6 ms·

Soon it won't matter what the population is, automation will sweep through all industries, what you see today in automation is what people 30 years ago see in c

Soon it won't matter what the population is, automation will sweep through all industries, what you see today in automation is what people 30 years ago see in computers - slow, cumbersome, expensive. That's going to change.

mandelbrotwurst 7y ago
Why does it follow that efficient automation will cause population levels to not matter?
- dumbfoundded 7y ago
  I think the idea is that humanity is basically a pyramid scheme. It takes more and more people to cover the debts and improve the world they received from the previous generations. I don't particularly agree with this viewpoint.
  - sgt101 7y ago
    Who's debts are the world's population covering? Are we in hoc to Mars?!
    - dumbfoundded 7y ago
      Here are a few debts we have: - Governmental fiscal debt - Global climate change - Societal debt. By this I mean, the previous generation left an unstable society at risk of collapse for the next generation. I would imagine a person born in 1920 would feel this way. As a programmer, I would frame this as "tech" debt for our social institutions.
Nyandalized 7y ago
Computers are part of automation, just like chainsaws. It's not a new phenomena. It's been sweeping through all industries the whole time. The thing is, efficiency unveils new possibilities, and possibilities induce demand, consumption. We are much more efficient than 10 years ago, but also consume at a much faster pace.
- tabtab 7y ago
  Past patterns are not always a sufficient predictor of future patterns. Some patterns may even last for hundreds or thousands of years, then disappear due to technological or cultural changes. As Yogi Berra said, "It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future."
Robotbeat 7y ago
It's only worth automating something if there's enough demand to justify the investment in the automation process. If population declines, we may actually see less automation for some things... ...and therefore cost increases.
- sdenton4 7y ago
  OTOH, automation enables things that fundamentally aren't possible with any number of humans, due to economics. If we find ways to lower the cost of automation itself, lovely things can happen.
yters 7y ago
What's the point of automating everything if there are no more people? I think ultimately people are the source of happiness for people. Material things are just an intermediary in the happiness exchange. So, if we get rid of people to replace them with material things we will become less happy. Plus, it isn't obvious that all the important stuff can be automated.
- Zanni 7y ago
  I find my joy in people is inversely related to their quantity. If I'm hiking a sparsely populated trail, then anyone I meet is worth a conversation. If I'm on a crowded subway, I do my best to shut everyone out. At a minimum, I think joy is conserved. But I suspect it would actually increase if there were fewer people (up to a point).
  - yters 7y ago
    As counter anecdata, my perception is people who come from large families and populous regions that are neighborly are much happier and friendlier than those who keep to themselves or ignore those around them.
- tapland 7y ago
  > So, if we get rid of people to replace them with material things we will become less happy. No. People who don't exist don't experience anything. And there are plenty of people who are born and who as adults wish they had never been, and a lot of us who are still ok with it but not very excited are still biased since we do exist. This is not a problem for those who are never born. They don't become people who can feel pain and suffering. There are plenty of people. I really doubt that an increase in people is in itself a reason for increased happiness. Noone is arguing for exterminating parts of the not needed population because of automation.
  - yters 7y ago
    What if the value of someone's life is independent of their own subjective perception of their own value? Many people, tragically, view themselves as valueless, due to many factors, but that's a reason to boost their self value, not a reason to give into their misperception of self. If a person's body is unhealthy, we don't encourage them towards greater unhealthiness, but rather health. The same with mental health. We should encourage mentally healthy perspectives, which includes self value.
Aloha 7y ago
They said this 30+ years ago too, it's still not there. As it turns out, often the opex for the people is still cheaper than the capex plus opex for the robot.
mirimir 7y ago
Yes, if all goes well. And if global climate change doesn't crash technological society. > If the world ahead has fewer people, will there be any real economic growth? Of course there will. As long as per capita usage of energy and stuff increases faster than population decreases. Basically this will continue the concentration of wealth ~indefinitely. I mean, consider Vernor Vinge's Marooned in Realtime. Even the poorest people consume as much as many nations do now.

mandelbrotwurst 7y ago

Why does it follow that efficient automation will cause population levels to not matter?

dumbfoundded 7y ago
I think the idea is that humanity is basically a pyramid scheme. It takes more and more people to cover the debts and improve the world they received from the previous generations. I don't particularly agree with this viewpoint.
- sgt101 7y ago
  Who's debts are the world's population covering? Are we in hoc to Mars?!
  - dumbfoundded 7y ago
    Here are a few debts we have: - Governmental fiscal debt - Global climate change - Societal debt. By this I mean, the previous generation left an unstable society at risk of collapse for the next generation. I would imagine a person born in 1920 would feel this way. As a programmer, I would frame this as "tech" debt for our social institutions.

Nyandalized 7y ago

Computers are part of automation, just like chainsaws. It's not a new phenomena. It's been sweeping through all industries the whole time. The thing is, efficiency unveils new possibilities, and possibilities induce demand, consumption. We are much more efficient than 10 years ago, but also consume at a much faster pace.

tabtab 7y ago
Past patterns are not always a sufficient predictor of future patterns. Some patterns may even last for hundreds or thousands of years, then disappear due to technological or cultural changes. As Yogi Berra said, "It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future."

Robotbeat 7y ago

It's only worth automating something if there's enough demand to justify the investment in the automation process. If population declines, we may actually see less automation for some things... ...and therefore cost increases.

sdenton4 7y ago
OTOH, automation enables things that fundamentally aren't possible with any number of humans, due to economics. If we find ways to lower the cost of automation itself, lovely things can happen.

yters 7y ago

What's the point of automating everything if there are no more people? I think ultimately people are the source of happiness for people. Material things are just an intermediary in the happiness exchange. So, if we get rid of people to replace them with material things we will become less happy. Plus, it isn't obvious that all the important stuff can be automated.

Zanni 7y ago
I find my joy in people is inversely related to their quantity. If I'm hiking a sparsely populated trail, then anyone I meet is worth a conversation. If I'm on a crowded subway, I do my best to shut everyone out. At a minimum, I think joy is conserved. But I suspect it would actually increase if there were fewer people (up to a point).
- yters 7y ago
  As counter anecdata, my perception is people who come from large families and populous regions that are neighborly are much happier and friendlier than those who keep to themselves or ignore those around them.
tapland 7y ago
> So, if we get rid of people to replace them with material things we will become less happy. No. People who don't exist don't experience anything. And there are plenty of people who are born and who as adults wish they had never been, and a lot of us who are still ok with it but not very excited are still biased since we do exist. This is not a problem for those who are never born. They don't become people who can feel pain and suffering. There are plenty of people. I really doubt that an increase in people is in itself a reason for increased happiness. Noone is arguing for exterminating parts of the not needed population because of automation.
- yters 7y ago
  What if the value of someone's life is independent of their own subjective perception of their own value? Many people, tragically, view themselves as valueless, due to many factors, but that's a reason to boost their self value, not a reason to give into their misperception of self. If a person's body is unhealthy, we don't encourage them towards greater unhealthiness, but rather health. The same with mental health. We should encourage mentally healthy perspectives, which includes self value.

Aloha 7y ago

They said this 30+ years ago too, it's still not there. As it turns out, often the opex for the people is still cheaper than the capex plus opex for the robot.

mirimir 7y ago

Yes, if all goes well. And if global climate change doesn't crash technological society. > If the world ahead has fewer people, will there be any real economic growth? Of course there will. As long as per capita usage of energy and stuff increases faster than population decreases. Basically this will continue the concentration of wealth ~indefinitely. I mean, consider Vernor Vinge's Marooned in Realtime. Even the poorest people consume as much as many nations do now.