Обсуждение

А разве робототехника не глобальная технология, вроде электроэнергетики или вычислительных технологий? Или, как с электричеством, ожидаете полный выхлоп только на следующем поколении менеджмента?

> никакой "новой экономики", всё в long run будет по-старому. Думаю, Вы ошыбаетесь. Рынок недвижымости, а за ним и нерынок размножэния ожыдают глобальные перемены.

а почему нет?

А про недвижимость можно подробнее? Что там такого назревает?

Если говорит про доткомы, то после того как он лопнул, в сухом остатке осталось много чего. Чем мы сейчас с успехом пользуемся. Думаю так будет и здесь. Лопнет, а лет через 7-10 после этого, наша жизнь измениться до неузнаваемости.

Никто не сомневается, что жизнь изменится существенно, а инвестировать в робототехнику нужно вне контекста пузырности, а "по абсолютным основаниям". Основные инвестиции в инфраструктуру каналов были сделаны после канальной лихорадки, основные инвестиции в доткомы -- после лопания пузыря доткомов. Я просто к тому, что нет никакой "новой экономики" -- робототехнической, пост-индустриальной, вебономики и т.д.. Все эти потуги придумывать новые экономики во время очередного пузыря обычно тщетны. Но надутие пузыря уже очевидно: массовые закупки Гугля в этой сфере явно подогрели интерес венчурных капиталистов, тема уже несколько месяцев как горячая.

Я тут не про сроки пишу. Я пишу про то, что с каждым новым пузырём пытаются создать "новую экономику", выдумать новые экономические законы (типа определения цены компании по количеству зарегистрированных эккаунтов во времена доткомов, а не по ожидаемой прибыли). И каждый раз эти попытки указать на изменившийся характер экономических отношений проваливаются с лопанием пузыря.

те кто в жизни ничего не строил думают размножать дома на принтерах?

The VC investments in Robotics is still at a relatively low level (less than US$ 200 million in 2012). Whereas the acquisitions are far more significant - Amazon buying Kiva for circa $750mn - Kiva is considerably reducing the cost of Amazon's warehouse facilitation (also acquisitions of Evolution for $74 Million, and Aldebaran for $100 Million). The Robot Economy is not about a bubble by any means - It is having a massive REAL impact on manufacturing, health care and many other industries. It is a reflection that automation has vastly streamlined productivity and led to a requirement that businesses and individuals look at there core skills. Call it an era of automation, or an era of robotics, there has been a fundamental transformation in production processes and it will have a significant impact on the way work is fulfilled. So no bubble at all - just good practices for those with the foresight to improve their practices through robotics. Thanks for stopping by my blog at robotenomics.com and having such good conversation on the robot (or automated) economy. Colin

It is argument about terms and definitions. You speak about usual industry development, not economics. Sure, there will be new services, new devices, new big corporations in this industry. Sure it will be profound changes in many other industries too. And sure there will be soon some kind of bubble on stock market (temporary, for 2-3 year). But no new economy/economics, stock market will be functioning as usual. Your website better be "robotbusiness". While I understand that you want to have say more than "business as usual", somewhat along line of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_economy (and you may be remember that around 1999 stock market was not functioning as usual due to bla-bla-bla about "new economics that emerge with advent of WWW").

Good points - during the dot com boom and bust I was a CEO of a stock listed company so remember the period well. I do think the current stock market (especially US) is rather overpriced and some 'irrationally exuberance' with investors, especially co's like Tesla, Amazon.com, Twitter and Facebook with incredibly unrealistic P/E's. I also believe there are traditional stocks which are not overpriced - will the exuberance of the tech stocks and the likes of Bitcoin cause a bubble, its highly possible the prices will be corrected as QE stalls. I think many robot stocks are undervalued. With respect to the 'robot economy' - as Bill Gates said the personal robot market is likely to be the next 1 trillion dollar market. Whatever we call the economy, digital, automated or robotic -- a significant change is underway akin to the industrial revolution. Changes in the way transactions are conducted and business is completed. I choose to call that a robot economy. I do not see significant VC investment in AI and robots, much is government, industry and academia led - the dot com bubble was created by VC's and more importantly investment banks - the investment in robotics and AI is under solid business principles - While we have the computational power to support many versions of AI, the field remains relatively poorly funded, a surprising result given that the development of powerful AIs (even if they aren’t general AIs) would probably be one of the most important and lucrative technological advances in history. And when that happens business will not be as usual for individuals.

Business or industry, I agree with what you saying. Right now there no any evidence of robot bubble in a market. But I expect it will be: this year "robotics" appear in many technology trend lists, this is preliminary condition for a next bubble. But I do not understand why "robotic economy", or "AI economy" (because nothing will change in economics: no one of current theories will change to explain robot-filled world. By the way, I prefer Austrian School of Economics).

The Schumpeter School of Economics and creative destruction is my preference, I guess we can classify that as Austrian:-) I agree the press may over hype "robotics and AI" this year. With respect to the robot economy, I see the big shift being if the economic growth of the future produces more jobs for more robots, leaving humans behind, what impact on humanity? And will fewer people share in the economic creation of wealth? So this is a transformational economy and a shift from an inclusive economy.

Robot-induced structured shifts is the same from economics point of view as any others (e.g. car in 1920, computers in 1990, smartphone in 2012). You speaks about usual economy, not something special. If they get LENR energy and power will be cheaper 10 times it will be tremendous shifts in multiple industries, but it will not be the "LENR economy".

Much of this of course is semantics but with respect to traditional economics a key part is return on assets - this has fallen hugely in the last few years due to automation and robotics, especially industrial. So I choose to call that the robot economy. This piece in the Financial Times expands on my thoughts -- The robot economy and the new rentier class http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2012/12/10/1303512/the-robot-economy-and-the-new-rentier-class/

есть куча методов определения цены, применяемых на практике, многие из которых к дисконтированию ожидаемых потоков бабла никак не сводимы зачем возводить метод в ранг закона? чтобы потом "оправдываться" на тему почему он перестал работать?

Thank you, really funny article in FT! As we're born in the USSR, it is very hard for us to agree with Paul Krugman that communism will be at last brought upon us by robotics (even if it is named "leisure economy" from now on). We libertarians (and Austrian economists often are libertarians) are with Peter Thiel :-) Really, QE is a much better explanation for diminishing returns. Look at the pictures I've accidentally posted just this morning - http://vvagr.livejournal.com/1928161.html. Tampering with the economy at such scale leaves no place for any other explanation. And Krugman wants to turn QE into hyperinflation to rob everyone of his savings - but calling it "to dilute the wealth effect on legacy claims".

So as Peter Thiel says - AI would probably be one of the most important and lucrative technological advances in history

and as Thiel said " a robotics revolution would basically have the effect of people losing their jobs, as you need fewer workers to do the same things,” Thiel said. “And it would have the benefit of freeing people up to do many other things. There would be social-dislocation problems, but I don’t think those are the ones we’ve been having. We’ve had a globalization problem.” http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/11/28/111128fa_fact_packer?currentPage=all

Избушка на курьих ножках - чем не роботизированный дом ? ))