3 ms·
> But one could also be tasked to do something robots could do because you just artificially made human labor cheaper than your robots Exactly, that's my main
by jonny_eh 10y ago
> But one could also be tasked to do something robots could do because you just artificially made human labor cheaper than your robots
Exactly, that's my main point. It gives humans a fighting chance against the robots.
- ocdtrekkie 10y agoI don't think humans being effectively modern mules is a good thing. If robots are better than humans at something, we should generally let robots do that thing. It would be more human labor hours to use screwdrivers for things, but we use power drills where applicable because power drills are better. Now, there are things we have also started letting robots do that they are not better at doing than humans, mind you. I think Google has demonstrated how colossally bad algorithms are at providing customer service, for example. I could definitely see this model making it more palatable for companies to get rid of the reviled automated answering systems and similar processes, and put humans back in the customer service field, in particular. I am concerned about enabling the former, I would like to enable the latter.
- k__ 10y agoI Bad the same thought. "give people purpose. how? lets give them mechanical jobs!" wat?!
- jonny_eh 10y agoThis plan doesn't force businesses to use humans instead of machines. If there's a job that ought to be done by a robot for the best result, competition will still ensure that's what's done. This just gives humans a leg up when competing on price.