9 ms·

I really hope that the last paragraph is wrong. Getting out of that area because they're afraid of neo-luddite backlash is ridiculous. Instead, they should be u

I really hope that the last paragraph is wrong. Getting out of that area because they're afraid of neo-luddite backlash is ridiculous. Instead, they should be using their considerable power to push the much-lauded "Silicon Valley Democracy" (http://www.vox.com/2016/2/19/11057836/silicon-valley-democrat-explained http://www.vox.com/2016/2/19/11057836/silicon-valley-democra...). Things like: - Guaranteed income, or at least a stopgap like the old welfare system, but with far less means-testing and much more generosity - Universal, free higher education - Free, universal health care - Smart, flexible regulatory apparatus - A complete rethought system of unions (a la Sweden) - Massive push (or even buildout) of dense urban housing developments. Make the modern "company town" an explicit goal if you must, then expand it to regions across the country I really wonder if the Nordics have a leg up on us here; they're already 3/4 of the way towards this ideal, both in terms of policy and a cultural understanding of the benefits of a truly progressive taxation system/public goods and services. Would a Danish or Finnish robotics company bail out just because of fear of backlash, or would they say "society already has you covered, people"?

randyrand 11y ago
How do you make higher education free? Doesn't someone have to still pay for it?
- miracle_code 11y ago
  How about the big and worth billions companys pay for it, it is their share for the future at last? Just talking out of my ass here, but the american educational system is flawed big time in that regard, let education and teaching be free, everybody profits in the end. But then again, a well schooled and open minded citizen is not needed in the big scheme of american things. Who will fight their wars then??? /s
  - webXL 11y ago
    U.S. corporations have a much higher tax rate than the rest of the developed economies. The vast majority of corporations aren't sitting on mountains of cash like Apple. Additional tax expense is financed by a combination of higher prices, input cost cuts, and reduced profitability. You're not going to get much there.
    - enraged_camel 11y ago
      US corporations may have high tax rates but that's only on paper. In practice, they massively benefit from loopholes in the tax code that are too many to count. Not to mention tens of billions in subsidies.
      - webXL 11y ago
        Yeah, but where do those loophole savings go? They flow to shareholders in the form of earnings, which get taxed again, or to consumers in the form of lower costs. You really need to look at total tax revenue per GDP, and we're at the low end of that, but when you consider our high GDP per capita (http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2010/03/taxes-per-person.html http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2010/03/taxes-per-person.html), we're in the middle of the pack. We're actually not that stingy on education either: https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&ctype=b&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=s&met_s=sp_pop_totl&scale_s=lin&ind_s=false&dimp_c=country:region&met_y=ny_gdp_pcap_cd&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&met_x=se_xpd_totl_gd_zs&scale_x=lin&ind_x=false&idim=country:BEL&ifdim=country:income_level:OEC&tunit=Y&pit=1300345200000&ind=false&icfg&iconSize=0.33 https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&...
      - randyrand 11y ago
        And there goes the continuation of offshoring. Next even the companies themselves will leave. Do people really not realize the consequences of these types of actions?
  - randyrand 11y ago
    >let education and teaching be free But I don't think many teachers will teach for free. And the ones that do might not be as qualified. You could force them to teach for free, but thats hardly ethical.
- henrik_w 11y ago
  Taxes (in Sweden at least). Works pretty well.
  - webXL 11y ago
    Where do the taxpayers get their money from?
  - randyrand 11y ago
    That's not free though. You still have to have people working in order to pay for it. Point being, lets call a spade a spade. They're tax-funded education, tax-funded healthcare. This is what we should be calling it. Because that is what it is. Thats not to say I'm opposed to those things.
- DasIch 11y ago
  In some countries people consider education to be actually important. If you tax people with high incomes properly, the people that graduate university and get a well paying job will pay so much in taxes you will easily be able to pay for the next generation of students.
webXL 11y ago
Nordics have a leg up on us because they don't spend so much on their militaries and don't have such a diverse electorate to appeal to. The U.S. has them covered to some extent. Alphabet should be pushing for more efficient governments, with an 's'. Americans need to let the world pony up more for safe international trade, and stop being so damn wasteful with ever increasing taxes and debt. Society will cover you when it's wealthy enough. Got to get there first though.
ocdtrekkie 11y ago
Honestly, I do think Google is really afraid of their perception problem. The last thing Google needs is people thinking data collection is going to lead somewhere bad. I think that's a lot of why they really sunk the Google Glass project after the privacy backlash started appearing heavily in the media. I loved my Glass, I still would prefer it over smartwatches sold today. But now it's kinda abandoned.
- adwf 11y ago
  The annoying thing is that Glass would've still been a great product without the camera. All they needed to do was release a cameraless version first, then evolve from there. But instead they came across as some sort of weird surveillance device - which is a perception that Google is always struggling with.
  - ocdtrekkie 11y ago
    That was always the odd thing, it wasn't really a good surveillance device. Not covert, lol. And the battery is unreasonably small for doing video. I actually was angry I couldn't turn off auto-upload, and never used the camera. Would've been more than happy to have a model without it.
thedaveoflife 11y ago
Occam's Razor: 1. Revenue Problem or 2. Neo-Luddite Problem?
- Futurebot 11y ago
  I honestly hope it's the former.
- taneq 11y ago
  Advertising revenues (their main income stream) are under fire on all fronts. Hardware is expensive and messy. They probably want to refocus their 'moon shots' in fields closer to their core expertise. Advertising, big data, AI. I wouldn't be surprised if they scale back on the hardware side of self-driving cars as well.
tremguy 11y ago
