5 ms·

The problem is that people still need something to do that gives some meaning to their existence and provides accomplishment, intrinsically and within their pee

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.
bobajeff 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. I seriously doubt that's something anybody has trouble figuring out. The issue most people tend to face is finding something to do that will provide income. Especially, since all of the things we would want to do requires money. Even if it's just watching sports and talking to friends drinking beer.
- aogaili 6y ago
  I also think this is the case. I see many people perfectly happy and keeping themselves very busy with hobbies, socializing, games etc. Also, content and entertainment platforms are growing, so I think most people will have even more to do with their time in the future. It does seem to be mostly an income issue. A lot of UBI skeptics are quick to point out the psychological impact of living in society with no work, but I think the real stress is living in a society that dependant on income while watching the jobs get automated by the day and your leaders have no clear/meaningful vision for the future.
- jpindar 6y ago
  I've noticed the people who say things like "we can't just give people money because they need the meaning and dignity of work" already have plenty of money and a high-status office job.
  - aogaili 6y ago
    Precisely, because what they fear is loss of control over those underneath them and not the loss of meaning. As it stands in today politic/economical systems (specially in the west) have an inherit artificial scarcity by design to allow a form of soft behavioural control/governance. You do X, we will fine/pay you Y amount. And this will only work if the Y amount is impactful enough for the individual. I think this could be replaced by some other from of social point system, while providing the necessities of life to ensure dignified living when income is lost. Because as it stand today, individual existence and any dignified livelihood is very fragile and highly dependant on a single source of income. You work at Amazon warehouse to pay your rent/bills, Amazon starts using Stretch the robot and you are left in a very weak and vulnerable position, at the mercy of the upper management, wondering when they might let you go because, thanks to Stretch the robot, you are redundant now. This has to be fixed sooner or later, because it just broken and getting worst by the day really fast. The issue here is that the erosion of jobs is happening from outside and inside. Due to covid, many consumers started purchasing online which is dominated by few mega players (Amazon), so many local retails, restaurants are losing job. And at the same time, those mega companies are investing heavily to gain efficiency as they try to meet the demand and increase their margins, so they are adding more automation. The way I see it, this is a race to the bottom, and a lot of workers and families will get hurt if this trend continues without some major economical and social solutions.
helios_invictus 6y ago
There are plenty of work out there that low skill workers could be doing, that requires uniquely human hands. Some of it doesn't seem that awesome, like say pickup litter, but some of it could be very cool like building trails or planting trees, or building sustainable homes. There are still lots of low problems that can only be solved by human hands.
slightwinder 6y ago
> There's art, but if ever fifth person is an artist, who is supposed to consume all of it? Other artist for example. It's not that unusual to have small isolated echo chamber. And as long as someone pays the bill, people will just do something even if they are not the top predator of the trade. Just look at all the hobby-creators out there who are busy creating stuff, despite not earning anything at all from it, often not even big responses.

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.

bobajeff 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. I seriously doubt that's something anybody has trouble figuring out. The issue most people tend to face is finding something to do that will provide income. Especially, since all of the things we would want to do requires money. Even if it's just watching sports and talking to friends drinking beer.

aogaili 6y ago
I also think this is the case. I see many people perfectly happy and keeping themselves very busy with hobbies, socializing, games etc. Also, content and entertainment platforms are growing, so I think most people will have even more to do with their time in the future. It does seem to be mostly an income issue. A lot of UBI skeptics are quick to point out the psychological impact of living in society with no work, but I think the real stress is living in a society that dependant on income while watching the jobs get automated by the day and your leaders have no clear/meaningful vision for the future.
jpindar 6y ago
I've noticed the people who say things like "we can't just give people money because they need the meaning and dignity of work" already have plenty of money and a high-status office job.
- aogaili 6y ago
  Precisely, because what they fear is loss of control over those underneath them and not the loss of meaning. As it stands in today politic/economical systems (specially in the west) have an inherit artificial scarcity by design to allow a form of soft behavioural control/governance. You do X, we will fine/pay you Y amount. And this will only work if the Y amount is impactful enough for the individual. I think this could be replaced by some other from of social point system, while providing the necessities of life to ensure dignified living when income is lost. Because as it stand today, individual existence and any dignified livelihood is very fragile and highly dependant on a single source of income. You work at Amazon warehouse to pay your rent/bills, Amazon starts using Stretch the robot and you are left in a very weak and vulnerable position, at the mercy of the upper management, wondering when they might let you go because, thanks to Stretch the robot, you are redundant now. This has to be fixed sooner or later, because it just broken and getting worst by the day really fast. The issue here is that the erosion of jobs is happening from outside and inside. Due to covid, many consumers started purchasing online which is dominated by few mega players (Amazon), so many local retails, restaurants are losing job. And at the same time, those mega companies are investing heavily to gain efficiency as they try to meet the demand and increase their margins, so they are adding more automation. The way I see it, this is a race to the bottom, and a lot of workers and families will get hurt if this trend continues without some major economical and social solutions.

helios_invictus 6y ago

There are plenty of work out there that low skill workers could be doing, that requires uniquely human hands. Some of it doesn't seem that awesome, like say pickup litter, but some of it could be very cool like building trails or planting trees, or building sustainable homes. There are still lots of low problems that can only be solved by human hands.

slightwinder 6y ago

> There's art, but if ever fifth person is an artist, who is supposed to consume all of it? Other artist for example. It's not that unusual to have small isolated echo chamber. And as long as someone pays the bill, people will just do something even if they are not the top predator of the trade. Just look at all the hobby-creators out there who are busy creating stuff, despite not earning anything at all from it, often not even big responses.