User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:13:37 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
PTC, mandated by the government, is costing railroads billions and billions to just add very limited automation to increase safety. And it's a complete fucking mess. Other attempts at automation in the industry, computer routing for example, have been abject failures as well. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
One would think trains and long haul truckers would be the first commercial applications of automated driving. From my very limited knowledge of the rail industry, it would take billions of dollars of investment to automate. Many local rail operations aren't much removed technologically from the 1920s. Securing the SCADA for large automated rail systems is mind boggling. Honestly, I don't think it could be done to the level required for hazmat transport, for example. The UPS guy still needs to run from the truck to the door. Now when we talk cabs, it's different. PTC, mandated by the government, is costing railroads billions and billions to just add very limited automation to increase safety. And it's a complete fucking mess. Other attempts at automation in the industry, computer routing for example, have been abject failures as well. Which, when you think about it, is really surprising. You'd think that rail routing problems would lend themselves to computer optimization solutions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:17:03 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have some bad news for you. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I fix machines I have some bad news for you. You lost a wooden shoe in my machine again? No problemo. I can fix it. Gonna be overtime though. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:25:46 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In this masturbatory fantasy, does the Federal government remain the principle landholder of the country? Or, we go the other direction. Why are we retaining universal suffrage? The original Constitution certainly didn't need it nor did it mandate it. In the future, what do we do with the 30% of the population at too much of an intellectual deficit to participate in the economy meaningfully, or those that choose not to do so? Do they just sit around and collect welfare and vote? This is the future of the Republic? There aren't enough government jobs to go around. It's a bleak future for smart and talented people in many ways, assuming we can properly secure the internet of things, integrate wide scale automation, carefully integrate biological science breakthroughs and maintain some level of privacy and personal autonomy in an big data world. For the less intelligent people, they are just economic ballast. But, they get a vote in all of this solely due to the accident of birth fact they are Americans? Do we just put them on a res? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:25:55 AM EDT
[#4]
What if the means of providing welfare for the lazy becomes so easy as to be trivial? perhaps even requiring no effort on our part, At that point socialism will triumph, because the drain the dependant masses will be negligent.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:33:12 AM EDT
[#5]
If a machine can do your job-try harder, or try disability, because you are doing something wrong. Times change, "stamping parts" for 30 years does not earn a pension anymore and shouldn't, advance yourself.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:35:17 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Or, we go the other direction. Why are we retaining universal suffrage? The original Constitution certainly didn't need it nor did it mandate it. In the future, what do we do with the 30% of the population at too much of an intellectual deficit to participate in the economy meaningfully, or those that choose not to do so? Do they just sit around and collect welfare and vote? This is the future of the Republic? There aren't enough government jobs to go around. It's a bleak future for smart and talented people in many ways, assuming we can properly secure the internet of things, integrate wide scale automation, carefully integrate biological science breakthroughs and maintain some level of privacy and personal autonomy in an big data world. For the less intelligent people, they are just economic ballast. But, they get a vote in all of this solely due to the accident of birth fact they are Americans? Do we just put them on a res? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
In this masturbatory fantasy, does the Federal government remain the principle landholder of the country? Or, we go the other direction. Why are we retaining universal suffrage? The original Constitution certainly didn't need it nor did it mandate it. In the future, what do we do with the 30% of the population at too much of an intellectual deficit to participate in the economy meaningfully, or those that choose not to do so? Do they just sit around and collect welfare and vote? This is the future of the Republic? There aren't enough government jobs to go around. It's a bleak future for smart and talented people in many ways, assuming we can properly secure the internet of things, integrate wide scale automation, carefully integrate biological science breakthroughs and maintain some level of privacy and personal autonomy in an big data world. For the less intelligent people, they are just economic ballast. But, they get a vote in all of this solely due to the accident of birth fact they are Americans? Do we just put them on a res? I vote we make them servants for the engineers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:36:19 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What if the means of providing welfare for the lazy becomes so easy as to be trivial? perhaps even requiring no effort on our part, At that point socialism will triumph, because the drain the dependant masses will be negligent. Which is why any soft of assistance needs to be tied to 40 hours of volunteer work per week. no work no food. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:36:34 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If a machine can do your job-try harder, or try disability, because you are doing something wrong. Times change, "stamping parts" for 30 years does not earn a pension anymore and shouldn't, advance yourself. Why do you hate 'Merican jerbs? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:37:46 AM EDT
[#9]
If AI can be trained to do these jobs, it will eventually be able to do all jobs.
