6 ms·

I've mixed feeling about this new Boston Dynamics robot. The issue here is that global economical systems are already having lots of capital centralized in the

I've mixed feeling about this new Boston Dynamics robot. The issue here is that global economical systems are already having lots of capital centralized in the hands of a few (the like of Amazon and their shareholders). Politicians asking those companies to raise salaries and provide jobs, meanwhile, new tech is making it easier to replace the workers. This kind of progress without proper economical and social intervention is just a race to the bottom for many workers.. I don't think technological progress can be stopped but economist, politicians and sociologist need to really step up and provide a meaningful future vision.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
arketyp 6y ago
> I don't think technological progress can be stopped but economist, politicians and sociologist need to really step up and provide a meaningful future vision. No thanks! Providing a meaningful future vision is a task for each and everyone.
- faitswulff 6y ago
  Right, but we live in a society.
- aogaili 6y ago
  Then what the point of government, economist, philosophers and entrepreneurs if everyone can do that? I don't think everyone is qualified to come up with a vision, the world is complex and you need certain background to do it.
  - krona 6y ago
    Exactly, freedom is dangerous since it means we might have think for ourselves and take responsibility for our own lives. I'd rather have government deciding what to do.
    - aogaili 6y ago
      If you have been to university or got some educational somehow and can think for yourself, which you probably are given you are in this forum, by all means go, it is a free market, and share with us your vision and insights. But to assume everyone can do that for themselves is just fantasy and idealistic thinking.
  - arketyp 6y ago
    Everyone should at least try. It's part of being a decent human being.
- aogaili 6y ago
  Most people can't articulate visions for themselves let alone human society. Could anyone point me to an author/thinker who can provide a meaningful vision for society in light of this rapid technological progress? I see Zuckerberg wants to embed us in virtual reality, Elon want us to go mars and evolve to cyborgs with neuralinks, Bezos want us to sit all day and one-click-buy from automated Stretch powered Amazon warehouses, governments want to bring coal factories back and print money, and the rest of us just busy speculating about NFTs, stocks, bitcoins, real-estate and posting on HN and social networks.. Where is the delighted vision for humanity in the next twenty years in the mix of all of that? I'd be happy if someone could share one with me.
  - arketyp 6y ago
    Though I sympathize with your concerns, maybe that attitude is part of the problem? Why do you expect anyone else to have a vision for you/us?
    - aogaili 6y ago
      Well, it is conversation. I'm doing entrepreneurship and I run business so I'm capable of articulating some vision for some part of the world. But I'm NOT in a position to articulate a vision for humanity, and what I see/hear concerns me, and I'm really hoping someone has one. Also, even if I/You have a vision, I don't think I'm (I speak for myself) in a position to make some major social or economical changes, which seem to me, necessary to avoid the societal catastrophe that might happen when things like this robot gets widely adopted.
  - MisterTea 6y ago
    > and the rest of us just busy speculating about NFTs, stocks, bitcoins, real-estate and posting on HN and social networks. It's sad when someone's idea of creative free time consists of gambling and addiction.
    - aogaili 6y ago
      Yeah, I'm personally not into any of that, but I don't hold myself any better than those who do, I just happen to have better support system and got lucky with some skill/goals that keeps me busy. But I can't help but notice that when faced with uncertainty and job instability many choose to throw money in whatever they happen to perceive the future would be, and unfortunately a lot of those so called "investment" are hyped by other capitalizing on their fears. Economical bubbles are everywhere (real estate, NFTs, stocks, bitcoins, etc.) I do think the underlying issue is the instability in the economical system. My concern is that this trend toward job elimination and capital centralization accelerated with Covid. And governments, economist, thinkers still unable to articulate a vision/strategy for the future, or even worse acknowledge the issue. The change is consumer behaviour last year was extremely rapid, those who never bought online in their live are now buying only online and many of those changes don't seem to be reversible. I really hope I'm wrong, but the way I see it, with the current market economics and centralization, and the rate of change, a lot of us and huge chunk of our society would find itself with no prospect of work or income because our government and economical systems are just lagging behind.
- freeflight 6y ago
  That ignores that we are social creatures living in an extremely interconnected global economy. Rugged individualism doesn't scale to that level and if we left everything only up to that then we might as well just abolish all institutions, including governments. Or to put it another way: There's a reason religion has been so successful for millennia, it provides a shared worldview and vision for people struggling to find their own.
