[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Humans need not apply (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 8/13/2014 9:52:03 AM EDT
|
Interesting 15:00 minute video about the "Robot Revolution" TL:DW 45% of workforce could become unemployable through no fault of their own.  |
|
Just like how the automobile displaced the stable boy, the street sweeper, the buggy-whip maker, the saddle maker, the hay farmer, the hay delivery man into the city....
Just like how a mining machine replaced 100 men with pick-axes. Just like how a combine replaced dozens of men with mule teams, or hundreds of them with scythes. Just like how a modern diesel train can run with one engineer, instead of an engineer, a guy running the coal, and a brake-man. Maybe... just MAYBE... automation actually frees up capital to employ people in new endeavors we haven't even dreamed up yet. Maybe... just MAYBE automation increases productivity so goods and services are cheaper, which also frees up capital, fights inflation, and leaves you with more spending money to create jobs and things that didn't even exist before. Naw... couldn't be. 
|
|
Quoted:
Just like how the automobile displaced the stable boy, the street sweeper, the buggy-whip maker, the saddle maker, the hay farmer, the hay delivery man into the city.... Just like how a mining machine replaced 100 men with pick-axes. Just like how a combine replaced dozens of men with mule teams, or hundreds of them with scythes. Just like how a modern diesel train can run with one engineer, instead of an engineer, a guy running the coal, and a brake-man. Maybe... just MAYBE... automation actually frees up capital to employ people in new endeavors we haven't even dreamed up yet. Maybe... just MAYBE automation increases productivity so goods and services are cheaper, which also frees up capital, fights inflation, and leaves you with more spending money to create jobs and things that didn't even exist before. Naw... couldn't be. Thank you. |
|
Quoted:
Just like how the automobile displaced the stable boy, the street sweeper, the buggy-whip maker, the saddle maker, the hay farmer, the hay delivery man into the city.... Just like how a mining machine replaced 100 men with pick-axes. Just like how a combine replaced dozens of men with mule teams, or hundreds of them with scythes. Just like how a modern diesel train can run with one engineer, instead of an engineer, a guy running the coal, and a brake-man. Maybe... just MAYBE... automation actually frees up capital to employ people in new endeavors we haven't even dreamed up yet. Maybe... just MAYBE automation increases productivity so goods and services are cheaper, which also frees up capital, fights inflation, and leaves you with more spending money to create jobs and things that didn't even exist before. Naw... couldn't be. Truth. Humans are born with fucking supercomputers between their ears. Only the laziest motherfucking union scum would argue against technology that frees us from menial tasks. |
|
Quoted:
It would be an improvement. Ethically and legally. Prolly intelligence too Quoted:
Quoted:
When will robot senators and congressmen replace the human ones? Ethically and legally. Prolly intelligence too A robot may not harm a human being, nor through inaction allow a human being to come to harm. A robot must protect itself unless doing so would violate the First Law. A robot must follow all orders from human beings unless doing so would violate the First or Second Laws. Asimov takes a crack at this in at least a couple of his short stories. |
|
Quoted: Just like how the automobile displaced the stable boy, the street sweeper, the buggy-whip maker, the saddle maker, the hay farmer, the hay delivery man into the city.... Just like how a mining machine replaced 100 men with pick-axes. Just like how a combine replaced dozens of men with mule teams, or hundreds of them with scythes. Just like how a modern diesel train can run with one engineer, instead of an engineer, a guy running the coal, and a brake-man. Maybe... just MAYBE... automation actually frees up capital to employ people in new endeavors we haven't even dreamed up yet. Maybe... just MAYBE automation increases productivity so goods and services are cheaper, which also frees up capital, fights inflation, and leaves you with more spending money to create jobs and things that didn't even exist before. Naw... couldn't be. I don't know. Seemed pretty compelling to me. |
|
Quoted:
It's only a matter of time http://cdn2.thisisinfamous.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Terminator-terminator-9683150-1024-576.jpg extensive research has already been done on this topic and "spolier alert" it doesn't end up well for us |
|
Quoted:
This idea is addressed in the video. I don't know. Seemed pretty compelling to me. Quoted:
Quoted:
Just like how the automobile displaced the stable boy, the street sweeper, the buggy-whip maker, the saddle maker, the hay farmer, the hay delivery man into the city.... Just like how a mining machine replaced 100 men with pick-axes. Just like how a combine replaced dozens of men with mule teams, or hundreds of them with scythes. Just like how a modern diesel train can run with one engineer, instead of an engineer, a guy running the coal, and a brake-man. Maybe... just MAYBE... automation actually frees up capital to employ people in new endeavors we haven't even dreamed up yet. Maybe... just MAYBE automation increases productivity so goods and services are cheaper, which also frees up capital, fights inflation, and leaves you with more spending money to create jobs and things that didn't even exist before. Naw... couldn't be. I don't know. Seemed pretty compelling to me. No. What he's saying is true. Your quality of life is proof of it. The poorest ghetto welfare piece of shit of today probably has more free time and luxuries than a 16th century nobleman. You probably live within walking distance of a place you can buy chicken for 1.50 a pound. A pound of chicken that, for even someone making 10 bucks an hour (someone we consider poor today) could buy for about 9 minutes of labor. |
|
Quoted:
... Maybe... just MAYBE... automation actually frees up capital to employ people in new endeavors we haven't even dreamed up yet. Maybe... just MAYBE automation increases productivity so goods and services are cheaper, which also frees up capital, fights inflation, and leaves you with more spending money to create jobs and things that didn't even exist before. Naw... couldn't be. None of that needs to happen if rent-seekers capture the market. Historically, industrial age machinery created new jobs as quickly as it reduced old ones. That doesn't need to happen here. Historically, there was little need for retraining. There were few regulatory caps. There were no IQ caps. Take automaton to the logical, extreme conclusion, and work backwards: an artificial general intelligence that's quantitatively and qualitatively superior to any human. In a free market with no basic income, it outcompetes all humans. Or consider an emulation hypothesis, where trained human minds can be digitized, creating a Malthusian race to the bottom that continually pares away non-competitive attributes. If a successful AGI is communist heaven, a successful emulation economy is capitalist hell. In a nearer scenario, people as we know them still do the programming and design. This pushes the economy in two directions: people with intensive training and high IQs who do the formal proofs, and people who do menial work that robots suck at. In all scenarios, there's a common trend: commerce doesn't run on the premodern logistics model. It's few to many and many to many models. So the untrained entrepreneurs can still become billionaires with the next facebook or Amazon every blue moon; but steady salaries from midsize businesses for the masses are right out. |
|
Quoted:
None of that needs to happen if rent-seekers capture the market. Historically, industrial age machinery created new jobs as quickly as it reduced old ones. That doesn't need to happen here. Historically, there was little need for retraining. There were few regulatory caps. There were no IQ caps. Take automaton to the logical, extreme conclusion, and work backwards: an artificial general intelligence that's quantitatively and qualitatively superior to any human. In a free market with no basic income, it outcompetes all humans. Or consider an emulation hypothesis, where trained human minds can be digitized, creating a Malthusian race to the bottom that continually pares away non-competitive attributes. If a successful AGI is communist heaven, a successful emulation economy is capitalist hell. In a nearer scenario, people as we know them still do the programming and design. This pushes the economy in two directions: people with intensive training and high IQs who do the formal proofs, and people who do menial work that robots suck at. In all scenarios, there's a common trend: commerce doesn't run on the premodern logistics model. It's few to many and many to many models. So the untrained entrepreneurs can still become billionaires with the next facebook or Amazon every blue moon; but steady salaries from midsize businesses for the masses are right out. Quoted:
Quoted:
... Maybe... just MAYBE... automation actually frees up capital to employ people in new endeavors we haven't even dreamed up yet. Maybe... just MAYBE automation increases productivity so goods and services are cheaper, which also frees up capital, fights inflation, and leaves you with more spending money to create jobs and things that didn't even exist before. Naw... couldn't be. None of that needs to happen if rent-seekers capture the market. Historically, industrial age machinery created new jobs as quickly as it reduced old ones. That doesn't need to happen here. Historically, there was little need for retraining. There were few regulatory caps. There were no IQ caps. Take automaton to the logical, extreme conclusion, and work backwards: an artificial