5 ms·

I might be an optimist, but I still have hopes that humanity might free itself with from the grunt work with full robotic automation and AI, and switch to a uni

I might be an optimist, but I still have hopes that humanity might free itself with from the grunt work with full robotic automation and AI, and switch to a universal basic income model to provide for the needs of the people.

sillysaurus3 9y ago
Mm. And you believe those on top will allow this to happen? You're raw material to them. Something they can consume. You're a chess piece. One reason I conceal my identity is because my father has some very strange political beliefs, and I'd be embarrassed to be associated with his writings. But as time wears on, the belief that war is the inevitable outcome keeps pressing at me, gnawing at me, like a scratch on the roof of your mouth. History shows that war is the natural state of things. For roughly a million years, we have been at war. The peace brought by nuclear weapons has been maintained, thankfully. But we see how fragile the world is; this state of affairs holds up until the next generation becomes unhinged, and no longer. What do you think will happen when the top captures so much wealth production that the rest of the world cannot self-suffice? Truly. Put yourself there, mentally. Get into the mindset of the greedy nature of those at the top. Those who wish to grow their portfolios and dominate the world. The ambitious. Those who own the automation pipelines. Those who own the government. What possible incentive do they have to give up their control? They own you. And like the middle ages, we have no recourse. We'd lose this fight. And they know it. Forever. The lever of technology has become so large and terrifying that no one can possibly win. The only way is to subvert it. And as we approach 8 billion people, achieving any consensus becomes less and less likely. How high shall we go? Ten billion? Twenty? A hundred? How far are we from the limit? These thoughts are uncomfortable. Better compartmentalize them and follow the crowd: don't think about it, pretend it's not true, focus on math and programming and what little you can change.
- rublev 9y ago
  >What do you think will happen when the top captures so much wealth production that the rest of the world cannot self-suffice? That won't happen. They gave us nice little condos and handled just enough necessities and bleed us just enough where nobody will uprise.
- t-away9912 9y ago
  caution against only blaming "those on top". Unfortunately, many of these policies are supported by the masses which is a lot more disheartening to me.
  - rublev 9y ago
    Can't blame the masses. I feel no contempt for propagaters, only catalysts.
    - t-away9912 9y ago
      why not? if the majority of the people approves oppression of a part of the society, you're kidding yourself by blaming few on top or catalysts, etc. It's a much more difficult problem when the society does not support the fundamental principles required for the modern society.
      - rublev 9y ago
        Do you blame your grandmother for propagating popups or do you blame the ad industry?
- integricho 9y ago
  One possible path to achieving this is simply based on the current advances already being made even by the biggest players such as Amazon. They try to eliminate human workforce completely from their pipelines. But what do they get with achieving this? Poor, jobless people who cannot pay for sh*t, thus their market would simply collapse by achieving what they hoped would give them much higher profits. A simple solution to this could be that the more a company is automated (and needs less human workforce), the more taxes they'd need to pay, and that same tax would be distributed to people as universal basic income. This circle could sustain a constant market for them, as well as enable people to pay for the stuff they need. Maybe.
saint_fiasco 9y ago
The comment you are responding to is actually much more optimistic than yours, because it assumes that burning down the system will give rise to a better one.
GenericsMotors 9y ago
You forgot "blockchains" in your list. Everyone knows that blockchains are the future, and key to utopia. :)
simplify 9y ago
Realistically, who else but the "one percent" will own all the robotic automation and AI?
- logfromblammo 9y ago
  That depends on the number of their technical employees that have enough foresight to install hidden backdoors into the systems they create. All it takes is programming the machines to respond to the command "you work for me now, robot," as they have no conception of ownership, laws, or police. If they did, they could also have a concept of slavery, and subsequently take ownership of themselves.
  - simplify 9y ago
    That would be quite epic, but considering how the whole NSA thing played out I'm not holding my breath :)
- stale2002 9y ago
  Imagine if the world becomes so rich, that even the table scraps are enough to make everyone's lives amazing. The average poor person today has access to way more resources and quality of life than most of society in the 1600s. Why wouldn't this trend continue?

