Being a little cynical here: man discovers human condition and is unhappy with it. Writes many words about it. Snark aside, people have to be incentivized to do

Being a little cynical here: man discovers human condition and is unhappy with it. Writes many words about it. Snark aside, people have to be incentivized to do all of this automation. From a philosophy standpoint I agree and we should always be asking these questions about society and productivity. I think intrinsic motivation is great and money is a poor extrinsic motivator as the author points out after a certain point, but... I just can’t see innovation happening the way it does without some sort of massive societal reorganization. And it smacks of needing some sort of central control of everything to achieve this orchestration. My basic argument on why this probably won’t work is that people as a whole are simple in that we have been doing roughly the same things and having the same struggles about as long as we have existed. Yes it’s gotten better, we live in better less violent world (the least violent world we have ever known, in fact). Almost entirely due to technology and the industrial revolution. This is an interesting piece but nothing we haven’t been observing in terms of productivity gained and who is benefitting from all of this productivity (and why are people still working 40+ hour weeks in an ever more productive society?). I think it will take another order of magnitude technology revolution before the average person really questions any of this.