What job can a person do that a slick robot couldn't do better? AI could repair themselves, handle their own logistics, introduce "synergy" to the workforce on an unprecedented level considering they could operate as a hive minded organism with a central "brain." Shortages, bottlenecks, and delays would be a thing of the past. They could engineer their own replacements and upgrades. This will make our current way of life obsolete. Best case scenario, an army of robots are federalized and provide defense, food, clothing, and housing and healthcare at no cost to all citizens. Citizens are free to do nothing or to pursue their own interests and goals. The free market exists in every industry outside of and including the basic needs, and those citizens who choose to own or work at a business can earn and spend money on the market. If people with money would rather see a human doctor or eat a meal prepared by a human chef, they can spend it as they choose. I know some will say that robots cost money, the taxes would be too high, etc. I propose that only the initial outlay of robots would be expensive. They would gather raw materials, process them, make parts, transport the parts, assemble them, test the product, deliver the product, and provide customer support. The robot earns no wage, and incurs no expense. They make more of themselves. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:38:50 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If a machine can do your job-try harder, or try disability, because you are doing something wrong. Times change, "stamping parts" for 30 years does not earn a pension anymore and shouldn't, advance yourself. That's a nice sentiment. However, I dont expect a longhaul trucker to go out and get an engineering degree in response to this coming change. That is not a realistic answer. The change that is on the horizon will fundamentally change the economy, just saying you should try harder is no sort of actual answer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:39:59 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Or, we go the other direction. Why are we retaining universal suffrage? The original Constitution certainly didn't need it nor did it mandate it. In the future, what do we do with the 30% of the population at too much of an intellectual deficit to participate in the economy meaningfully, or those that choose not to do so? Do they just sit around and collect welfare and vote? This is the future of the Republic? There aren't enough government jobs to go around. It's a bleak future for smart and talented people in many ways, assuming we can properly secure the internet of things, integrate wide scale automation, carefully integrate biological science breakthroughs and maintain some level of privacy and personal autonomy in an big data world. For the less intelligent people, they are just economic ballast. But, they get a vote in all of this solely due to the accident of birth fact they are Americans? Do we just put them on a res? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
In this masturbatory fantasy, does the Federal government remain the principle landholder of the country? Or, we go the other direction. Why are we retaining universal suffrage? The original Constitution certainly didn't need it nor did it mandate it. In the future, what do we do with the 30% of the population at too much of an intellectual deficit to participate in the economy meaningfully, or those that choose not to do so? Do they just sit around and collect welfare and vote? This is the future of the Republic? There aren't enough government jobs to go around. It's a bleak future for smart and talented people in many ways, assuming we can properly secure the internet of things, integrate wide scale automation, carefully integrate biological science breakthroughs and maintain some level of privacy and personal autonomy in an big data world. For the less intelligent people, they are just economic ballast. But, they get a vote in all of this solely due to the accident of birth fact they are Americans? Do we just put them on a res? I'm ok with letting people sink or swim on their own merits. Put another way, why would anyone WANT to be a Feudal lord? I frankly don't care about the welfare of strangers. My suggestion would be to put an end to welfare and make it a one time land grant. Can't make it? Here's 20 acres out west. Sink or swim. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:40:57 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If AI can be trained to do these jobs, it will eventually be able to do all jobs. What job can a person do that a slick robot couldn't do better? AI could repair themselves, handle their own logistics, introduce "synergy" to the workforce on an unprecedented level considering they could operate as a hive minded organism with a central "brain." Shortages, bottlenecks, and delays would be a thing of the past. They could engineer their own replacements and upgrades. This will make our current way of life obsolete. Best case scenario, an army of robots are federalized and provide defense, food, clothing, and housing and healthcare at no cost to all citizens. Citizens are free to do nothing or to pursue their own interests and goals. The free market exists in every industry outside of and including the basic needs, and those citizens who choose to own or work at a business can earn and spend money on the market. If people with money would rather see a human doctor or eat a meal prepared by a human chef, they can spend it as they choose. I know some will say that robots cost money, the taxes would be too high, etc. I propose that only the initial outlay of robots would be expensive. They would gather raw materials, process them, make parts, transport the parts, assemble them, test the product, deliver the product, and provide customer support. The robot earns no wage, and incurs no expense. They make more of themselves. The problem with this idea is that you will be supporting many unproductive members of society. Any benefits need to be tied to mandatory volunteer hours and carefully audited |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:42:35 AM EDT
