5 ms·

It shows that cheap labour (slaves) starves innovation. You dont need a robot, if you have servants. Thus, the irony, a social system that keeps the labour expe

It shows that cheap labour (slaves) starves innovation. You dont need a robot, if you have servants. Thus, the irony, a social system that keeps the labour expensive, boosts tech.

danbruc 11y ago
What is ironic about that?
- louithethrid 11y ago
  The unemployed underclass the valley und a non-controlled migration (which it advocates often for) kills it. Its a sort of self-regulating-plant. So a societal mechanism, that aims to improve every tech available, is unable to do a bit of leviathan-cybernetics and stabilize its own propelling force. Irony is when ones action contradict ones plans?
  - danbruc 11y ago
    I see no contradiction - keep necessary labour well paid but aim for abolishing all labour in the end.
pouetpouet 11y ago
Who needs the printing press when you have cheap copists?
Houshalter 11y ago
I think thats too simplistic. The romans didnt have modern metal working to build effective steam engines or coal to power them. They didn't even have printing presses to preserve and spread knowledge. Or good number systsem to do math with. Maybe they could have had an industrial revolution but its not as simple as just slaves.
- lordnacho 11y ago
  I think there's some value in the parent comment. Of course labor is not the only input. But the laws of nature haven't changed; the Romans could have discovered science back then if they'd only set up society to do so.
  - Houshalter 11y ago
    We don't know that. That's hindsight bias. There are so many things that happened before the industrial revolution that contributed. I mentioned the printing press and modern mathematics. The creation of a totally different economic system than the Romans had. I also read once about the development of the canon lead to experimenting with better and better metal working. Which eventually allowed steam engines. The Romans had no concept of the scientific method. No concept of machines that could do work or produce energy. The whole philosophy that the universe obeyed simple laws that could be discovered empirically was foreign to them. The Greeks believed that they could discover the laws of the universe just by thinking really hard about them. An interesting take on this is Archimede's Chronophone: http://lesswrong.com/lw/h5/archimedess_chronophone/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/h5/archimedess_chronophone/
bsbechtel 11y ago
I agree that cheap labor starves innovation, but the cause of cheap labor is not a lack of a social system that boosts wages. It's lots of competitors trying to hire away your employees. The only way this is possible is by making it easier for new firms to enter the market. I'm not sure about Rome specifically, but in general, merchants and other businesses before the 18th century needed social connections and permission from their lords/kings/governors before opening a business. A 'corporation' was originally nothing more than a charter from your government saying you have permission to conduct business.
FelixP 11y ago
If you want to see the impact of profoundly cheap labor in a modern country, go to India. When I was there last winter, it was fascinating to see how many things were done by simply throwing seemingly-inordinate man-hours of labor at tasks (e.g. painting roads and signage by hand).

It shows that cheap labour (slaves) starves innovation. You dont need a robot, if you have servants. Thus, the irony, a social system that keeps the labour expensive, boosts tech.

danbruc 11y ago

What is ironic about that?

louithethrid 11y ago
The unemployed underclass the valley und a non-controlled migration (which it advocates often for) kills it. Its a sort of self-regulating-plant. So a societal mechanism, that aims to improve every tech available, is unable to do a bit of leviathan-cybernetics and stabilize its own propelling force. Irony is when ones action contradict ones plans?
- danbruc 11y ago
  I see no contradiction - keep necessary labour well paid but aim for abolishing all labour in the end.

pouetpouet 11y ago

Who needs the printing press when you have cheap copists?

Houshalter 11y ago

I think thats too simplistic. The romans didnt have modern metal working to build effective steam engines or coal to power them. They didn't even have printing presses to preserve and spread knowledge. Or good number systsem to do math with. Maybe they could have had an industrial revolution but its not as simple as just slaves.

lordnacho 11y ago
I think there's some value in the parent comment. Of course labor is not the only input. But the laws of nature haven't changed; the Romans could have discovered science back then if they'd only set up society to do so.
- Houshalter 11y ago
  We don't know that. That's hindsight bias. There are so many things that happened before the industrial revolution that contributed. I mentioned the printing press and modern mathematics. The creation of a totally different economic system than the Romans had. I also read once about the development of the canon lead to experimenting with better and better metal working. Which eventually allowed steam engines. The Romans had no concept of the scientific method. No concept of machines that could do work or produce energy. The whole philosophy that the universe obeyed simple laws that could be discovered empirically was foreign to them. The Greeks believed that they could discover the laws of the universe just by thinking really hard about them. An interesting take on this is Archimede's Chronophone: http://lesswrong.com/lw/h5/archimedess_chronophone/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/h5/archimedess_chronophone/

bsbechtel 11y ago

I agree that cheap labor starves innovation, but the cause of cheap labor is not a lack of a social system that boosts wages. It's lots of competitors trying to hire away your employees. The only way this is possible is by making it easier for new firms to enter the market. I'm not sure about Rome specifically, but in general, merchants and other businesses before the 18th century needed social connections and permission from their lords/kings/governors before opening a business. A 'corporation' was originally nothing more than a charter from your government saying you have permission to conduct business.

FelixP 11y ago

If you want to see the impact of profoundly cheap labor in a modern country, go to India. When I was there last winter, it was fascinating to see how many things were done by simply throwing seemingly-inordinate man-hours of labor at tasks (e.g. painting roads and signage by hand).