chriskanan 6y ago
UBI+existentialism That's basically what Star Trek has for a post-scarcity world. It assumes that people would be motivated to better themselves or the world, be curious, etc. despite not having to work. I think some people would flourish in that environment and presumably still be contributing. Many scientists were basically trust fund kids before the 20th century. They didn't need to work. But there is a good amount of worry some will just derive no meaning from life and turn to social media, video games, drugs, etc. (The WALL-E future) There is a huge amount of thought going on, but I think the open questions are regarding how effective the solutions will be. We as a society may need to shift our values considerably for any solution to be viable.
- weinzierl 6y ago
  UBI = universal basic income (to save others a Google search)
- the_duke 6y ago
  The problem is that people still need something to do that gives some meaning to their existence and provides accomplishment, intrinsically and within their peer group. There are only so many occupations that can do that. There's art, but if ever fifth person is an artist, who is supposed to consume all of it? Many are also not wired to be scientists. With machine learning steadily becoming helpful in more domains and slow but steady improvements in robotics, we could be just 50-100 years away from a future where most manual labor and even a lot of the lower level intellectual labor of today becomes redundant or significanntly diminished. I'm sure there are models that can provide a meaningful existence, but they won't be so easy to find. And that's ignoring the possible outcome of giant mega corporations that completely control the masses , since every aspect of live becomes dependant on what they provide. We are headed for very interesting times. Of course that assumes continued progress, and as history shows that is not at all a given. All we'd need is a serious global conflict with nuclear weapons or local revolutions for progress to be reverted or stalled for a long time.
  - CodeGlitch 6y ago
    > The problem is that people still need something to do that gives some meaning to their existence and provides accomplishment, intrinsically and within their peer group. Parenting. > There's art, but if ever fifth person is an artist, who is supposed to consume all of it? Don't forget charity work, nursing, education - i don't think any of these will replaced by machines soon. > Many are also not wired to be scientists. See above. How about explorers? Sports enthusiasts. > With machine learning steadily becoming helpful in more domains and slow but steady improvements in robotics, we could be just 50-100 years away from a future where most manual labor of today becomes redundant. It happened before : see farming. We found other things to do :) > Of course that assumes continued progress, and as history shows that is not at all a given. All we'd need is a serious global conflict with nuclear weapons and progress could be stalled for a long time. Massive progress is made during times of need. WW1 and WW2 basically created aircraft, rockets and computers. The current pandemic is pushing medicine forward at a rate not seen in years.
unishark 6y ago
You assume the labor supply always growing. Eventually world population is supposed to peak and start shrinking. Then accepting more immigrants won't be an option anymore. What happens when most of a population are elderly and unable to do most kinds of work?
- XorNot 6y ago
  This is a sea-change I'm expecting to see in my lifetime which will have a lot of flow on effects. The baby-boomers have had an outsized influence on everything since being an oversized generation means not only have they consumed and held onto more of everything finite (i.e. real estate) but they've also stayed as the principle holders of high level positions for longer (since normal sickness/early death doesn't remove them - another boomer is able to simply step into the role on the basis of experience). We really haven't seen a world where the labor supply follows a more normal age pyramid, and the markets are all assuming that what's true now will always be so.
m463 6y ago
On the other hand, will it make goods less expensive for everyone? I read "the box" about container shipping and the amount of labor in the global shipping business before containers was ludicrous. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Box_(Levinson_book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Box_(Levinson_book)
Gravityloss 6y ago
Think of a simulation with a large number of agents. They have randomly assigned wealth at start. Agents meet one on one randomly and engage in a transaction. In the transaction, the richer gets a slight amount of money from the poorer one. If you run this simulation for long enough, one agents gets all the wealth and everybody else gets zero. It's the nature of the system. There's no good or evil, it's just a simple simulation.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

arketyp 6y ago

> I don't think technological progress can be stopped but economist, politicians and sociologist need to really step up and provide a meaningful future vision. No thanks! Providing a meaningful future vision is a task for each and everyone.

