4 ms·

Counterpoint: even if it is different this time, it's different in a good way. As the need for human labor decreases, costs fall to the floor. This is specific

Counterpoint: even if it is different this time, it's different in a good way. As the need for human labor decreases, costs fall to the floor. This is specifically true for knowledge work that is not constrained by resource inputs. Imagine how much HN would cost to run if it was a newspaper or magazine? This may seem like it's still bad news for humans, because where do the new jobs come from? Yet we regularly see an increase in consumption to compensate for the reduction in production costs. This increase in consumption generally overruns the job reductions due to efficiency. The number of newspaper writers may drop, but the total number of employed writers goes up. We also see this trend in technology. Early computers took a highly trained team to keep a single computer operating. Now technician to computer ratios can be 1000:1 or more. Yet we seen an increase in total employment rather than a reduction. > the response to previous waves was a shift to knowledge work. Computer assisted knowledge work may be precisely the answer to the unskilled and unemployed. Ubiquitous computing made it so that your banker only needs 1/10th the knowledge in order to be effective (when was the last time you calculated an amortization schedule by hand?). Make it so the "knowledge work" is done by the expert system and the human simply operates the expert system.

Avshalom 9y ago
The increase in consumption seems coupled with an increase in debt. And of course in the face of a combo of increased consumption and automation the jobs created are part time entry level retail.
- euyyn 9y ago
  > The increase in consumption seems coupled with an increase in debt. How? And what would be bad about that?
ThomPete 9y ago
No we aren't seeing an increase in employment. We are seeing an increase in temp work which means among other things no employe paid healthcare. Furthermore cost doesn't necessarily fall to the floor just because cost of production does. Many products are being kept up artificially and even more is being subsidized.
- sidegrid 9y ago
  Why do employees pay for healthcare? What I weird system.
  - amcca029 9y ago
    In america individuals have to pay for healthcare, because socialism makes the kids gay.
Havoc 9y ago
>Computer assisted knowledge work may be precisely the answer No but that's the entire problem. Why computer "assisted" when computers are getting to the point where they can do it on their own completely? Robotics already outperform humans physically, and AI is (in many areas) approaching humans. So the risk here is complete replacement, not supplementing. In the near term your solutions are solid, but that's a band aid. Humans will soon simply no longer be able to compete at all except for niches. >the human simply operates the expert system. Operate what? At the current pace the only operating required will be flicking the ON button. >when was the last time you calculated an amortization schedule by hand 5.5 years ago. :p
- majewsky 9y ago
  > > the human simply operates the expert system. > Operate what? At the current pace the only operating required will be flicking the ON button. Maybe GP refers to a human operating the expert system like a manager operates an expert. :) And managers make good money on that, so no problem here.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- johngalt 9y ago
  Agreed that it will be different once AGI completely supplants human efforts, but at that point you are examining the singularity. Robots that are better than humans at everything, could also design better robots etc... If/when that happens, economics and jobs will be worry #96 on the list of things to be concerned about.
- cirgue 9y ago
  >Robotics already outperform humans physically, and AI is (in many areas) approaching humans. So the risk here is complete replacement, not supplementing. The steam drill didn't beat John Henry, the system of technology, resources, and people behind the steam drill did. Until a computer decides that it wants to win a chess tournament and teaches itself how to play, humans will always be at the helm.
dugditches 9y ago
hardly a 'good way' for the people that are going to be trapped under the transition. some people arent capable of making the shift to this 'knowledge system' operator based work you mention, for various reasons. and employeers arent going to be willing to take the time\cost to teach them.
eli_gottlieb 9y ago
>As the need for human labor decreases, costs fall to the floor. Not if the new wealth is eaten as resource or monopoly rent.

Avshalom 9y ago

The increase in consumption seems coupled with an increase in debt. And of course in the face of a combo of increased consumption and automation the jobs created are part time entry level retail.

euyyn 9y ago
> The increase in consumption seems coupled with an increase in debt. How? And what would be bad about that?

ThomPete 9y ago

No we aren't seeing an increase in employment. We are seeing an increase in temp work which means among other things no employe paid healthcare. Furthermore cost doesn't necessarily fall to the floor just because cost of production does. Many products are being kept up artificially and even more is being subsidized.

sidegrid 9y ago
Why do employees pay for healthcare? What I weird system.
- amcca029 9y ago
  In america individuals have to pay for healthcare, because socialism makes the kids gay.

Havoc 9y ago

>Computer assisted knowledge work may be precisely the answer No but that's the entire problem. Why computer "assisted" when computers are getting to the point where they can do it on their own completely? Robotics already outperform humans physically, and AI is (in many areas) approaching humans. So the risk here is complete replacement, not supplementing. In the near term your solutions are solid, but that's a band aid. Humans will soon simply no longer be able to compete at all except for niches. >the human simply operates the expert system. Operate what? At the current pace the only operating required will be flicking the ON button. >when was the last time you calculated an amortization schedule by hand 5.5 years ago. :p

majewsky 9y ago
> > the human simply operates the expert system. > Operate what? At the current pace the only operating required will be flicking the ON button. Maybe GP refers to a human operating the expert system like a manager operates an expert. :) And managers make good money on that, so no problem here.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
johngalt 9y ago
Agreed that it will be different once AGI completely supplants human efforts, but at that point you are examining the singularity. Robots that are better than humans at everything, could also design better robots etc... If/when that happens, economics and jobs will be worry #96 on the list of things to be concerned about.
cirgue 9y ago
>Robotics already outperform humans physically, and AI is (in many areas) approaching humans. So the risk here is complete replacement, not supplementing. The steam drill didn't beat John Henry, the system of technology, resources, and people behind the steam drill did. Until a computer decides that it wants to win a chess tournament and teaches itself how to play, humans will always be at the helm.

dugditches 9y ago

hardly a 'good way' for the people that are going to be trapped under the transition. some people arent capable of making the shift to this 'knowledge system' operator based work you mention, for various reasons. and employeers arent going to be willing to take the time\cost to teach them.

eli_gottlieb 9y ago

>As the need for human labor decreases, costs fall to the floor. Not if the new wealth is eaten as resource or monopoly rent.