I must say I'm not sure if "society having you covered" is quite the issue here. Yes, being a Finn, I can attest on having most of your bullet-point list, as relating to the case at hand, covered. But it doesn't necessarily solve the knee-jerk reaction some people are having for these sorts of innovations. It always strikes me a bit odd when someone from SV comments on societal questions. People from different backgrounds and different walks of life don't obviously share the same worldview, of course those people well off have a harder time relating to those lower on the economic spectrum. But somehow it feels almost like there's a physical discontinuum between the "tech" people, and other people, who don't breathe and live their work, who are just happy to keep whatever job that keeps food on the table. I believe a big part of this is that most folks, contrary to tech, don't have to actively learn on the job. That's why the common answer to start re-educating yourself isn't really a viable alternative for most average people in their 30s-40s. Don't get me wrong, I think it's very much unfortunate that societal issues get in the way of progress that in the long run will make everyone better off. I'm just saying that the things you have listed aren't necessarily the only factor in solving this problem. It's like considering people and their lives only as a function of income and expenses, when there are really a host of other factors also at play here.
- Futurebot 11y ago
  What we're doing now is a whole lot of nothing in the US; we've only recently been able to admit that this whole thing might be a problem, but are far behind in terms of actually doing anything about it. In your Finland, you are able to at least move forward from something resembling a solid political and cultural foundation; we're nowhere near that here. The items I've listed would help us actually move forward to help people survive and navigate the new world: to give them individual agency, autonomy, and safety in a world where lifetime employment is gone; traditional unions are weak and/or are protecting jobs that may themselves be automated / cannot be created in numbers high enough to make up for massive job losses; the free agency/gig/Precariat economy is growing; and jobs are being automated away (even if Google has decided to step away for now.) Identity factors, habits, location/mobility, etc. are all very important. Policy is meant to help provide a baseline for existence, not act as a panacea. There will have to be logistical changes: many people will move to urban areas, as the UN predicts 2/3 of the world will live in by 2050, which are easier to provide services to, have high-quality educational institutions, and obviously what's left of many of the jobs. There will have to be habit changes: those who want to compete will likely have to embrace autodidactism-for-life / training-for-life (free college / cheap online learning makes this one much more palatable.) There will also have to be the hardest changes of all: cultural ones. We'll have different classes of people, many of whom will not be engaged in traditional work. Treating the latter as lazy slackers or parasites that deserve to starve will have to go, first and foremost. We'll have people who still work, and who do much better than those that don't. With proper tax policy and others that I've outlined, we'll hopefully be able to avoid massive wealth gaps / concentration that could lead to massive social upheaval. Some will be managers, developers, business owners, etc. Others will still be in the gig economy, but will exist within it while working from a much more stable base. Being on a "zero hours" contract or working as an Instacart shopper will be much less punishing if you can always afford a place to live. We'll have the "socializing/partying" class that may just get drunk, do drugs, and hang out with their friends, etc. We'll have people who do spend their time mostly consuming media (video games, movies, news, etc.) We'll have people who just sit around learning new stuff because they enjoy doing so; the idea of a lifetime of academia becomes much more appealing when you're not perpetually on the verge of starvation. We'll have people who create music, art, social media posts, and image memes full-time without worrying about paying the rent. We'll have people who finally get to play sports or make handicrafts like they've always wanted to. The biggest adjustment we'll have to make: people will be required to find their own meaning if they can't work, and so cannot derive their identity from their job as they have in the past. Jaron Lanier's "multiple overlapping hierarchies of status" will become ever more important (from both sides: creation/participation and consumption.) Politics and policy are just the start.
mtgx 11y ago
Google "the socialists", is what I imagine I'd hear from the media. That vision is nice and all, until you have to tell all the rich people and corporations that they must give away most of their income to sustain a "guaranteed income" future for everyone. I'm not saying I disagree with it - in fact I agree - I'm just saying Google would have to be ready to fight for that and ask for higher taxes to pay for that income and other benefits for the whole population.
CamperBob2 11y ago
With all of the points you raise, one wonders why the Googles and Apples and Microsofts and Y Combinators of the world are started here, and not in Finland or Norway or Denmark, or whatever culturally-homogeneous oil-rich welfare state you have in mind. And why so many of the the Linus Torvaldses and Elon Musks of the world head for the US as soon as they're able to. Maybe social justice -- or at least your idea of it -- isn't the last, best purpose of humanity after all.
- Futurebot 11y ago
  The Nordics create plenty of innovative companies, and that seems to be increasing. Here are some examples: http://www.demos.org/blog/3/16/16/nordic-innovation-arguments-never-die http://www.demos.org/blog/3/16/16/nordic-innovation-argument... Just a few example companies: Skype, Spotify, Mojang Example technologies: Bluetooth, pacemaker, AIS (like GPS), first LTE system. More, just from Sweden: http://www.swedenabroad.com/ImageVaultFiles/id_19367/cf_347/Examples_of_Swedish_innovations.PDF http://www.swedenabroad.com/ImageVaultFiles/id_19367/cf_347/... As far as people coming to the US, there are totally understandable reasons. We have excellent universities, more people (which matters: bigger local market, larger talent pool, more companies to work for, etc.), and we also have legacy clustering effects (NYC for finance and ads, SV for chips and startups.) These advantages are obviously very significant. There's absolutely no reason we cannot combine those advantages, our highly entrepreneurial culture, and the best the Nordics have to offer to be even better; that's part of what the "Silicon Valley Democrat" idea is about, and influential people there support it (that's where the idea comes from, obviously.) Even YC is doing research into the GBI. This implication here wasn't about that, though; it was about what we'll be forced to do if we don't want to simply leave the masses unemployed and eventually storming the metaphorical--or literal--gates. That will require some or all of the above list.
- solipsism 11y ago
  one wonders why the Googles and Apples and Microsofts and Y Combinators of the world are started here Maybe social justice -- or at least your idea of it -- isn't the last, best purpose of humanity after all Woah. Talk about a non-sequitor. What's one thing have to do with the other?

