4 ms·

The fact that you will see resistance to the idea that automation will eat jobs and a change is needed even here on HN to my mind underscores the gravity of the

The fact that you will see resistance to the idea that automation will eat jobs and a change is needed even here on HN to my mind underscores the gravity of the problem you describe. You will have replies saying "never heard of a jacquard loom lol?!" And "new categories of jobs, idiot!", and "it's always been fine before!". It wasn't fine before. I recently pointed out that living conditions for the average Victorian nose-dived as available labour exceeded demand due to automation. It wasn't a magical instant orderly transition. Perhaps we should seek to avoid the same mistakes - I know that that's a radical and divisive idea but there it is. This mandates either universal basic income or a meat-grinder war. We went for (2) last time - and afterwards even women could get jobs!

disordinary 10y ago
I agree, but then I also think that the people who were working the fields with subsistance farming had no idea that a whole new category of work was about to emerge, they simply couldn't understand. Maybe we can't see the new work opportunities because we're so invested in what we do now. I can't see it, but that's the point. The problem is that previous revolutions like the industrial revolution were fueled by an increase in the extraction of raw materials from the earth which fueled growth. Now I see us as having the perfect storm with multiple attacks on our way of life which previous revolutions hdidn't have. We have a massive acceleration of automation and artificial intelligence, coupled with dwindling natural resources, and catastrophic climate change. We don't have the resources to keep our way of life going, and we don't have the resources to have another huge leap forwards economically (unless we start mining asteroids at scale, or something like that). It could be that this is the peak of humanity, or it could be that the peak is yet to come. But this is no doubt the peak in the way of life that we've been building since the late 1700s.
- visarga 10y ago
  When automation becomes able to self reproduce, we bootstrap a self replicating factory. If it can work with generally available materials and doesn't need rare ones, it can lead to zero costs of production, as the factory will self replicate and expand as needed. We are probably closer to self replicating factories than AGI. It's just a matter of organizing industrial processes and automating them.
visarga 10y ago
There are two reasons for UBI: 1. covering the basic needs of the population, and 2. to keep economy working. If people don't have jobs, they can't buy things, then the reason for the great automated factories ceases to exist. Companies should desire UBI in order to keep the product demand strong. The larger UBI is, the more money in the pot. The only problem is how to obtain UBI. I think it will need to be a form of redistribution, where value is taken from where it accumulates and moved to where it is lacking. It will probably be a combination of taxation and issuing money. Companies will share the benefits of automation with the population by this mechanism, and get to compete for the yearly BHI that is flowing from the population to their coffers.
- madaxe_again 10y ago
  I think issuing money will always be a controversial proposition - at least within the endemic value-system. Even if people rationally understand the need for it and the requirement of a consumer class, the idea of "money for nothing" will not sit easy emotionally. I think we're more likely to see something akin to corporate sponsorship of a consumer class - rather than the consumers being given money to spend, they are given goods and services either free or heavily reduced directly by corporations, either subsidised by the state via tax or directly provided via regulatory requirement (unlikely this would be entirely voluntary). This weeks food is bought to you by Purdue and Country Kitchen Buffet. Your new jacket is bought to you by Walmart. From this, you also end up with a secondary barter economy - people trading their free crap for less common crap. This way you achieve subsidence for the masses, maintain consumer capitalism, and rather than there being envy and anger at people getting "money for nothing", they are instead seen as a subclass of "lazy unworthy poor in their rightful place". The corporates accept it because it builds brand loyalty, grows a new generation of consumers, keeps people just upwardly mobile enough in a world where the majority live by trading crap to keep them mollified and in the hamster wheel. Maybe one day I can own a robotic forge! Then I'll be rich! There may be places where monetary UBI exists, but I don't think it'll be a majority system. A simulacra of an economy will do just fine as long as it keeps power concentrated.
  - disordinary 10y ago
dugditches 10y ago
Automation will eat the 'good' jobs in that it creates bad ones. For existing Factories, the trend is to slap Automation on the cheap bits. And leave the harder bits to Meat. So you'll put in a machine or computer that reduces work by 33% and remove 1 of the 2 workers on that task. That one worker now needs to pickup that new slack. And now for less money than his retiring coworkers and building a weaker retirement with a worse pension plan. Not every plant is Tesla on the cutting edge of automation. Lots are barely getting by and can't afford Automation. They make more Monkeys every day.
- disordinary 10y ago
  The problem is though that the companies that can't afford to invest in automation become less and less competitive and finally go out of business. There will always be craft industries, there are still car companies which hand craft their vehicles, but they will always be few and far between.

