4 ms·

Yep, this is a fascinating (and scary) thing to think about. What will happen to a society where every single person has their basic needs met by some form of

Yep, this is a fascinating (and scary) thing to think about. What will happen to a society where every single person has their basic needs met by some form of automation, and nobody needs to work? I would say most first world countries are already in this scenario if so much money wasn't spent on non essentials. Industrial scale farming, mass produced pharmaceuticals, rapid house construction etc. mean that if a society wanted, you could have 10% of the population providing for the 90% (an inversion of what was the case for most of human history). There is no precedent or example from history to show us what this will do to society. How will humans cope with not actually needing to do anything? I personally envisage a Matrix like scenario where this societal change will also usher in advances in VR and related tech. People may spend most of their time engrossed in entertainment, until eventually, they see no need to participate in the real world at all.

coldtea 7y ago
>What will happen to a society where every single person has their basic needs met by some form of automation, and nobody needs to work? Those who control the "means of automation" (robot factories, power stations, etc) --let's say 0.01%--, will rule over the rest, in gated communities and closed enclaves. A small percentage of the population will live alongside them, in B-rated residences, to provide them services that, either still need humans or are better done by humans (e.g. sex), or its considered "classier" to have humans do for you (e.g. cooking). Let's say that's a 10%. The rest 90% will be left to rot in urban and suburban slums, develop their own black economy, and shot on sight when they dare enter the rich areas. https://www.amazon.com/Planet-Slums-Mike-Davis/dp/1784786616 https://www.amazon.com/Planet-Slums-Mike-Davis/dp/1784786616 https://www.amazon.com/City-Quartz-Excavating-Future-Angeles/dp/1844675688 https://www.amazon.com/City-Quartz-Excavating-Future-Angeles...
- selimthegrim 7y ago
  Will be left? Come on down to New Orleans and take a tour of Peter Thiel’s cameras!
- wedn3sday 7y ago
  The irony of your amazon links at the bottom of the rant is delicious. Given the pessimism of your comment (not saying its wrong), Im surprised you didn't factor in how much the rich will invest in sex robots. Imagine if Bezos invested the same amount he's going to lose in the divorce settlement into human-like robotics. Brothels are illegal in much of the western world, but the first person to put $1bn into the sexbot industry will clean up, no laws against fucking a toaster!
- Thorentis 7y ago
  The other bleaker outcome is that anybody who doesn't support the needs of the 0.01% will just be wiped out since they no longer serve a purpose. Think about it: sweatshops will be replaced by robots, menial healthcare tasks performed by robots, garbage collectors, janitors etc. None of them needed. So why give them food provided by the robotic farms? The only thing stopping a mass population wipe out by the technocracy is altruism.
xster 7y ago
Right, and the next logical follow-up question is did we just define 'providing' wrong. Right now, that definition is commercial GDP value, but even that metric's inventor warned us that it's a bullshit metric [1]. Old people living by themselves sometimes spam call doctors, not for their heart bypass commercial value, but to feel materially better after talking to another human, which has no commercial value. When I was trying to figure out what to do after high school, I was full of energy and curiosity for this world and wanted to do everything from being a historian, to a musician, to astrophysics, which, let's face it, has no commercial value. Now I'm coding. Luckily I like coding, but not everyone's lucky to have their interests align with commercial value. Maybe it's not so bad for humans to be humans again. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product#History
dustingetz 7y ago
seems like a false proposition, considering today a smartphone is a basic human need if you want to be able to apply to jobs. even the homeless need to have one. have-not is relative to the haves that you compete with in various markets.
daseiner1 7y ago
the last man

coldtea 7y ago

>What will happen to a society where every single person has their basic needs met by some form of automation, and nobody needs to work? Those who control the "means of automation" (robot factories, power stations, etc) --let's say 0.01%--, will rule over the rest, in gated communities and closed enclaves. A small percentage of the population will live alongside them, in B-rated residences, to provide them services that, either still need humans or are better done by humans (e.g. sex), or its considered "classier" to have humans do for you (e.g. cooking). Let's say that's a 10%. The rest 90% will be left to rot in urban and suburban slums, develop their own black economy, and shot on sight when they dare enter the rich areas. https://www.amazon.com/Planet-Slums-Mike-Davis/dp/1784786616 https://www.amazon.com/Planet-Slums-Mike-Davis/dp/1784786616 https://www.amazon.com/City-Quartz-Excavating-Future-Angeles/dp/1844675688 https://www.amazon.com/City-Quartz-Excavating-Future-Angeles...

selimthegrim 7y ago
Will be left? Come on down to New Orleans and take a tour of Peter Thiel’s cameras!
wedn3sday 7y ago
The irony of your amazon links at the bottom of the rant is delicious. Given the pessimism of your comment (not saying its wrong), Im surprised you didn't factor in how much the rich will invest in sex robots. Imagine if Bezos invested the same amount he's going to lose in the divorce settlement into human-like robotics. Brothels are illegal in much of the western world, but the first person to put $1bn into the sexbot industry will clean up, no laws against fucking a toaster!
Thorentis 7y ago
The other bleaker outcome is that anybody who doesn't support the needs of the 0.01% will just be wiped out since they no longer serve a purpose. Think about it: sweatshops will be replaced by robots, menial healthcare tasks performed by robots, garbage collectors, janitors etc. None of them needed. So why give them food provided by the robotic farms? The only thing stopping a mass population wipe out by the technocracy is altruism.

xster 7y ago

Right, and the next logical follow-up question is did we just define 'providing' wrong. Right now, that definition is commercial GDP value, but even that metric's inventor warned us that it's a bullshit metric [1]. Old people living by themselves sometimes spam call doctors, not for their heart bypass commercial value, but to feel materially better after talking to another human, which has no commercial value. When I was trying to figure out what to do after high school, I was full of energy and curiosity for this world and wanted to do everything from being a historian, to a musician, to astrophysics, which, let's face it, has no commercial value. Now I'm coding. Luckily I like coding, but not everyone's lucky to have their interests align with commercial value. Maybe it's not so bad for humans to be humans again. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product#History

dustingetz 7y ago

seems like a false proposition, considering today a smartphone is a basic human need if you want to be able to apply to jobs. even the homeless need to have one. have-not is relative to the haves that you compete with in various markets.

daseiner1 7y ago

the last man