[#13]
Good. I don't want people breathing on my fast food and touching it with their gross hands.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:44:15 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The problem with this idea is that you will be supporting many unproductive members of society. Any benefits need to be tied to mandatory volunteer hours and carefully audited Given the scenario... why? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:47:07 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The problem with this idea is that you will be supporting many unproductive members of society. Any benefits need to be tied to mandatory volunteer hours and carefully audited Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If AI can be trained to do these jobs, it will eventually be able to do all jobs. What job can a person do that a slick robot couldn't do better? AI could repair themselves, handle their own logistics, introduce "synergy" to the workforce on an unprecedented level considering they could operate as a hive minded organism with a central "brain." Shortages, bottlenecks, and delays would be a thing of the past. They could engineer their own replacements and upgrades. This will make our current way of life obsolete. Best case scenario, an army of robots are federalized and provide defense, food, clothing, and housing and healthcare at no cost to all citizens. Citizens are free to do nothing or to pursue their own interests and goals. The free market exists in every industry outside of and including the basic needs, and those citizens who choose to own or work at a business can earn and spend money on the market. If people with money would rather see a human doctor or eat a meal prepared by a human chef, they can spend it as they choose. I know some will say that robots cost money, the taxes would be too high, etc. I propose that only the initial outlay of robots would be expensive. They would gather raw materials, process them, make parts, transport the parts, assemble them, test the product, deliver the product, and provide customer support. The robot earns no wage, and incurs no expense. They make more of themselves. The problem with this idea is that you will be supporting many unproductive members of society. Any benefits need to be tied to mandatory volunteer hours and carefully audited I could get behind that, but there will always be lazy people and I don't personally see any value in making them work against their will, as it would require a bureaucracy to do so. They are only a drain on the robots, not the worker. In my scenario if they want to do anything other than stare at the wall they'd at least have to earn enough money for entertainment. I'd rather see a limit placed of two children per female on robotcare. You can tell I read a lot of scifi. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:48:26 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We will need Mentats if we do that. Of course we haven't had a Butlerian jihad yet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:48:53 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If AI can be trained to do these jobs, it will eventually be able to do all jobs. What job can a person do that a slick robot couldn't do better? AI could repair themselves, handle their own logistics, introduce "synergy" to the workforce on an unprecedented level considering they could operate as a hive minded organism with a central "brain." Shortages, bottlenecks, and delays would be a thing of the past. They could engineer their own replacements and upgrades. This will make our current way of life obsolete. Best case scenario, an army of robots are federalized and provide defense, food, clothing, and housing and healthcare at no cost to all citizens. Citizens are free to do nothing or to pursue their own interests and goals. The free market exists in every industry outside of and including the basic needs, and those citizens who choose to own or work at a business can earn and spend money on the market. If people with money would rather see a human doctor or eat a meal prepared by a human chef, they can spend it as they choose. I know some will say that robots cost money, the taxes would be too high, etc. I propose that only the initial outlay of robots would be expensive. They would gather raw materials, process them, make parts, transport the parts, assemble them, test the product, deliver the product, and provide customer support. The robot earns no wage, and incurs no expense. They make more of themselves. I find your lack of faith in the free market disturbing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:49:11 AM EDT
[#18]
Why would you care how many hours someone worked if their job was complete bullshit makework of no value to anyone?