general intelligence that's quantitatively and qualitatively superior to any human. In a free market with no basic income, it outcompetes all humans. Or consider an emulation hypothesis, where trained human minds can be digitized, creating a Malthusian race to the bottom that continually pares away non-competitive attributes. If a successful AGI is communist heaven, a successful emulation economy is capitalist hell. In a nearer scenario, people as we know them still do the programming and design. This pushes the economy in two directions: people with intensive training and high IQs who do the formal proofs, and people who do menial work that robots suck at. In all scenarios, there's a common trend: commerce doesn't run on the premodern logistics model. It's few to many and many to many models. So the untrained entrepreneurs can still become billionaires with the next facebook or Amazon every blue moon; but steady salaries from midsize businesses for the masses are right out. If people want to go become subsistence farmers, all they have to do is petition their government to free up the millions of acres it sits on and does nothing with. |
|
Quoted:
Naw... couldn't be. We're not building robots so that we can pay for them, and also pay for more employees. The whole point of automation is to get people off the payroll. Find me any business owner that says they're implementing automation so they can hire more people. |
|
Quoted:
Its coming and sooner than most people think. Google is pressing hard with 'small biz' robots that are affordable and most importantly run on simple code. The next revolution will not be pretty for a lot of folks. No, see, when they get laid off and end up drawing welfare, life is better! |
|
Quoted:
No, see, when they get laid off and end up drawing welfare, life is better! Quoted:
Quoted:
Its coming and sooner than most people think. Google is pressing hard with 'small biz' robots that are affordable and most importantly run on simple code. The next revolution will not be pretty for a lot of folks. No, see, when they get laid off and end up drawing welfare, life is better! Oh yeah, I keep forgetting that's the way it works now. |
|
Quoted:
Creative destruction. Somebody has to design, build, test, manufacture, program, and install the robots though. Absolutely. But it will take less people to do just that vs the jobs that are wiped out. Plus, the people that get axed first aren't exactly in a position to design, test, manufacture, program and install or they wouldn't be working at Burger King in the first place. |
|
Quoted:
No, see, when they get laid off and end up drawing welfare, life is better! Quoted:
Quoted:
Its coming and sooner than most people think. Google is pressing hard with 'small biz' robots that are affordable and most importantly run on simple code. The next revolution will not be pretty for a lot of folks. No, see, when they get laid off and end up drawing welfare, life is better! I see alot of people arguing against automation but none volunteering to go farm 40 acres with a mule-drawn plow. |
|
Quoted:
Creative destruction. Somebody has to design, build, test, manufacture, program, and install the robots though. That's true, and it has to take less people or there's no point in it. No business owner says, "I'm going to replace 20 workers with this robot and 40 more workers!" |
|
Quoted: No. What he's saying is true. Your quality of life is proof of it. The poorest ghetto welfare piece of shit of today probably has more free time and luxuries than a 16th century nobleman. You probably live within walking distance of a place you can buy chicken for 1.50 a pound. A pound of chicken that, for even someone making 10 bucks an hour (someone we consider poor today) could buy for about 9 minutes of labor. bringing welfare into the issue just confuses things. The average welfare pos has more free time and luxuries than I do, because I actually work, pay for my own shit, and pay taxes. Also, just because the economy worked that way before (when transitioning from an agriculture economy to a manufacturing economy, which is a totally different transition than the one we're just starting) What we're actually going to see is automation replacing a large part of the workforce, and not just menial jobs but high paying white collar jobs. We've become a service economy, but we're poised to eliminate a large % of the service jobs as well. I'm sure there will be new jobs created, but the question is whether there will be enough jobs that pay well enough to employ those who actually wish to work. If there aren't, and so far no one has come up with what to do with all the barristas and burgerflippers. They'll simply become another poor ghetto welfare piece of shit, it appears. |
|
Quoted:
I see alot of people arguing against automation but none volunteering to go farm 40 acres with a mule-drawn plow. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Its coming and sooner than most people think. Google is pressing hard with 'small biz' robots that are affordable and most importantly run on simple code. The next revolution will not be pretty for a lot of folks. No, see, when they get laid off and end up drawing welfare, life is better! I see alot of people arguing against automation but none volunteering to go farm 40 acres with a mule-drawn plow. What would I do there, grow straw so I could build straw men? |
|
Quoted:
What would I do there, grow straw so I could build straw men? Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Its coming and sooner than most people think. Google is pressing hard with 'small biz' robots that are affordable and most importantly run on simple code. The next revolution will not be pretty for a lot of folks. No, see, when they get laid off and end up drawing welfare, life is better! I see alot of people arguing against automation but none volunteering to go farm 40 acres with a mule-drawn plow. What would I do there, grow straw so I could build straw men? lol, it isn't a straw man argument at all. What exactly do you think it is you'd be doing if we embraced the luddite mindset? Sure as shit, not whatever it is you're doing right now. Unless you're already a small-time homestead farmer. |
|
Quoted:
"Anyone who disagrees with me must be a Luddite" is exactly what a straw man argument is. Quoted:
Quoted:
lol, it isn't a straw man argument at all. "Anyone who disagrees with me must be a Luddite" is exactly what a straw man argument is. Except that isn't what I said at all. Who's making strawmen arguments here? If you think we should abandon automation or other technical progress that reduces the need for human labor, then yes, you are by any reasonable definition of the word a LUDDITE. That isn't because you "disagree with me." |
|
Quoted:
I see alot of people arguing against automation but none volunteering to go farm 40 acres with a mule-drawn plow. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Its coming and sooner than most people think. Google is pressing hard with 'small biz' robots that are affordable and most importantly run on simple code. The next revolution will not be pretty for a lot of folks. No, see, when they get laid off and end up drawing welfare, life is better! I see alot of people arguing against automation but none volunteering to go farm 40 acres with a mule-drawn plow. Im definitely not arguing against it. In fact, I welcome it. I mean that's where my field is heading. But I also can see the downsides of it when a lot of positions are replaced by superior machines (more efficient, TCO < labor, don't call in sick, etc.) We are talking about a current economic environment where burger flippers want $15 per hour. Going from that to....uh well there are no more burger flipping jobs because the entire McDonals is run by about 2 people and 80 machines. That's going to cause a lot more issues than we are dealing with now. And McDonalds is just the tip of the iceberg. |
|
Quoted:
Im definitely not arguing against it. In fact, I welcome it. I mean that's where my field is heading. But I also can see the downsides of it when a lot of positions are replaced by superior machines (more efficient, TCO < labor, don't call in sick, etc.) We are talking about a current economic environment where burger flippers want $15 per hour. Going from that to....uh well there are no more burger flipping jobs because the entire McDonals is run by about 2 people and 80 machines. That's going to cause a lot more issues than we are dealing with now. And McDonalds is just the tip of the iceberg. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Its coming and sooner than most people think. Google is pressing hard with 'small biz' robots that are affordable and most importantly run on simple code. The next revolution will not be pretty for a lot of folks. No, see, when they get laid off and end up drawing welfare, life is better! I see alot of people arguing against automation but none volunteering to go farm 40 acres with a mule-drawn plow. Im definitely not arguing against it. In fact, I welcome it. I mean that's where my field is heading. But I also can see the downsides of it when a lot of positions are replaced by superior machines (more efficient, TCO < labor, don't call in sick, etc.) We are talking about a current economic environment where burger flippers want $15 per hour. Going from that to....uh well there are no more burger flipping jobs because the entire McDonals is run by about 2 people and 80 machines. That's going to cause a lot more issues than we are dealing with now. And McDonalds is just the tip of the iceberg. If all else fails, consider it a more effective sorting mechanism for higher quality humans. |
|
Quoted:
Its coming and sooner than most people think. Google is pressing hard with 'small biz' robots that are affordable and most importantly run on simple code. The next revolution will not be pretty for a lot of folks. Let us go forth and begin the breaking of looms, comrade! ETA: I see I've been beat to the Luddite reference. 
