3 ms·

Good point. We've been through periods before where most of the jobs in a sector were replaced by automation, and overall we've been able to adapt and prosper.

by rpeden 10y ago

Good point. We've been through periods before where most of the jobs in a sector were replaced by automation, and overall we've been able to adapt and prosper. It's not just robots. It's been 6+ months since I've used a human cashier at McDonald's. As a consumer, I love it. The automated kiosks make so many options much more discoverable. Want a Junior Chicken with pickles and onions added, and chipotle or thai sauce instead of mayo? No problem, it just takes a few taps on the screen. When ordering from a cashier, I'd never have known those options were available. Of course, now there are far fewer cashiers. It's certainly possible (and probably likely) that freeing up people to do more important work is a net benefit in the long term. In the interim, there will be plenty of people upset that there currently aren't enough jobs for everyone who wants to work. I also wonder whether increasingly powerful technology makes it possible that we'll see a sort of "black swan" step change that is so out of line from what we've seen in the past that we can't really conceive of how it would happen or how it will impact society. Maybe it's useless to wonder about that, though. If I can't conceive of how such a change would happen, there's not much I can do to prevent it or prepare for it.

VLM 10y ago
How many Junior Chicken with pickles and onions does the unemployed cashier order? When its your turn thru the chipper shredder of the economy and you will never again have money, how many Junior Chicken with pickles and onions will you order at that time? Remember its only a matter of when, not if. When there's no one left with money to buy a Junior Chicken with pickles and onions does that mean the economy "won"? And who exactly is doing this "winning"? And whats the next step? The problem with the historical analogies is no reaction mechanism is specified, or if one is provided its invalid or inapplicable (perhaps the new mechanism works, but only if all participants IQ are above 140...). Without a plausible reaction mechanism, its just a gamblers fallacy. Say you're temporarily in a temporarily advanced civilization. You're playing a game where you flip a coin and every time it comes up heads, civilization not only survives but gets better, while every time it comes up tails the civilization collapses and most people die and there's nothing but ruins. In fact your world has no shortage of academics and the archeological ruins of dead civilizations that they ruminate over. Back to the game, so far every time your civilization flips the coin it came up heads, therefore its impossible for it to ever come up tails at any time in the future. Sounds logical, right? I do wonder why those other civilizations all failed, sometimes we're not smart enough yet to know, or there's no longer enough evidence, or using 20/20 hindsight and Monday morning quarterbacking it seems very self evident. Whatever, I got a coin that can only come up heads lets flip it a couple times, what could possibly be the downside?
crdoconnor 10y ago
>It's not just robots. It's been 6+ months since I've used a human cashier at McDonald's. This is actually the return of a very old technology that went out of vogue in the 70s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automat >It's certainly possible (and probably likely) that freeing up people to do more important work is a net benefit in the long term. In the interim, there will be plenty of people upset that there currently aren't enough jobs for everyone who wants to work. We have crumbling infrastructure and low inflation and a severe lack of adequately paid jobs at the same time. That isn't an unfortunate side effect of technological advancement that's gross economic mismanagement and abuse of political power.

by rpeden 10y ago

VLM 10y ago

How many Junior Chicken with pickles and onions does the unemployed cashier order? When its your turn thru the chipper shredder of the economy and you will never again have money, how many Junior Chicken with pickles and onions will you order at that time? Remember its only a matter of when, not if. When there's no one left with money to buy a Junior Chicken with pickles and onions does that mean the economy "won"? And who exactly is doing this "winning"? And whats the next step? The problem with the historical analogies is no reaction mechanism is specified, or if one is provided its invalid or inapplicable (perhaps the new mechanism works, but only if all participants IQ are above 140...). Without a plausible reaction mechanism, its just a gamblers fallacy. Say you're temporarily in a temporarily advanced civilization. You're playing a game where you flip a coin and every time it comes up heads, civilization not only survives but gets better, while every time it comes up tails the civilization collapses and most people die and there's nothing but ruins. In fact your world has no shortage of academics and the archeological ruins of dead civilizations that they ruminate over. Back to the game, so far every time your civilization flips the coin it came up heads, therefore its impossible for it to ever come up tails at any time in the future. Sounds logical, right? I do wonder why those other civilizations all failed, sometimes we're not smart enough yet to know, or there's no longer enough evidence, or using 20/20 hindsight and Monday morning quarterbacking it seems very self evident. Whatever, I got a coin that can only come up heads lets flip it a couple times, what could possibly be the downside?

crdoconnor 10y ago

>It's not just robots. It's been 6+ months since I've used a human cashier at McDonald's. This is actually the return of a very old technology that went out of vogue in the 70s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automat >It's certainly possible (and probably likely) that freeing up people to do more important work is a net benefit in the long term. In the interim, there will be plenty of people upset that there currently aren't enough jobs for everyone who wants to work. We have crumbling infrastructure and low inflation and a severe lack of adequately paid jobs at the same time. That isn't an unfortunate side effect of technological advancement that's gross economic mismanagement and abuse of political power.