6 ms·

The Luddites were not anti technology, they were extensively educated people whose jobs were threatened when factory owners tried to replace them with cheap wor

The Luddites were not anti technology, they were extensively educated people whose jobs were threatened when factory owners tried to replace them with cheap workers and auto looms. The Luddites said first, "this tech will make the whole factory more productive, let's keep everyone on board and split the gains between the owners and the workers. It's a win win." The factory owners said, "no, I can keep 100% of the gains if I fire you all and hire unskilled workers." Engineers today are looking at AI that's close to producing non toy code. We are in the same spot as the Luddites - but we have the ability to see it coming. The answer is to consider: unionizing, starting or joining workers co-ops, fighting for legislation that takes care of workers basic needs (eg universal basic income) so displaced workers aren't made destitute, etc.

Spooky23 4y ago
The other factor that is similar to the Luddites is that the factory owners tightly controlled the methods and means of production. That’s happening today with enterprise cloud adoption. The bank CIO migrates to AWS, gets his bonus for eliminating capex, and AWS quietly hires the smartest people away. That brain drain will make it increasingly similar to communicating circa 1960 with AT&T. Entire categories of skilled worker are on their way out.
hoosieree 4y ago
Alternatively, replace the CEO with an AI chatbot trained to exhibit even moderately utilitarian ethics.
- salawat 4y ago
  Goodbye Grandma. By eliminating you, I can potentially improve two other people's lives. Iterate trillions of times per second. No, thank you. I would prefer CEO's remain firmly able to experience pain.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
yucky 4y ago
There is another option, sure to be unpopular here: learn a new trade. If you find yourself automated out of a job you can spend your life trying to swim against the inevitable, or learn new skills that still have value.
- mgrthrow 4y ago
  This cannot happen infinitely. It's a problem with the way we approach the world moving past occupations. Like, coal miners aren't useful anymore, but just telling the miners to "learn a new trade" is not solving the systemic issue of "if society advances, we should provide more for members of society".
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
godelski 4y ago
There's a question I often ask people, and they seem very uncomfortable with it: > What do you do when 10% of your country's population is unemployable? I usually frame this in the context of automation to avoid the "new jobs will appear" argument (which is poor regardless because it is avoiding the transitionary period that you allude to, but I digress). 10% is depression level unemployment. But the real question here is "How do we transition into a post scarcity society?" (10% is arbitrary, and we'd expect it to rise) I think a lot of people have a lot of answers but do not think deeply about this problem. There's a decent chance that this kind of event happens within our lifetimes. Handling properly would probably mean we've already needed to have started down this path. If handled poorly revolutionary bloodshed isn't unlikely. Post scarcity would be a big boon for humankind, but the process of getting there is potentially a great filter in of itself. Personally, I don't think our modern concepts of things like Socialism, Capitalism, UBI, or other similar systems can accurately capture the nuance needed to make this transition while maximizing human benefits/quality of life. We are talking about a complete shift in our organizational structure that no one has ever seen before, so I don't think we should accept simple answers. But I do think this is a question that needs to become more commonplace and is not as absurd as when I proposed it a decade ago. We coders are not in the same spot as the Luddites, most of the world is.
- mgrthrow 4y ago
  I mean, most socialism (but especially Anarcho socialism as proposed by Kropotkin) starts with a foundation of people's right to life. We produce enough to give everyone in the US a comfortable existence. Almost twice as much food is produced as we need, for every homeless person there are 30 vacant houses, people gladly share their productive time with others (even highly skilled labor, like engineering time in open source. There are many, many socialist and anarchist thinkers who have written extensively on this topic.
  - godelski 4y ago
    Do you have any reference that specifically discusses the transitionary period into post scarcity? I'm extremely disinterested in violent revolutions and tearing something down and putting it back up with a theoretical system. I want to see a system that still pushes us quickly towards post scarcity, and that's something I haven't seen that isn't also extremely vulnerable to authoritarian takeovers.

Spooky23 4y ago

The other factor that is similar to the Luddites is that the factory owners tightly controlled the methods and means of production. That’s happening today with enterprise cloud adoption. The bank CIO migrates to AWS, gets his bonus for eliminating capex, and AWS quietly hires the smartest people away. That brain drain will make it increasingly similar to communicating circa 1960 with AT&T. Entire categories of skilled worker are on their way out.

hoosieree 4y ago

Alternatively, replace the CEO with an AI chatbot trained to exhibit even moderately utilitarian ethics.

salawat 4y ago
Goodbye Grandma. By eliminating you, I can potentially improve two other people's lives. Iterate trillions of times per second. No, thank you. I would prefer CEO's remain firmly able to experience pain.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

yucky 4y ago

There is another option, sure to be unpopular here: learn a new trade. If you find yourself automated out of a job you can spend your life trying to swim against the inevitable, or learn new skills that still have value.

mgrthrow 4y ago
This cannot happen infinitely. It's a problem with the way we approach the world moving past occupations. Like, coal miners aren't useful anymore, but just telling the miners to "learn a new trade" is not solving the systemic issue of "if society advances, we should provide more for members of society".
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

godelski 4y ago

There's a question I often ask people, and they seem very uncomfortable with it: > What do you do when 10% of your country's population is unemployable? I usually frame this in the context of automation to avoid the "new jobs will appear" argument (which is poor regardless because it is avoiding the transitionary period that you allude to, but I digress). 10% is depression level unemployment. But the real question here is "How do we transition into a post scarcity society?" (10% is arbitrary, and we'd expect it to rise) I think a lot of people have a lot of answers but do not think deeply about this problem. There's a decent chance that this kind of event happens within our lifetimes. Handling properly would probably mean we've already needed to have started down this path. If handled poorly revolutionary bloodshed isn't unlikely. Post scarcity would be a big boon for humankind, but the process of getting there is potentially a great filter in of itself. Personally, I don't think our modern concepts of things like Socialism, Capitalism, UBI, or other similar systems can accurately capture the nuance needed to make this transition while maximizing human benefits/quality of life. We are talking about a complete shift in our organizational structure that no one has ever seen before, so I don't think we should accept simple answers. But I do think this is a question that needs to become more commonplace and is not as absurd as when I proposed it a decade ago. We coders are not in the same spot as the Luddites, most of the world is.

mgrthrow 4y ago
I mean, most socialism (but especially Anarcho socialism as proposed by Kropotkin) starts with a foundation of people's right to life. We produce enough to give everyone in the US a comfortable existence. Almost twice as much food is produced as we need, for every homeless person there are 30 vacant houses, people gladly share their productive time with others (even highly skilled labor, like engineering time in open source. There are many, many socialist and anarchist thinkers who have written extensively on this topic.
- godelski 4y ago
  Do you have any reference that specifically discusses the transitionary period into post scarcity? I'm extremely disinterested in violent revolutions and tearing something down and putting it back up with a theoretical system. I want to see a system that still pushes us quickly towards post scarcity, and that's something I haven't seen that isn't also extremely vulnerable to authoritarian takeovers.