faitswulff 6y ago
Right, but we live in a society.
aogaili 6y ago
Then what the point of government, economist, philosophers and entrepreneurs if everyone can do that? I don't think everyone is qualified to come up with a vision, the world is complex and you need certain background to do it.
- krona 6y ago
  Exactly, freedom is dangerous since it means we might have think for ourselves and take responsibility for our own lives. I'd rather have government deciding what to do.
  - aogaili 6y ago
    If you have been to university or got some educational somehow and can think for yourself, which you probably are given you are in this forum, by all means go, it is a free market, and share with us your vision and insights. But to assume everyone can do that for themselves is just fantasy and idealistic thinking.
- arketyp 6y ago
  Everyone should at least try. It's part of being a decent human being.
aogaili 6y ago
Most people can't articulate visions for themselves let alone human society. Could anyone point me to an author/thinker who can provide a meaningful vision for society in light of this rapid technological progress? I see Zuckerberg wants to embed us in virtual reality, Elon want us to go mars and evolve to cyborgs with neuralinks, Bezos want us to sit all day and one-click-buy from automated Stretch powered Amazon warehouses, governments want to bring coal factories back and print money, and the rest of us just busy speculating about NFTs, stocks, bitcoins, real-estate and posting on HN and social networks.. Where is the delighted vision for humanity in the next twenty years in the mix of all of that? I'd be happy if someone could share one with me.
- arketyp 6y ago
  Though I sympathize with your concerns, maybe that attitude is part of the problem? Why do you expect anyone else to have a vision for you/us?
  - aogaili 6y ago
    Well, it is conversation. I'm doing entrepreneurship and I run business so I'm capable of articulating some vision for some part of the world. But I'm NOT in a position to articulate a vision for humanity, and what I see/hear concerns me, and I'm really hoping someone has one. Also, even if I/You have a vision, I don't think I'm (I speak for myself) in a position to make some major social or economical changes, which seem to me, necessary to avoid the societal catastrophe that might happen when things like this robot gets widely adopted.
- MisterTea 6y ago
  > and the rest of us just busy speculating about NFTs, stocks, bitcoins, real-estate and posting on HN and social networks. It's sad when someone's idea of creative free time consists of gambling and addiction.
  - aogaili 6y ago
    Yeah, I'm personally not into any of that, but I don't hold myself any better than those who do, I just happen to have better support system and got lucky with some skill/goals that keeps me busy. But I can't help but notice that when faced with uncertainty and job instability many choose to throw money in whatever they happen to perceive the future would be, and unfortunately a lot of those so called "investment" are hyped by other capitalizing on their fears. Economical bubbles are everywhere (real estate, NFTs, stocks, bitcoins, etc.) I do think the underlying issue is the instability in the economical system. My concern is that this trend toward job elimination and capital centralization accelerated with Covid. And governments, economist, thinkers still unable to articulate a vision/strategy for the future, or even worse acknowledge the issue. The change is consumer behaviour last year was extremely rapid, those who never bought online in their live are now buying only online and many of those changes don't seem to be reversible. I really hope I'm wrong, but the way I see it, with the current market economics and centralization, and the rate of change, a lot of us and huge chunk of our society would find itself with no prospect of work or income because our government and economical systems are just lagging behind.
freeflight 6y ago
That ignores that we are social creatures living in an extremely interconnected global economy. Rugged individualism doesn't scale to that level and if we left everything only up to that then we might as well just abolish all institutions, including governments. Or to put it another way: There's a reason religion has been so successful for millennia, it provides a shared worldview and vision for people struggling to find their own.