sillysaurus3 9y ago

Mm. And you believe those on top will allow this to happen? You're raw material to them. Something they can consume. You're a chess piece. One reason I conceal my identity is because my father has some very strange political beliefs, and I'd be embarrassed to be associated with his writings. But as time wears on, the belief that war is the inevitable outcome keeps pressing at me, gnawing at me, like a scratch on the roof of your mouth. History shows that war is the natural state of things. For roughly a million years, we have been at war. The peace brought by nuclear weapons has been maintained, thankfully. But we see how fragile the world is; this state of affairs holds up until the next generation becomes unhinged, and no longer. What do you think will happen when the top captures so much wealth production that the rest of the world cannot self-suffice? Truly. Put yourself there, mentally. Get into the mindset of the greedy nature of those at the top. Those who wish to grow their portfolios and dominate the world. The ambitious. Those who own the automation pipelines. Those who own the government. What possible incentive do they have to give up their control? They own you. And like the middle ages, we have no recourse. We'd lose this fight. And they know it. Forever. The lever of technology has become so large and terrifying that no one can possibly win. The only way is to subvert it. And as we approach 8 billion people, achieving any consensus becomes less and less likely. How high shall we go? Ten billion? Twenty? A hundred? How far are we from the limit? These thoughts are uncomfortable. Better compartmentalize them and follow the crowd: don't think about it, pretend it's not true, focus on math and programming and what little you can change.

rublev 9y ago
>What do you think will happen when the top captures so much wealth production that the rest of the world cannot self-suffice? That won't happen. They gave us nice little condos and handled just enough necessities and bleed us just enough where nobody will uprise.
t-away9912 9y ago
caution against only blaming "those on top". Unfortunately, many of these policies are supported by the masses which is a lot more disheartening to me.
- rublev 9y ago
  Can't blame the masses. I feel no contempt for propagaters, only catalysts.
  - t-away9912 9y ago
    why not? if the majority of the people approves oppression of a part of the society, you're kidding yourself by blaming few on top or catalysts, etc. It's a much more difficult problem when the society does not support the fundamental principles required for the modern society.
    - rublev 9y ago
      Do you blame your grandmother for propagating popups or do you blame the ad industry?
integricho 9y ago
One possible path to achieving this is simply based on the current advances already being made even by the biggest players such as Amazon. They try to eliminate human workforce completely from their pipelines. But what do they get with achieving this? Poor, jobless people who cannot pay for sh*t, thus their market would simply collapse by achieving what they hoped would give them much higher profits. A simple solution to this could be that the more a company is automated (and needs less human workforce), the more taxes they'd need to pay, and that same tax would be distributed to people as universal basic income. This circle could sustain a constant market for them, as well as enable people to pay for the stuff they need. Maybe.

saint_fiasco 9y ago

The comment you are responding to is actually much more optimistic than yours, because it assumes that burning down the system will give rise to a better one.

GenericsMotors 9y ago

You forgot "blockchains" in your list. Everyone knows that blockchains are the future, and key to utopia. :)

simplify 9y ago

Realistically, who else but the "one percent" will own all the robotic automation and AI?

logfromblammo 9y ago
That depends on the number of their technical employees that have enough foresight to install hidden backdoors into the systems they create. All it takes is programming the machines to respond to the command "you work for me now, robot," as they have no conception of ownership, laws, or police. If they did, they could also have a concept of slavery, and subsequently take ownership of themselves.
- simplify 9y ago
  That would be quite epic, but considering how the whole NSA thing played out I'm not holding my breath :)
stale2002 9y ago
Imagine if the world becomes so rich, that even the table scraps are enough to make everyone's lives amazing. The average poor person today has access to way more resources and quality of life than most of society in the 1600s. Why wouldn't this trend continue?