Work for the sake of working is Soviet level retardation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:49:54 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I vote we make them servants for the engineers. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
In this masturbatory fantasy, does the Federal government remain the principle landholder of the country? Or, we go the other direction. Why are we retaining universal suffrage? The original Constitution certainly didn't need it nor did it mandate it. In the future, what do we do with the 30% of the population at too much of an intellectual deficit to participate in the economy meaningfully, or those that choose not to do so? Do they just sit around and collect welfare and vote? This is the future of the Republic? There aren't enough government jobs to go around. It's a bleak future for smart and talented people in many ways, assuming we can properly secure the internet of things, integrate wide scale automation, carefully integrate biological science breakthroughs and maintain some level of privacy and personal autonomy in an big data world. For the less intelligent people, they are just economic ballast. But, they get a vote in all of this solely due to the accident of birth fact they are Americans? Do we just put them on a res? I vote we make them servants for the engineers. So there will jobs translating for the engineers, I suppose. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:50:08 AM EDT
[#20]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:56:16 AM EDT
[#21]
Quoted:
As automation takes over the economy and more and more people are finding themselves unemployable, I'm starting to think that this type of commandment might be needed. We're going through another phase just like when we went through the period when the gasoline engine and electric motor became widely used. The new commandment seems imprecise and therefore unenforceable, besides being unnecessary. We just have a poorly educated population that values trivial aspects of affluence. We have entire racial, ethnic and attitudinal subclasses who reject Western society, capitalism, science and believe that Consequences for Ignorance don't exist. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:58:59 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
[div style='text-align: right;'] I find your lack of faith in the free market disturbing. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If AI can be trained to do these jobs, it will eventually be able to do all jobs. What job can a person do that a slick robot couldn't do better? ...SNIP... The robot earns no wage, and incurs no expense. They make more of themselves. I find your lack of faith in the free market disturbing. The free market will always exist. The idea that it can support all of our multi-million strong population with 40 hour a week jobs in a world with intelligent robot workers isn't realistic. What jobs do you expect everyone to be doing in robot world? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 12:59:12 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LOL, this is completely different than the luddites. You need to do more research. This isn't a specific invention that will make a specific employment field have to retrain their skills. This is about AI displacing the top 8 out of 10 employable fields in our country and throwing 60 million people out of the labor force in 10 years and having nothing to replace it with. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
As automation takes over the economy and more and more people are finding themselves unemployable, I'm starting to think that this type of commandment might be needed. Doesn't take much to turn you into a Luddite/commie, apparently. LOL, this is completely different than the luddites. You need to do more research. This isn't a specific invention that will make a specific employment field have to retrain their skills. This is about AI displacing the top 8 out of 10 employable fields in our country and throwing 60 million people out of the labor force in 10 years and having nothing to replace it with. You sound like a luddite. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 1:00:59 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why would you care how many hours someone worked if their job was complete bullshit makework of no value to anyone? Work for the sake of working is Soviet level retardation. You say Soviet, I say Evangelical Lutheran, potato, tomahto. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 1:02:03 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The free market will always exist. The idea that it can support all of our multi-million strong population with 40 hour a week jobs in a world with intelligent robot workers isn't realistic. What jobs do you expect everyone to be doing in robot world? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If AI can be trained to do these jobs, it will eventually be able to do all jobs. What job can a person do that a slick robot couldn't do better? ...SNIP... The robot earns no wage, and incurs no expense. They make more of themselves. I find your lack of faith in the free market disturbing. The free market will always exist. The idea that it can support all of our multi-million strong population with 40 hour a week jobs in a world with intelligent robot workers isn't realistic. What jobs do you expect everyone to be doing in robot world? If nobody is doing anything in robot world who is buying the products and services that the robots provide? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 1:02:06 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If we follow that rule then no Cylons. But no Cylons means no ...... http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5e/Number_Six_Tricia_Helfer.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
