4 ms·

By purely speculating, just like the article, I guess everything that can't be replaced by robots (or let me reword it: isn't as fun without humans) will be lef

by tekkk 7y ago

By purely speculating, just like the article, I guess everything that can't be replaced by robots (or let me reword it: isn't as fun without humans) will be left for humans. Meaning arts, entertainment, sports and artisan products. Probably influencing too and whatever jobs our fledgling mind-control apparatuses require. Sure not everyone can make the change so I guess they'll end up doing maintenance work or something, social services or just sit on their ass playing video games. I don't think the problem is as bad as it seems, I mean I can't recall anyone complaining about doing less mundane work. In my mind the problem isn't that there isn't enough "work" for everyone. We can make up more work given enough time. It's the redistribution of the wealth of the owners of these mega corporations that is the most puzzling problem. Especially if all the wealth falls to only a couple of those companies. Going forward I think whatever that is what makes us human will be our most prized commodity. In a world full of synthetic products it's the ones that are real which stand out. And if we can't tell the difference between synthetics and reals, well. I guess we are screwed then. Perhaps it's just the next step in our evolution to become one with the machine, legacy flesh-versions will be left as curiosities, put in museums.

freeflight 7y ago
Imho this isn't just pure speculation, it's simply extrapolating trends that have already been going on for centuries. And one of the most dangerous non-answers to it is this: > Sure not everyone can make the change so I guess they'll end up doing maintenance work or something, social services or just sit on their ass playing video games. Because it assumes that societies will properly respond to it with social reforms accounting for these changes. But unlike the automation trend, the social changes that need to accompany it are a far cry away from even being recognized as a requirement. In that context I do not see a future where people without a job will be "sitting at home playing video games", it's far more likely that people will be living on the street and won't even be able to afford food, because their gig-economy job got replaced by a fleet of corporate bots, just like most other menial and low-income jobs. Will such a society recognize that not everybody can find a meaningful [0] place to work? Will it maybe force people, to work underpaid just to keep up the appearance of "pulling them bootstraps"? I mean, there's already a whole lot of that going on. Maybe it's just the pessimist in me, but I just don't see the kind of "utopia" emerging from this many people imagine it to be. At least not in the way we are currently going about it, where the societal impact of massive tech-advances is regularly relegated to something that will be fixed post-release. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_Jobs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_Jobs

by tekkk 7y ago

freeflight 7y ago

Imho this isn't just pure speculation, it's simply extrapolating trends that have already been going on for centuries. And one of the most dangerous non-answers to it is this: > Sure not everyone can make the change so I guess they'll end up doing maintenance work or something, social services or just sit on their ass playing video games. Because it assumes that societies will properly respond to it with social reforms accounting for these changes. But unlike the automation trend, the social changes that need to accompany it are a far cry away from even being recognized as a requirement. In that context I do not see a future where people without a job will be "sitting at home playing video games", it's far more likely that people will be living on the street and won't even be able to afford food, because their gig-economy job got replaced by a fleet of corporate bots, just like most other menial and low-income jobs. Will such a society recognize that not everybody can find a meaningful [0] place to work? Will it maybe force people, to work underpaid just to keep up the appearance of "pulling them bootstraps"? I mean, there's already a whole lot of that going on. Maybe it's just the pessimist in me, but I just don't see the kind of "utopia" emerging from this many people imagine it to be. At least not in the way we are currently going about it, where the societal impact of massive tech-advances is regularly relegated to something that will be fixed post-release. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_Jobs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_Jobs