disordinary 10y ago

I agree, but then I also think that the people who were working the fields with subsistance farming had no idea that a whole new category of work was about to emerge, they simply couldn't understand. Maybe we can't see the new work opportunities because we're so invested in what we do now. I can't see it, but that's the point. The problem is that previous revolutions like the industrial revolution were fueled by an increase in the extraction of raw materials from the earth which fueled growth. Now I see us as having the perfect storm with multiple attacks on our way of life which previous revolutions hdidn't have. We have a massive acceleration of automation and artificial intelligence, coupled with dwindling natural resources, and catastrophic climate change. We don't have the resources to keep our way of life going, and we don't have the resources to have another huge leap forwards economically (unless we start mining asteroids at scale, or something like that). It could be that this is the peak of humanity, or it could be that the peak is yet to come. But this is no doubt the peak in the way of life that we've been building since the late 1700s.

visarga 10y ago
When automation becomes able to self reproduce, we bootstrap a self replicating factory. If it can work with generally available materials and doesn't need rare ones, it can lead to zero costs of production, as the factory will self replicate and expand as needed. We are probably closer to self replicating factories than AGI. It's just a matter of organizing industrial processes and automating them.

visarga 10y ago

There are two reasons for UBI: 1. covering the basic needs of the population, and 2. to keep economy working. If people don't have jobs, they can't buy things, then the reason for the great automated factories ceases to exist. Companies should desire UBI in order to keep the product demand strong. The larger UBI is, the more money in the pot. The only problem is how to obtain UBI. I think it will need to be a form of redistribution, where value is taken from where it accumulates and moved to where it is lacking. It will probably be a combination of taxation and issuing money. Companies will share the benefits of automation with the population by this mechanism, and get to compete for the yearly BHI that is flowing from the population to their coffers.

madaxe_again 10y ago
I think issuing money will always be a controversial proposition - at least within the endemic value-system. Even if people rationally understand the need for it and the requirement of a consumer class, the idea of "money for nothing" will not sit easy emotionally. I think we're more likely to see something akin to corporate sponsorship of a consumer class - rather than the consumers being given money to spend, they are given goods and services either free or heavily reduced directly by corporations, either subsidised by the state via tax or directly provided via regulatory requirement (unlikely this would be entirely voluntary). This weeks food is bought to you by Purdue and Country Kitchen Buffet. Your new jacket is bought to you by Walmart. From this, you also end up with a secondary barter economy - people trading their free crap for less common crap. This way you achieve subsidence for the masses, maintain consumer capitalism, and rather than there being envy and anger at people getting "money for nothing", they are instead seen as a subclass of "lazy unworthy poor in their rightful place". The corporates accept it because it builds brand loyalty, grows a new generation of consumers, keeps people just upwardly mobile enough in a world where the majority live by trading crap to keep them mollified and in the hamster wheel. Maybe one day I can own a robotic forge! Then I'll be rich! There may be places where monetary UBI exists, but I don't think it'll be a majority system. A simulacra of an economy will do just fine as long as it keeps power concentrated.
- disordinary 10y ago

dugditches 10y ago

Automation will eat the 'good' jobs in that it creates bad ones. For existing Factories, the trend is to slap Automation on the cheap bits. And leave the harder bits to Meat. So you'll put in a machine or computer that reduces work by 33% and remove 1 of the 2 workers on that task. That one worker now needs to pickup that new slack. And now for less money than his retiring coworkers and building a weaker retirement with a worse pension plan. Not every plant is Tesla on the cutting edge of automation. Lots are barely getting by and can't afford Automation. They make more Monkeys every day.

disordinary 10y ago
The problem is though that the companies that can't afford to invest in automation become less and less competitive and finally go out of business. There will always be craft industries, there are still car companies which hand craft their vehicles, but they will always be few and far between.