7 ms·

You're right. We should all go back to using horses instead of automobiles while we're at it.

by 35bge57dtjku 10y ago

kafkaesq 10y ago
That's (very clearly) not what I'm saying.
- 35bge57dtjku 10y ago
  That was (very clearly) sarcasm.
  - aninhumer 10y ago
    Yes, but sarcasm that I at least would interpret to mean: "Your argument is calling for a halt to progress, which is as silly as going back to using horses." But the parent wasn't actually suggesting that progress be stopped, merely observing that it was going to cause social problems.
coldtea 10y ago
It would be much better for the cities and the environment, for one. And not everybody would need to have a horse, the same way not everybody needs to drive (and most don't) in cities designed for humans.
- abraae 10y ago
  Not necessarily. If the solar installer can't get to the customer's house because he's traveling by horse... Or the biofuel engineer spends an extra 2 hours a day commuting on his horse, rather than developing new technologies in his lab... Then it's not better for the environment for us to all move to horse and cart.
  - coldtea 10y ago
    Then, you know, we could always allow vehicles for professional uses...
- 35bge57dtjku 10y ago
  How would 250 million horses pissing and shitting everywhere, plus needing to be stabled, fed, and used on a daily basis be better? I'd need to see more analysis before I believe that what worked 100 years ago would scale up to what would be needed today without serious problems, environmental and otherwise.
thevardanian 10y ago
Don't be obtuse, and address the point. How are you going to retrain an entire generation of people that will experience the effects of joblessness immediately; essentially overnight. Cars took at least a generation to become mainstream. This time around it seems technology will destroy jobs almost at the flick of a switch. Unless you're arguing that the adoption rate will not be significantly quick, which I think most would disagree with.
- gnopgnip 10y ago
  What about the cotton gin or the sewing machine or the steam engine?
  - thevardanian 10y ago
    Those are incremental inventions within an overarching paradigm; that being the industrial revolution. The industrial revolution is what produced those inventions, and many others that lead to the countless wars, and newer ways of thinking, which resulted in significant changes in society. Undoubted it has produced great positive changes, but in the short term it was really quite awful.The question is how great of change are we really looking at this time around. Heck is it even a revolution in the first place, or merely an incremental progress. I personally don't think it's incremental and that we're at a point where we just had the idea of collecting seeds and planting them in the ground. The resulting aftermath of that simple idea produced civilization. The resulting aftermath of computation is yet to be seen.
- 35bge57dtjku 10y ago
  No one is, just like we never do. What have all the people who have been losing their factory jobs for the past 2 decades done? > that might hitherto have happened over the course of 1-2 generations may soon be happening in the space of 5-10 years It's been happening in that shorter timespan for a while now, so really, what have those people who have already lost their jobs done?
  - thevardanian 10y ago

You're right. We should all go back to using horses instead of automobiles while we're at it.

kafkaesq 10y ago

That's (very clearly) not what I'm saying.

35bge57dtjku 10y ago
That was (very clearly) sarcasm.
- aninhumer 10y ago
  Yes, but sarcasm that I at least would interpret to mean: "Your argument is calling for a halt to progress, which is as silly as going back to using horses." But the parent wasn't actually suggesting that progress be stopped, merely observing that it was going to cause social problems.

coldtea 10y ago

It would be much better for the cities and the environment, for one. And not everybody would need to have a horse, the same way not everybody needs to drive (and most don't) in cities designed for humans.

abraae 10y ago
Not necessarily. If the solar installer can't get to the customer's house because he's traveling by horse... Or the biofuel engineer spends an extra 2 hours a day commuting on his horse, rather than developing new technologies in his lab... Then it's not better for the environment for us to all move to horse and cart.
- coldtea 10y ago
  Then, you know, we could always allow vehicles for professional uses...
35bge57dtjku 10y ago
How would 250 million horses pissing and shitting everywhere, plus needing to be stabled, fed, and used on a daily basis be better? I'd need to see more analysis before I believe that what worked 100 years ago would scale up to what would be needed today without serious problems, environmental and otherwise.

thevardanian 10y ago

Don't be obtuse, and address the point. How are you going to retrain an entire generation of people that will experience the effects of joblessness immediately; essentially overnight. Cars took at least a generation to become mainstream. This time around it seems technology will destroy jobs almost at the flick of a switch. Unless you're arguing that the adoption rate will not be significantly quick, which I think most would disagree with.

gnopgnip 10y ago
What about the cotton gin or the sewing machine or the steam engine?
- thevardanian 10y ago
  Those are incremental inventions within an overarching paradigm; that being the industrial revolution. The industrial revolution is what produced those inventions, and many others that lead to the countless wars, and newer ways of thinking, which resulted in significant changes in society. Undoubted it has produced great positive changes, but in the short term it was really quite awful.The question is how great of change are we really looking at this time around. Heck is it even a revolution in the first place, or merely an incremental progress. I personally don't think it's incremental and that we're at a point where we just had the idea of collecting seeds and planting them in the ground. The resulting aftermath of that simple idea produced civilization. The resulting aftermath of computation is yet to be seen.
35bge57dtjku 10y ago
No one is, just like we never do. What have all the people who have been losing their factory jobs for the past 2 decades done? > that might hitherto have happened over the course of 1-2 generations may soon be happening in the space of 5-10 years It's been happening in that shorter timespan for a while now, so really, what have those people who have already lost their jobs done?
- thevardanian 10y ago