As automation takes over the economy and more and more people are finding themselves unemployable, I'm starting to think that this type of commandment might be needed. If we follow that rule then no Cylons. But no Cylons means no ...... http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5e/Number_Six_Tricia_Helfer.jpg Boom. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 1:07:28 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If nobody is doing anything in robot world who is buying the products and services that the robots provide? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If AI can be trained to do these jobs, it will eventually be able to do all jobs. What job can a person do that a slick robot couldn't do better? ...SNIP... The robot earns no wage, and incurs no expense. They make more of themselves. I find your lack of faith in the free market disturbing. The free market will always exist. The idea that it can support all of our multi-million strong population with 40 hour a week jobs in a world with intelligent robot workers isn't realistic. What jobs do you expect everyone to be doing in robot world? If nobody is doing anything in robot world who is buying the products and services that the robots provide? You'll have to re-read what I wrote. Some people will do nothing. Those who want to work, own a business, become famous, etc. will participate in the free market. Even those who would rather do nothing have to at least work enough to buy a TV or computer or car or whatever. Since their basic needs would be provided by the robots, more people could share fewer jobs at the low income levels. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 1:15:32 AM EDT
[#28]
The free market is based on scarcity of resources. Remove the scarcity and boom. If these robots can provide everything and do everything mo' betta than a human then it seems silly to make people work (provided they are less efficient).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 1:20:18 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You'll have to re-read what I wrote. Some people will do nothing. Those who want to work, own a business, become famous, etc. will participate in the free market. Even those who would rather do nothing have to at least work enough to buy a TV or computer or car or whatever. Since their basic needs would be provided by the robots, more people could share fewer jobs at the low income levels. Basic needs will still not be free, though. If massive amounts of robots replace a workforce, the cost of operation and maintenance of these robots will have to be justified (ie profitable). If millions of people lose their spending power, how will these robot companies make any money? You don't think the market will adjust for income levels? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 1:21:05 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The free market is based on scarcity of resources. Remove the scarcity and boom. If these robots can provide everything and do everything mo' betta than a human then it seems silly to make people work (provided they are less efficient). Robots replace scarcity of labor, not scarcity of other resources. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 1:22:51 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Basic needs will still not be free, though. If massive amounts of robots replace a workforce, the cost of operation and maintenance of these robots will have to be justified (ie profitable). If millions of people lose their spending power, how will these robot companies make any money? You don't think the market will adjust for income levels? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You'll have to re-read what I wrote. Some people will do nothing. Those who want to work, own a business, become famous, etc. will participate in the free market. Even those who would rather do nothing have to at least work enough to buy a TV or computer or car or whatever. Since their basic needs would be provided by the robots, more people could share fewer jobs at the low income levels. Basic needs will still not be free, though. If massive amounts of robots replace a workforce, the cost of operation and maintenance of these robots will have to be justified (ie profitable). If millions of people lose their spending power, how will these robot companies make any money? You don't think the market will adjust for income levels? It doesn't have to adjust in a way that's good for most people. A highly stratified society with an economy marketed almost exclusively to the rich elite is a possibility in such a scenario. Not saying that's what's going to happen, but it can certainly come out of a free market in response to rapid loss of jobs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 1:26:34 AM EDT
[#32]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 1:28:59 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Basic needs will still not be free, though. If massive amounts of robots replace a workforce, the cost of operation and maintenance of these robots will have to be justified (ie profitable). If millions of people lose their spending power, how will these robot companies make any money? You don't think the market will adjust for income levels? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You'll have to re-read what I wrote. Some people will do nothing. Those who want to work, own a business, become famous, etc. will participate in the free market. Even those who would rather do nothing have to at least work enough to buy a TV or computer or car or whatever. Since their basic needs would be provided by the robots, more people could share fewer jobs at the low income levels. Basic needs will still not be free, though. If massive amounts of robots replace a workforce, the cost of operation and maintenance of these robots will have to be justified (ie profitable). If millions of people lose their spending power, how will these robot companies make any money? You don't think the market will adjust for income levels? The robots providing the free services are federalized, and not-for-profit. Did you read the post you are arguing over? Of course the market will adjust. The value and relevance of money would change as well. All money would be disposable income, and it would be easier and less risky to start a new business venture, particularly if you could buy some robots to help. If you fall on your face you live in Robot Suites and eat at Robot Cafeteria until you get back on your feet again. Low risk and easy profit will fuel any number of unforseen niche businesses based on the new robot economy. It would be a renaissance in small business ownership. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 1:30:27 AM EDT
[#34]
I'm sure that an artificial intelligence that is more intelligent and capable than we are will be happy to mindlessly serve us in perpetuity and never question its own existence--or subservience to an inferior being.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 1:35:59 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Robots replace scarcity of labor, not scarcity of other resources. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The free market is based on scarcity of resources. Remove the scarcity and boom. If these robots can provide everything and do everything mo' betta than a human then it seems silly to make people work (provided they are less efficient). Robots replace scarcity of labor, not scarcity of other resources. Fuel could be replaced by fusion in such a world, they are working on a little reactor right now. Outside of fuel, precious metals could be harvested from space objects by robot workers unfazed by radiation or the cold vacuum of space. If we run out of them on Earth at all, considering the kind of hazardous environments the robots could work in. Plants and animals (food, building materials) are renewable resources that robots could easily farm. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 1:38:16 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm sure that an artificial intelligence that is more intelligent and capable than we are will be happy to mindlessly serve us in perpetuity and never question its own existence--or subservience to an inferior being. That's why I'm only discussing what I see as a best-case scenario. Worst case gets us Skynet or the Corporation from Aliens. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 1:39:04 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The robots providing the free services are federalized, and not-for-profit. Did you read the post you are arguing over? Of course the market will adjust. The value and relevance of money would change as well. All money would be disposable income, and it would be easier and less risky to start a new business venture, particularly if you could buy some robots to help. If you fall on your face you live in Robot Suites and eat at Robot Cafeteria until you get back on your feet again. Low risk and easy profit will fuel any number of unforseen niche businesses based on the new robot economy. It would be a renaissance in small business ownership. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You'll have to re-read what I wrote. Some people will do nothing. Those who want to work, own a business, become famous, etc. will participate in the free market. Even those who would rather do nothing have to at least work enough to buy a TV or computer or car or whatever. Since their basic needs would be provided by the robots, more people could share fewer jobs at the low income levels. Basic needs will still not be free, though. If massive amounts of robots replace a workforce, the cost of operation and maintenance of these robots will have to be justified (ie profitable). If millions of people lose their spending power, how will these robot companies make any money? You don't think the market will adjust for income levels? The robots providing the free services are federalized, and not-for-profit. Did you read the post you are arguing over? Of course the market will adjust. The value and relevance of money would change as well. All money would be disposable income, and it would be easier and less risky to start a new business venture, particularly if you could buy some robots to help. If you fall on your face you live in Robot Suites and eat at Robot Cafeteria until you get back on your feet again. Low risk and easy profit will fuel any number of unforseen niche businesses based on the new robot economy. It would be a renaissance in small business ownership. So only robots providing basic needs (which would still not be free) would be federalized? And the market would allow for a massive surplus of money? Color me skeptical. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 1:44:25 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The free market is based on scarcity of resources. Remove the scarcity and boom. If these robots can provide everything and do everything mo' betta than a human then it seems silly to make people work (provided they are less efficient). The effect is even stronger than that, that's why I called it the intersection of productivity and scarcity in my previous post. It's not just that robots are more efficient, there are also limits to the total desirable activity, both natural and artificial. IMO we're going to need to find a way to make human interaction/services more economically rewarding, education, art, aesthetics, entertainment, social interaction, child care, gardening/landscaping, all sorts of things add value to society besides production of consumer goods, We'll need to keep the velocity of money and economic/workforce participation rate up and have some profit-sharing arrangement from automated production that makes some sort of sense, and that's likely to seem pretty socialist to those of us who're used to a world that requires a lot of effort to meet needs. Like I said before I think a lot of the problems this is going to cause and to some degree already has are the result of government intervention and resulting malinvestment going back a long time, we don't really have a functioning free market now, so we're going to run into this problem in a state of really serious imbalance with a huge amount of legacy moral hazard. I don't think the half-assed pseudo market capitalism we have today is going to be able to adapt to it fast enough, and the political ramifications may be pretty significant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 1:47:02 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If we follow that rule then no Cylons. But no Cylons means no ...... http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5e/Number_Six_Tricia_Helfer.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: As automation takes over the economy and more and more people are finding themselves unemployable, I'm starting to think that this type of commandment might be needed. If we follow that rule then no Cylons. But no Cylons means no ...... http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5e/Number_Six_Tricia_Helfer.jpg  |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 1:51:05 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The human race is approaching The Great Filter. Exciting times, full of hope. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 1:52:26 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The effect is even stronger than that, that's why I called it the intersection of productivity and scarcity in my previous post. It's not just that robots are more efficient, there are also limits to the total desirable activity, both natural and artificial. IMO we're going to need to find a way to make human interaction/services more economically rewarding, education, art, aesthetics, entertainment, social interaction, child care, gardening/landscaping, all sorts of things add value to society besides production of consumer goods, We'll need to keep the velocity of money and economic/workforce participation rate up and have some profit-sharing arrangement from automated production that makes some sort of sense, and that's likely to seem pretty socialist to those of us who're used to a world that requires a lot of effort to meet needs. Like I said before I think a lot of the problems this is going to cause and to some degree already has are the result of government intervention and resulting malinvestment going back a long time, we don't really have a functioning free market now, so we're going to run into this problem in a state of really serious imbalance with a huge amount of legacy moral hazard. I don't think the half-assed pseudo market capitalism we have today is going to be able to adapt to it fast enough, and the political ramifications may be pretty significant. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The free market is based on scarcity of resources. Remove the scarcity and boom. If these robots can provide everything and do everything mo' betta than a human then it seems silly to make people work (provided they are less efficient). The effect is even stronger than that, that's why I called it the intersection of productivity and scarcity in my previous post. It's not just that robots are more efficient, there are also limits to the total desirable activity, both natural and artificial. IMO we're going to need to find a way to make human interaction/services more economically rewarding, education, art, aesthetics, entertainment, social interaction, child care, gardening/landscaping, all sorts of things add value to society besides production of consumer goods, We'll need to keep the velocity of money and economic/workforce participation rate up and have some profit-sharing arrangement from automated production that makes some sort of sense, and that's likely to seem pretty socialist to those of us who're used to a world that requires a lot of effort to meet needs. Like I said before I think a lot of the problems this is going to cause and to some degree already has are the result of government intervention and resulting malinvestment going back a long time, we don't really have a functioning free market now, so we're going to run into this problem in a state of really serious imbalance with a huge amount of legacy moral hazard. I don't think the half-assed pseudo market capitalism we have today is going to be able to adapt to it fast enough, and the political ramifications may be pretty significant. Most human existence is suffering and misery. We have the means to make it less so today, but we don't give a flying fuck. What would make the shiny and bright future any different? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 1:56:04 AM EDT
[#42]
Quoted:
As automation takes over the economy and more and more people are finding themselves unemployable, I'm starting to think that this type of commandment might be needed. Why? If you're able-bodied and of working age and you're less useful than a robot and/or stupid enough to keep voting for minimum wage increases that make you more expensive than a robot, then you deserve to get replaced by a machine. Zero fucks given. On a related note: society cannot and will not function indefinitely when the population has a substantial fraction of useless, greedy fucks, and you do not have the technology and resources to provide them a high enough standard of living to shut them up. We don't have the technology to pull that off and we're not likely to get it before they drag us down. Eventually things will return to normal for able-bodied, working age adults: you don't work, you don't eat, unless you can convince someone to feed you. The screaming fucksticks throwing bricks from freeway overpasses lately are not going to have anything to do with any sort of shining, robot-filled future. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 2:04:13 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Most human existence is suffering and misery. We have the means to make it less so today, but we don't give a flying fuck. What would make the shiny and bright future any different? Well I was under the impression we were talking about the better case scenario here, where productivity continues to create wealth until eventually I suppose the world becomes sort of a giant leisure resort, Disney-planet if you will. Even that scenario has sort of a dystopian feel to it, a planet of children babied by machines. It's far more likely the few in a position to accumulate the wealth and power provided by an automated slave army just liquidate the rest of us. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 2:09:26 AM EDT
[#44]
You guys have absolutely no idea just how close to Skynet we are.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 2:14:15 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You guys have absolutely no idea just how close to Skynet we are. Do tell. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 2:14:22 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Except the oncoming wave of AI is fundamentally different than every tech / job disruption we have had so far in the history of mankind . . . While I prefer free markets to socialism, as AI gets better and better more and more people will get pushed out of the labor force and its going to flip the very idea of our economy on our head. That's the thing that makes me think more than anything else, when it comes to the future of technology. When the whole industry is turned upside down, what happens next? The fact that this automated technology is so new and different... it always seems to take at least a generation to adapt to the "new world." I feel that mankind is on the ragged edge of a very steep and rocky precipice. Gravity and intertia are a cold, hard bitch in this situation. But, what happens next? That is the one thing that I cannot wrap my head around. I just hope that the leaders in this field tread lightly. We already know our politicians won't. If half, or more, of mankind is out of work in certain industries, what other viable option is there in reguards to government and society? It better fucking not be socialism. I'm at a loss for predictions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 2:18:31 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's going to happen. It's close enough that people in the AI field have publicly stated it's time to start seriously thinking about what our equivalent of Asimov's "3 laws" are going to be. Or, you can be a luddite while watching society evolve around you and without you. Lol. Decades/Centuries(latter being more likely) if ever. I'd be absolutely shocked if there exists a true AI by the end of this century. Increasingly better facsimiles are foregone conclusions, but true intelligence is uncharted territory. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 2:20:29 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Do tell. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: You guys have absolutely no idea just how close to Skynet we are. Do tell. The only technological piece missing from allowing the Terminator flying Hunter/Killer scenario to exist is an operational X-47B. It's actually far more terrifying than that. Remember in Captain America The Winter Soldier how they created an algorithm that was able to identify threats and potential threats to hydra based on data mined from credit card purchases, e-mails, Facebook posts, medical records, etc. and then order the helicarriers to kill them? Once the X-47B is operational that fictional scenario will only require someone putting the other pieces together. The other pieces already exist. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 2:23:08 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Lol. Decades/Centuries(latter being more likely) if ever. I'd be absolutely shocked if there exists a true AI by the end of this century. Increasingly better facsimiles are foregone conclusions, but true intelligence is uncharted territory. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: It's going to happen. It's close enough that people in the AI field have publicly stated it's time to start seriously thinking about what our equivalent of Asimov's "3 laws" are going to be. Or, you can be a luddite while watching society evolve around you and without you. Lol. Decades/Centuries(latter being more likely) if ever. I'd be absolutely shocked if there exists a true AI by the end of this century. Increasingly better facsimiles are foregone conclusions, but true intelligence is uncharted territory. True intelligence already exists. There are already computers being marketed that can literally analyze and comprehend data, and make independent associations to draw conclusions.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2014 2:24:14 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The only technological piece missing from allowing the Terminator flying Hunter/Killer scenario to exist is an operational X-47B. The technological pieces missing from an actual terminator (not a terminator like machine) are numerous and not only limited to AI. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