randyrand 11y ago

How do you make higher education free? Doesn't someone have to still pay for it?

miracle_code 11y ago
How about the big and worth billions companys pay for it, it is their share for the future at last? Just talking out of my ass here, but the american educational system is flawed big time in that regard, let education and teaching be free, everybody profits in the end. But then again, a well schooled and open minded citizen is not needed in the big scheme of american things. Who will fight their wars then??? /s
- webXL 11y ago
  U.S. corporations have a much higher tax rate than the rest of the developed economies. The vast majority of corporations aren't sitting on mountains of cash like Apple. Additional tax expense is financed by a combination of higher prices, input cost cuts, and reduced profitability. You're not going to get much there.
  - enraged_camel 11y ago
    US corporations may have high tax rates but that's only on paper. In practice, they massively benefit from loopholes in the tax code that are too many to count. Not to mention tens of billions in subsidies.
    - webXL 11y ago
      Yeah, but where do those loophole savings go? They flow to shareholders in the form of earnings, which get taxed again, or to consumers in the form of lower costs. You really need to look at total tax revenue per GDP, and we're at the low end of that, but when you consider our high GDP per capita (http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2010/03/taxes-per-person.html http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2010/03/taxes-per-person.html), we're in the middle of the pack. We're actually not that stingy on education either: https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&ctype=b&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=s&met_s=sp_pop_totl&scale_s=lin&ind_s=false&dimp_c=country:region&met_y=ny_gdp_pcap_cd&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&met_x=se_xpd_totl_gd_zs&scale_x=lin&ind_x=false&idim=country:BEL&ifdim=country:income_level:OEC&tunit=Y&pit=1300345200000&ind=false&icfg&iconSize=0.33 https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&...
    - randyrand 11y ago
      And there goes the continuation of offshoring. Next even the companies themselves will leave. Do people really not realize the consequences of these types of actions?
- randyrand 11y ago
  >let education and teaching be free But I don't think many teachers will teach for free. And the ones that do might not be as qualified. You could force them to teach for free, but thats hardly ethical.
henrik_w 11y ago
Taxes (in Sweden at least). Works pretty well.
- webXL 11y ago
  Where do the taxpayers get their money from?
- randyrand 11y ago
  That's not free though. You still have to have people working in order to pay for it. Point being, lets call a spade a spade. They're tax-funded education, tax-funded healthcare. This is what we should be calling it. Because that is what it is. Thats not to say I'm opposed to those things.
DasIch 11y ago
In some countries people consider education to be actually important. If you tax people with high incomes properly, the people that graduate university and get a well paying job will pay so much in taxes you will easily be able to pay for the next generation of students.