|
|
Quoted:
If all else fails, consider it a more effective sorting mechanism for higher quality humans. I agree, the problem is that they're still going to vote. Believe me, I'd love to see a world where we grind up the welfare class to make fertilizer, but it's just not very realistic. |
|
Quoted:
Just like how the automobile displaced the stable boy, the street sweeper, the buggy-whip maker, the saddle maker, the hay farmer, the hay delivery man into the city.... Just like how a mining machine replaced 100 men with pick-axes. Just like how a combine replaced dozens of men with mule teams, or hundreds of them with scythes. Just like how a modern diesel train can run with one engineer, instead of an engineer, a guy running the coal, and a brake-man. Maybe... just MAYBE... automation actually frees up capital to employ people in new endeavors we haven't even dreamed up yet. Maybe... just MAYBE automation increases productivity so goods and services are cheaper, which also frees up capital, fights inflation, and leaves you with more spending money to create jobs and things that didn't even exist before. Naw... couldn't be. This has a limit, however. 1. People are not infinitely trainable (some people can barely be trained to put on pants everyday). A guy with an 80 IQ can be trained to assemble car parts, but he is not ever gonna be writing CFD algorithms. Everybody has their own ceiling; we can't all just move on to more and more highly skilled positions as robots replace people in the low-skill positions. And robots/algorithms are doing higher and higher-skilled jobs every day, so soon it won't be just the 80-IQ guy who is too dumb to be retrained into a position of value, but the 90-IQ, and the 100, and so on. 2. The pay a person receives is correlated with the perceived recurring value they generate for a company. Robots diminish the perceived value of low or unskilled labor, because they can do it for pennies on the dollar (like illegal immigrants, or Chinese sweatshop workers, but more severely). The market value of a job becomes almost nil when it can be effectively performed by a robot. I'm curious to see how many long-haul truckers can afford to take the pay cut once robot trucking becomes ubiquitous. 3. Robots make goods cheaper by providing the equivalent output of more jobs than they create (at least, in total dollar amounts). Virtually by definition. A robot that produces the output of 100 factory workers does not need 100 repairmen or technicians to operate. Per unit, a robot that replaces 100 probably requires <1 worker to design and build it, and maybe a few people to install/maintain it. Technological progress does generally improve standards of living, but bearing in mind 1-3, as robots get cheaper/smarter/more numerous, they stand a decent chance of eliminating any value that the dullards of society might have (in a capitalist sense). I don't know what the solution is, but generally groups of people don't respond well when they are told/shown that they are obsolete. |
|
Quoted:
We're not building robots so that we can pay for them, and also pay for more employees. The whole point of automation is to get people off the payroll. Find me any business owner that says they're implementing automation so they can hire more people. Quoted:
Quoted:
Naw... couldn't be. We're not building robots so that we can pay for them, and also pay for more employees. The whole point of automation is to get people off the payroll. Find me any business owner that says they're implementing automation so they can hire more people. (facepalm) |
|
Quoted:
(facepalm) Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Naw... couldn't be. We're not building robots so that we can pay for them, and also pay for more employees. The whole point of automation is to get people off the payroll. Find me any business owner that says they're implementing automation so they can hire more people. (facepalm) I know, I know. The people that the robot replaces can just go work at a better job somewhere else. Which somehow will be prohibited from buying their own robots. Sorry but this all sounds way too much like, "Making everyone buy insurance will make health care cheaper!" |
