5 ms·

On the other hand, in a few years you won't need even basic literacy to thrive in developed countries. It'll be enough to grunt in the general direction of the

by nudq 7y ago

On the other hand, in a few years you won't need even basic literacy to thrive in developed countries. It'll be enough to grunt in the general direction of the nearest piece of smart furniture. Amazon will know everything about your physical, mental and emotional state needed to know what has to be dispatched, cost deducted automatically from your UBI account.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
TomMarius 7y ago
Is this really the future we want for humankind?
- Nasrudith 7y ago
  The thing is short of being responsible for human extinction you never get to choose the future for humankind - only expand or limit their options. To give an absurd example your descendants may decide for some bizzare reason it would be awesome to keep pet dodos fenced in their yards. Given that dodos are long extinct immediately it is impossible. But if their biotech advanced enough to recover the DNA and clone them and either manually reconstruct or mutate the cloned base until an acceptable genepool was produced operation "yard-dodo" would once again be a possibility - although very remote.
- sbmassey 7y ago
  Maybe we can speciate into grunting Amazon-prime-subscribing Eloi, and the technologically literate Morlocks who feed on them.
vincent-toups 7y ago
You call that thriving?
- baddox 7y ago
  Sure, why not? What is the point of literacy if, well, there is no longer any point of literacy?
contingencies 7y ago
As someone designing what could be construed as smart public furniture, I absolutely agree. Such change is both economically and politically incentivized, and people will almost always err toward convenience. Some recent research[0][1] suggested that purchasing free time (through paying for convenience) makes people happier than material purchases. Further, potential criticism of such changes is swept under the rug as high end / high tech brands pioneering these services align themselves publicly with the fairytalesque yet disembodied/unassailable image of a "sophisticated" "urbanite" "consumer" who is "time poor" "cash rich" and thereby "successful" because they are "going places" (being content with where you are is unsexy). Moreover, they have "choice" so are "empowered" and can "express themselves" and "their aspirations" through "their choices" (read: spending / conspicuous consumption / subsequent social network image spam). The mythical "successful neighbour" or "keeping up with the Joneses": aspects of human social behavior (and thus capitalist marketing norms) are such a crock of shit sometimes. A motto for the future? iCaveman: I can't. [0] http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2017/07/18/1706541114.full http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2017/07/18/1706541114.full [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/27/science/study-happy-save-money-time.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/27/science/study-happy-save-...
ummwhat 7y ago
Ah ha. We aren't getting dumber. We are replacing ourselves with robots.
darepublic 7y ago
I grunt angrily at this suggestion
duxup 7y ago
https://youtu.be/z7FcJwg6OkA?t=73 https://youtu.be/z7FcJwg6OkA?t=73

by nudq 7y ago

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

TomMarius 7y ago

Is this really the future we want for humankind?

Nasrudith 7y ago
The thing is short of being responsible for human extinction you never get to choose the future for humankind - only expand or limit their options. To give an absurd example your descendants may decide for some bizzare reason it would be awesome to keep pet dodos fenced in their yards. Given that dodos are long extinct immediately it is impossible. But if their biotech advanced enough to recover the DNA and clone them and either manually reconstruct or mutate the cloned base until an acceptable genepool was produced operation "yard-dodo" would once again be a possibility - although very remote.
sbmassey 7y ago
Maybe we can speciate into grunting Amazon-prime-subscribing Eloi, and the technologically literate Morlocks who feed on them.

vincent-toups 7y ago

You call that thriving?

baddox 7y ago
Sure, why not? What is the point of literacy if, well, there is no longer any point of literacy?

contingencies 7y ago

As someone designing what could be construed as smart public furniture, I absolutely agree. Such change is both economically and politically incentivized, and people will almost always err toward convenience. Some recent research[0][1] suggested that purchasing free time (through paying for convenience) makes people happier than material purchases. Further, potential criticism of such changes is swept under the rug as high end / high tech brands pioneering these services align themselves publicly with the fairytalesque yet disembodied/unassailable image of a "sophisticated" "urbanite" "consumer" who is "time poor" "cash rich" and thereby "successful" because they are "going places" (being content with where you are is unsexy). Moreover, they have "choice" so are "empowered" and can "express themselves" and "their aspirations" through "their choices" (read: spending / conspicuous consumption / subsequent social network image spam). The mythical "successful neighbour" or "keeping up with the Joneses": aspects of human social behavior (and thus capitalist marketing norms) are such a crock of shit sometimes. A motto for the future? iCaveman: I can't. [0] http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2017/07/18/1706541114.full http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2017/07/18/1706541114.full [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/27/science/study-happy-save-money-time.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/27/science/study-happy-save-...

ummwhat 7y ago

Ah ha. We aren't getting dumber. We are replacing ourselves with robots.

darepublic 7y ago

I grunt angrily at this suggestion

duxup 7y ago

https://youtu.be/z7FcJwg6OkA?t=73 https://youtu.be/z7FcJwg6OkA?t=73