webXL 11y ago

Nordics have a leg up on us because they don't spend so much on their militaries and don't have such a diverse electorate to appeal to. The U.S. has them covered to some extent. Alphabet should be pushing for more efficient governments, with an 's'. Americans need to let the world pony up more for safe international trade, and stop being so damn wasteful with ever increasing taxes and debt. Society will cover you when it's wealthy enough. Got to get there first though.

ocdtrekkie 11y ago

Honestly, I do think Google is really afraid of their perception problem. The last thing Google needs is people thinking data collection is going to lead somewhere bad. I think that's a lot of why they really sunk the Google Glass project after the privacy backlash started appearing heavily in the media. I loved my Glass, I still would prefer it over smartwatches sold today. But now it's kinda abandoned.

adwf 11y ago
The annoying thing is that Glass would've still been a great product without the camera. All they needed to do was release a cameraless version first, then evolve from there. But instead they came across as some sort of weird surveillance device - which is a perception that Google is always struggling with.
- ocdtrekkie 11y ago
  That was always the odd thing, it wasn't really a good surveillance device. Not covert, lol. And the battery is unreasonably small for doing video. I actually was angry I couldn't turn off auto-upload, and never used the camera. Would've been more than happy to have a model without it.

thedaveoflife 11y ago

Occam's Razor: 1. Revenue Problem or 2. Neo-Luddite Problem?

Futurebot 11y ago
I honestly hope it's the former.
taneq 11y ago
Advertising revenues (their main income stream) are under fire on all fronts. Hardware is expensive and messy. They probably want to refocus their 'moon shots' in fields closer to their core expertise. Advertising, big data, AI. I wouldn't be surprised if they scale back on the hardware side of self-driving cars as well.

tremguy 11y ago

I must say I'm not sure if "society having you covered" is quite the issue here. Yes, being a Finn, I can attest on having most of your bullet-point list, as relating to the case at hand, covered. But it doesn't necessarily solve the knee-jerk reaction some people are having for these sorts of innovations. It always strikes me a bit odd when someone from SV comments on societal questions. People from different backgrounds and different walks of life don't obviously share the same worldview, of course those people well off have a harder time relating to those lower on the economic spectrum. But somehow it feels almost like there's a physical discontinuum between the "tech" people, and other people, who don't breathe and live their work, who are just happy to keep whatever job that keeps food on the table. I believe a big part of this is that most folks, contrary to tech, don't have to actively learn on the job. That's why the common answer to start re-educating yourself isn't really a viable alternative for most average people in their 30s-40s. Don't get me wrong, I think it's very much unfortunate that societal issues get in the way of progress that in the long run will make everyone better off. I'm just saying that the things you have listed aren't necessarily the only factor in solving this problem. It's like considering people and their lives only as a function of income and expenses, when there are really a host of other factors also at play here.