|
Quoted:
I think if we reduce the need for human labor, we will have a reduced need for human labor. I think that will result in less people being employed, which is the point of automation in the first place. That's not a value judgment, that's just arithmetic. Except that humans constantly invent new things and new things to do with their time that improve their quality of life. Automation destroyed the blacksmith... and created the machinist. |
|
Quoted:
Except that humans constantly invent new things and new things to do with their time that improve their quality of life. Automation destroyed the blacksmith... and created the machinist. Quoted:
Quoted:
I think if we reduce the need for human labor, we will have a reduced need for human labor. I think that will result in less people being employed, which is the point of automation in the first place. That's not a value judgment, that's just arithmetic. Except that humans constantly invent new things and new things to do with their time that improve their quality of life. Automation destroyed the blacksmith... and created the machinist. And, a machinist that can accomplish the same output as 10 blacksmiths is better for society as a whole. That doesn't magically make the 10 replaced blacksmiths disappear, or magically turn them into machinists. This isn't hard to understand. |
|
Quoted:
This idea is addressed in the video. I don't know. Seemed pretty compelling to me. Quoted:
Quoted:
Just like how the automobile displaced the stable boy, the street sweeper, the buggy-whip maker, the saddle maker, the hay farmer, the hay delivery man into the city.... Just like how a mining machine replaced 100 men with pick-axes. Just like how a combine replaced dozens of men with mule teams, or hundreds of them with scythes. Just like how a modern diesel train can run with one engineer, instead of an engineer, a guy running the coal, and a brake-man. Maybe... just MAYBE... automation actually frees up capital to employ people in new endeavors we haven't even dreamed up yet. Maybe... just MAYBE automation increases productivity so goods and services are cheaper, which also frees up capital, fights inflation, and leaves you with more spending money to create jobs and things that didn't even exist before. Naw... couldn't be. I don't know. Seemed pretty compelling to me. It's addressed in an old book. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Player_Piano_(novel) |
|
Quoted:
Maybe... just MAYBE... automation actually frees up capital to employ people in new endeavors we haven't even dreamed up yet. Maybe... just MAYBE automation increases productivity so goods and services are cheaper, which also frees up capital, fights inflation, and leaves you with more spending money to create jobs and things that didn't even exist before. Naw... couldn't be. Maybe, just Maybe you need to watch the video all the way through to see this one is a bit different. IMHO the jury is still on the fence, but I've thought the same thing for years and with the newer 'software bots' even more jobs may be on the chopping block. |
|
Quoted:
Except that humans constantly invent new things and new things to do with their time that improve their quality of life. Automation destroyed the blacksmith... and created the machinist. Quoted:
Quoted:
I think if we reduce the need for human labor, we will have a reduced need for human labor. I think that will result in less people being employed, which is the point of automation in the first place. That's not a value judgment, that's just arithmetic. Except that humans constantly invent new things and new things to do with their time that improve their quality of life. Automation destroyed the blacksmith... and created the machinist. And CNC machines and 3D printers are replacing the machinist. |
|
In 1820, 72% of the working population worked on farms. Today, 2.2% of the population work on farms.
