4 ms·

Workers are minor annoyance for amazon. If they could do everything with robots they would. This is the tragedy of automation and robotics. As soon as it become

Workers are minor annoyance for amazon. If they could do everything with robots they would. This is the tragedy of automation and robotics. As soon as it becomes an option there will be massive unemployment unless we figure out a better model.

dmos62 5y ago
Automation is as much of a tragedy as 3/5 people not having to work in agriculture or not having to spend hours washing your clothes by hand. A job becoming unnecessary should be a good thing. If you become unnecessary, something is wrong, and not necessarily with you.
howaboutnope 5y ago
Let's see if people will also shallowly dismiss Stephen Hawking saying the exact same thing you just said. > If machines produce everything we need, the outcome will depend on how things are distributed. Everyone can enjoy a life of luxurious leisure if the machine-produced wealth is shared, or most people can end up miserably poor if the machine-owners successfully lobby against wealth redistribution. So far, the trend seems to be toward the second option, with technology driving ever-increasing inequality. -- Stephen Hawking, https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/3nyn5i/science_ama_series_stephen_hawking_ama_answers/cvsdmkv https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/3nyn5i/science_ama...
- treeman79 5y ago
  Farming was 97% of the population at one point. Then automation took over. Rough at the time for sure. But few would wish to go back.
  - howaboutnope 5y ago
    This isn't about automation separated from the world it is used in, this is about automation speeding up inequality that isn't just growing, but accelerating -- and the predictable outcome that those who exploit and don't share with people when they still kinda need them, will certainly not share once they no longer need them for anything whatsoever, and can kill them in vast numbers trivially. If it was already occasionally possible to get soldiers to do it, how much more so owithout pesky humans and their consciences getting in the way. > But few would wish to go back. What does that even mean? I would love to "go back" and deal with things by not just letting the masses starve while people in costumes play god and smell their own farts, which is exactly what they do today. I would LOVE to see see that space exploration and awesome inter-species music festivals we might have in 2021 if the last few millenia hadn't been such pathetic ass.
  - Nextgrid 5y ago
    > But few would wish to go back. Do they? Back in the day when everything was manual I think you could reasonably make a living farming your own land. It was hard work but it was possible. Nowadays everything is so optimized that margins are razor-thin and the remaining farmers are being squeezed from every side, both from the demand side for their produce (supermarket chains driving prices down) and from the equipment side (John Deere & co intentionally making equipment that's impossible to repair unless you pay them exorbitant prices).
    - treeman79 5y ago
      Missed the point. Hardly anyone is a farmer. We all have many luxuries because people who otherwise would be farmers are to some degree instead doing useful things other then fighting gophers and locusts.

dmos62 5y ago

Automation is as much of a tragedy as 3/5 people not having to work in agriculture or not having to spend hours washing your clothes by hand. A job becoming unnecessary should be a good thing. If you become unnecessary, something is wrong, and not necessarily with you.

howaboutnope 5y ago

Let's see if people will also shallowly dismiss Stephen Hawking saying the exact same thing you just said. > If machines produce everything we need, the outcome will depend on how things are distributed. Everyone can enjoy a life of luxurious leisure if the machine-produced wealth is shared, or most people can end up miserably poor if the machine-owners successfully lobby against wealth redistribution. So far, the trend seems to be toward the second option, with technology driving ever-increasing inequality. -- Stephen Hawking, https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/3nyn5i/science_ama_series_stephen_hawking_ama_answers/cvsdmkv https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/3nyn5i/science_ama...

treeman79 5y ago
Farming was 97% of the population at one point. Then automation took over. Rough at the time for sure. But few would wish to go back.
- howaboutnope 5y ago
  This isn't about automation separated from the world it is used in, this is about automation speeding up inequality that isn't just growing, but accelerating -- and the predictable outcome that those who exploit and don't share with people when they still kinda need them, will certainly not share once they no longer need them for anything whatsoever, and can kill them in vast numbers trivially. If it was already occasionally possible to get soldiers to do it, how much more so owithout pesky humans and their consciences getting in the way. > But few would wish to go back. What does that even mean? I would love to "go back" and deal with things by not just letting the masses starve while people in costumes play god and smell their own farts, which is exactly what they do today. I would LOVE to see see that space exploration and awesome inter-species music festivals we might have in 2021 if the last few millenia hadn't been such pathetic ass.
- Nextgrid 5y ago
  > But few would wish to go back. Do they? Back in the day when everything was manual I think you could reasonably make a living farming your own land. It was hard work but it was possible. Nowadays everything is so optimized that margins are razor-thin and the remaining farmers are being squeezed from every side, both from the demand side for their produce (supermarket chains driving prices down) and from the equipment side (John Deere & co intentionally making equipment that's impossible to repair unless you pay them exorbitant prices).
  - treeman79 5y ago
    Missed the point. Hardly anyone is a farmer. We all have many luxuries because people who otherwise would be farmers are to some degree instead doing useful things other then fighting gophers and locusts.