chriskanan 6y ago

UBI+existentialism That's basically what Star Trek has for a post-scarcity world. It assumes that people would be motivated to better themselves or the world, be curious, etc. despite not having to work. I think some people would flourish in that environment and presumably still be contributing. Many scientists were basically trust fund kids before the 20th century. They didn't need to work. But there is a good amount of worry some will just derive no meaning from life and turn to social media, video games, drugs, etc. (The WALL-E future) There is a huge amount of thought going on, but I think the open questions are regarding how effective the solutions will be. We as a society may need to shift our values considerably for any solution to be viable.

weinzierl 6y ago
UBI = universal basic income (to save others a Google search)
the_duke 6y ago
The problem is that people still need something to do that gives some meaning to their existence and provides accomplishment, intrinsically and within their peer group. There are only so many occupations that can do that. There's art, but if ever fifth person is an artist, who is supposed to consume all of it? Many are also not wired to be scientists. With machine learning steadily becoming helpful in more domains and slow but steady improvements in robotics, we could be just 50-100 years away from a future where most manual labor and even a lot of the lower level intellectual labor of today becomes redundant or significanntly diminished. I'm sure there are models that can provide a meaningful existence, but they won't be so easy to find. And that's ignoring the possible outcome of giant mega corporations that completely control the masses , since every aspect of live becomes dependant on what they provide. We are headed for very interesting times. Of course that assumes continued progress, and as history shows that is not at all a given. All we'd need is a serious global conflict with nuclear weapons or local revolutions for progress to be reverted or stalled for a long time.
- CodeGlitch 6y ago
  > The problem is that people still need something to do that gives some meaning to their existence and provides accomplishment, intrinsically and within their peer group. Parenting. > There's art, but if ever fifth person is an artist, who is supposed to consume all of it? Don't forget charity work, nursing, education - i don't think any of these will replaced by machines soon. > Many are also not wired to be scientists. See above. How about explorers? Sports enthusiasts. > With machine learning steadily becoming helpful in more domains and slow but steady improvements in robotics, we could be just 50-100 years away from a future where most manual labor of today becomes redundant. It happened before : see farming. We found other things to do :) > Of course that assumes continued progress, and as history shows that is not at all a given. All we'd need is a serious global conflict with nuclear weapons and progress could be stalled for a long time. Massive progress is made during times of need. WW1 and WW2 basically created aircraft, rockets and computers. The current pandemic is pushing medicine forward at a rate not seen in years.

unishark 6y ago

You assume the labor supply always growing. Eventually world population is supposed to peak and start shrinking. Then accepting more immigrants won't be an option anymore. What happens when most of a population are elderly and unable to do most kinds of work?

XorNot 6y ago
This is a sea-change I'm expecting to see in my lifetime which will have a lot of flow on effects. The baby-boomers have had an outsized influence on everything since being an oversized generation means not only have they consumed and held onto more of everything finite (i.e. real estate) but they've also stayed as the principle holders of high level positions for longer (since normal sickness/early death doesn't remove them - another boomer is able to simply step into the role on the basis of experience). We really haven't seen a world where the labor supply follows a more normal age pyramid, and the markets are all assuming that what's true now will always be so.

m463 6y ago

On the other hand, will it make goods less expensive for everyone? I read "the box" about container shipping and the amount of labor in the global shipping business before containers was ludicrous. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Box_(Levinson_book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Box_(Levinson_book)

Gravityloss 6y ago

Think of a simulation with a large number of agents. They have randomly assigned wealth at start. Agents meet one on one randomly and engage in a transaction. In the transaction, the richer gets a slight amount of money from the poorer one. If you run this simulation for long enough, one agents gets all the wealth and everybody else gets zero. It's the nature of the system. There's no good or evil, it's just a simple simulation.