Futurebot 11y ago
What we're doing now is a whole lot of nothing in the US; we've only recently been able to admit that this whole thing might be a problem, but are far behind in terms of actually doing anything about it. In your Finland, you are able to at least move forward from something resembling a solid political and cultural foundation; we're nowhere near that here. The items I've listed would help us actually move forward to help people survive and navigate the new world: to give them individual agency, autonomy, and safety in a world where lifetime employment is gone; traditional unions are weak and/or are protecting jobs that may themselves be automated / cannot be created in numbers high enough to make up for massive job losses; the free agency/gig/Precariat economy is growing; and jobs are being automated away (even if Google has decided to step away for now.) Identity factors, habits, location/mobility, etc. are all very important. Policy is meant to help provide a baseline for existence, not act as a panacea. There will have to be logistical changes: many people will move to urban areas, as the UN predicts 2/3 of the world will live in by 2050, which are easier to provide services to, have high-quality educational institutions, and obviously what's left of many of the jobs. There will have to be habit changes: those who want to compete will likely have to embrace autodidactism-for-life / training-for-life (free college / cheap online learning makes this one much more palatable.) There will also have to be the hardest changes of all: cultural ones. We'll have different classes of people, many of whom will not be engaged in traditional work. Treating the latter as lazy slackers or parasites that deserve to starve will have to go, first and foremost. We'll have people who still work, and who do much better than those that don't. With proper tax policy and others that I've outlined, we'll hopefully be able to avoid massive wealth gaps / concentration that could lead to massive social upheaval. Some will be managers, developers, business owners, etc. Others will still be in the gig economy, but will exist within it while working from a much more stable base. Being on a "zero hours" contract or working as an Instacart shopper will be much less punishing if you can always afford a place to live. We'll have the "socializing/partying" class that may just get drunk, do drugs, and hang out with their friends, etc. We'll have people who do spend their time mostly consuming media (video games, movies, news, etc.) We'll have people who just sit around learning new stuff because they enjoy doing so; the idea of a lifetime of academia becomes much more appealing when you're not perpetually on the verge of starvation. We'll have people who create music, art, social media posts, and image memes full-time without worrying about paying the rent. We'll have people who finally get to play sports or make handicrafts like they've always wanted to. The biggest adjustment we'll have to make: people will be required to find their own meaning if they can't work, and so cannot derive their identity from their job as they have in the past. Jaron Lanier's "multiple overlapping hierarchies of status" will become ever more important (from both sides: creation/participation and consumption.) Politics and policy are just the start.

mtgx 11y ago

Google "the socialists", is what I imagine I'd hear from the media. That vision is nice and all, until you have to tell all the rich people and corporations that they must give away most of their income to sustain a "guaranteed income" future for everyone. I'm not saying I disagree with it - in fact I agree - I'm just saying Google would have to be ready to fight for that and ask for higher taxes to pay for that income and other benefits for the whole population.

CamperBob2 11y ago

With all of the points you raise, one wonders why the Googles and Apples and Microsofts and Y Combinators of the world are started here, and not in Finland or Norway or Denmark, or whatever culturally-homogeneous oil-rich welfare state you have in mind. And why so many of the the Linus Torvaldses and Elon Musks of the world head for the US as soon as they're able to. Maybe social justice -- or at least your idea of it -- isn't the last, best purpose of humanity after all.

Futurebot 11y ago
The Nordics create plenty of innovative companies, and that seems to be increasing. Here are some examples: http://www.demos.org/blog/3/16/16/nordic-innovation-arguments-never-die http://www.demos.org/blog/3/16/16/nordic-innovation-argument... Just a few example companies: Skype, Spotify, Mojang Example technologies: Bluetooth, pacemaker, AIS (like GPS), first LTE system. More, just from Sweden: http://www.swedenabroad.com/ImageVaultFiles/id_19367/cf_347/Examples_of_Swedish_innovations.PDF http://www.swedenabroad.com/ImageVaultFiles/id_19367/cf_347/... As far as people coming to the US, there are totally understandable reasons. We have excellent universities, more people (which matters: bigger local market, larger talent pool, more companies to work for, etc.), and we also have legacy clustering effects (NYC for finance and ads, SV for chips and startups.) These advantages are obviously very significant. There's absolutely no reason we cannot combine those advantages, our highly entrepreneurial culture, and the best the Nordics have to offer to be even better; that's part of what the "Silicon Valley Democrat" idea is about, and influential people there support it (that's where the idea comes from, obviously.) Even YC is doing research into the GBI. This implication here wasn't about that, though; it was about what we'll be forced to do if we don't want to simply leave the masses unemployed and eventually storming the metaphorical--or literal--gates. That will require some or all of the above list.
solipsism 11y ago
one wonders why the Googles and Apples and Microsofts and Y Combinators of the world are started here Maybe social justice -- or at least your idea of it -- isn't the last, best purpose of humanity after all Woah. Talk about a non-sequitor. What's one thing have to do with the other?