As technology advanced, fewer people were needed on the dawn to dusk work on the farm. This allow people to move into new industries, like automotive, aerospace, electronics, computer science, home construction, etc. Robots have relieved many workers from dangerous, repetitive, boring tasks in manufacturing. |
|
Quoted:
In 1820, 72% of the working population worked on farms. Today, 2.2% of the population work on farms. As technology advanced, fewer people were needed on the dawn to dusk work on the farm. This allow people to move into new industries, like automotive, aerospace, electronics, computer science, home construction, etc. Robots have relieved many workers from dangerous, repetitive, boring tasks in manufacturing. All areas where the new robots will be working. Heck they have 3D printers that can print houses now, and bots that can write code. |
|
Quoted:
Maybe, just Maybe you need to watch the video all the way through to see this one is a bit different. IMHO the jury is still on the fence, but I've thought the same thing for years and with the newer 'software bots' even more jobs may be on the chopping block. Quoted:
Quoted:
Maybe... just MAYBE... automation actually frees up capital to employ people in new endeavors we haven't even dreamed up yet. Maybe... just MAYBE automation increases productivity so goods and services are cheaper, which also frees up capital, fights inflation, and leaves you with more spending money to create jobs and things that didn't even exist before. Naw... couldn't be. Maybe, just Maybe you need to watch the video all the way through to see this one is a bit different. IMHO the jury is still on the fence, but I've thought the same thing for years and with the newer 'software bots' even more jobs may be on the chopping block. I did watch the video, and the premise that "THIS TIME IT'S DIFFERENT" is bullshit. The problem is a failure to understand the fundamental nature of money and capital. When a business increases productivity, or efficiency, the 'extra money' does not go under a mattress and sit there. It gets invested, it moves. Even if it does go into "savings" and just sit there, that means the next dollar that comes in is now free to be spent. Even if it's being moved to avoid taxes, or to try and convert the assets/money into inflation proof forms it generates economic activity. All the doom and gloomers are BLIND to just how much extra, luxury, frivolous stuff that surrounds us, extra clothes, kids toys, video games, microwaves, stuff nobody 'needs' to survive or live that have all become possible because of the extra capital/money freed up by all the machine automation we've already created in society. Every last economic downturn and unemployment gap has been created by leftist/socialist policies that believe in the false zero-sum game economy. If not created by them, they have been exacerbated and prolonged by them. "So what if the robots and software replace EVERYONE? hurr-durr..." If the robot economy displaced everyone, and no one had any income to pay for goods and services, then there'd be no robot economy in the first place. It would serve no purpose. The people themselves who couldn't afford anything produced by the robot economy would starve said economy of any money/capital/income because they wouldn't be able to use it. Or, we would become a Post-Scarcity Society. Everyone would have their basic needs met. Much like those who rightly point out above that America's non-productive "poor" enjoy a standard of living and luxuries that no one could have at any price just 50 or even 100 years ago... Then on top of it, there would be a luxury/status/entertainment and social economy based on personal services, crafts, art, celebrity, sports prowess... which we already have seen emerge en-masse as a result of industrialization in the late 19th and 20th century. |
|
Quoted:
I did watch the video, and the premise that "THIS TIME IT'S DIFFERENT" is bullshit. The problem is a failure to understand the fundamental nature of money and capital. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Maybe... just MAYBE... automation actually frees up capital to employ people in new endeavors we haven't even dreamed up yet. Maybe... just MAYBE automation increases productivity so goods and services are cheaper, which also frees up capital, fights inflation, and leaves you with more spending money to create jobs and things that didn't even exist before. Naw... couldn't be. Maybe, just Maybe you need to watch the video all the way through to see this one is a bit different. IMHO the jury is still on the fence, but I've thought the same thing for years and with the newer 'software bots' even more jobs may be on the chopping block. I did watch the video, and the premise that "THIS TIME IT'S DIFFERENT" is bullshit. The problem is a failure to understand the fundamental nature of money and capital. Oh I get that. Just that instead of employing people you'll be buying bots and robots to do the work. That's the point. Business will be super efficient, how that will improve the lives of people who don't own such businesses is not spelled out. Nor who will these businesses market to if we have high rates of unemployment. They don't have to put everyone out of work, even 50% would do a number on our society; and 50% should be easy to achieve. |