Welfare payments • The use of various forms of subsidies has often been
accepted as a solution to technological unemployment even by conservatives
and by those who are optimistic about the long term effect on jobs. • Welfare
programs have historically tended to be more durable once established,
compared with other solutions to unemployment such as directly creating jobs
with public works.
32. 32. Basic Income • Several commentators have argued that traditional forms
of welfare payment may be inadequate as a response to the future challenges
posed by technological unemployment, and have suggested a basic income
as an alternative. • Since late 2015, new basic income pilots have been
announced in Finland, the Netherlands, and Canada. • Further recent
advocacy for basic income has arisen from a number of technology
entrepreneurs. • One objection to basic income is that it could be a
disincentive to work, but evidence from older pilots in India, Africa, and
Canada indicates that this does not happen and that a basic income
encourages low-level entrepreneurship and more productive, collaborative
work. • Another objection is that funding it sustainably is a huge challenge.
33. 33. • To better address both the funding concerns and concerns about
government control, one alternative model is that the cost and control would
be distributed across the private sector instead of the public sector. •
Companies across the economy would be required to employ humans, but
the job descriptions would be left to private innovation, and individuals would
have to compete to be hired and retained. • This would be a for-profit sector
analog of basic income, that is, a market-based form of basic income.
34. 34. Education • Improved availability to quality education, including skills
training for adults, is a solution that in principle at least is not opposed by any
side of the political spectrum. • It is welcomed even by those who are
optimistic about long-term technological employment. • Improved education
paid for by government tends to be especially popular with industry. •
Proponents of this brand of policy assert higher level, more specialized
learning is a way to capitalize from the growing technology industry.
35. 35. • However, several academics have also argued that improved education
alone will not be sufficient to solve technological unemployment. • Pointing to
 recent declines in the demand for many intermediate skills, and suggesting
that not everyone is capable in becoming proficient in the most advanced
skills. • Paul Krugman, an economics professor and columnist for the New
York Times, argued that better education would be an insufficient solution to
technological unemployment, as it "actually reduces the demand for
highlyeducated workers“.
36. 36. Public works • Programmes of Public works have traditionally been used
as way for governments to directly boost employment, though this has often
been opposed by some. • For less developed economies, public works may
be an easier to administrate solution compared to universal welfare
programmes. • As of 2015, calls for public works in the advanced economies
have been less frequent even from progressives, due to concerns about
sovereign debt.
37. 37. Shorter Working Hours • Reductions in working hours have been
proposed as a possible solution to unemployment by economists. • Yet once
working hours have reached about 40 hours per week, workers have been
less enthusiastic about further reductions, both to prevent loss of income and
as many value engaging in work for its own sake. • Generally, 20th-century
economists had argued against further reductions as a solution to
unemployment, saying it reflects a Lump of labour fallacy. • In 2014, Google's
co-founder, Larry Page, suggested a four-day workweek, so as technology
continues to displace jobs, more people can find employment.
38. 38. Broadening the ownership of technological assets • Several solutions
have been proposed which don't fall easily into the traditional left-right political
spectrum. • This includes broadening the ownership of robots and other
productive capital assets. • A mechanism was proposed where ordinary
people receive "nano payments" for the big data they generate by their
regular surfing and other aspects of their online presence.
39. 39. SO WHO IS RIGHT ? The pessimists (many of them techie types), who
say this time is different and machines really will take all the jobs. or The
optimists (mostly economists and historians), who insist that in the end
technology always creates more jobs than it destroys? The truth probably lies
somewhere in between. Visit www.seminarlinks.blogspot.com to Download
40. 40. • Despite the wide range of views expressed, pretty much everyone
agrees on the prescription: that companies and governments will need to
make it easier for workers to acquire new skills and switch jobs as needed. •
That would provide the best defense in the event that the pessimists are right
and the impact of artificial intelligence proves to be more rapid and more
dramatic than the optimists expect. -The Economist
 It is having that effect

I think the biggest problem with technology these days is how fast new technologies
are coming out. As soon as you learn about one, a new one comes out to replace that
one. It is making it very hard for people to maintain their employment. If people do get
laid off, it is really hard to find another job because what the person learned in their
career is now outdated.

Report Post
Reply
0

 Probably it will

It is indeed likely that some people will become unemployed due to new technology
that comes out on a daily basis here in the United States of America and the rest of the
world as well. I am sure that already people have lost their jobs and become
unemployed due to technology already.

Report Post
Reply
0

 Yes, technology will lead to higher unemployment.

Many people believe that one of the reasons that businesses exist is to provide
employment, but that is not the case. In a capitalist society, the imperative is always to
improve profit margins. Replacing employees with automation will almost always lead to
long term profit increases. It is more likely that we will devise a better way to share the
fruits of capitalism more equitably with displaced workers than that we will find some
way to stem the rising tide of automation.

Report Post
 Reply
0

 Yes, unemployment will rise due to technology.

I think that the unemployment number will rise due to the advent of new technology. I
think that more and more people will not be able to compete with some technology that
replaces them to do everyday jobs. I think that technology is advancing at such an
amazing level that almost all jobs will be done by computers.