3 ms·

Your comment is phrased like you're disagreeing with or challenging mine. But I think we're in agreement? I didn't mention the specific jobs that you did but

Your comment is phrased like you're disagreeing with or challenging mine. But I think we're in agreement? I didn't mention the specific jobs that you did but I agree wholeheartedly that we need people to do those jobs. And I'll go one step further and say they're important and should be done with great skill and care whether or not they have economic value, especially because they have to do with caring for those in our population that have some of the greatest needs. Of course economic value drives the sustainability of professions in a lot of ways, but my hope is always that if we prioritize skill and care in our professions then economic value and sustainability will follow.

weatherlite 4y ago
> Another value would be the relationship building experience of doing something for others and the gratitude that is engendered when someone works hard to make something for you. Rereading what you said yes we're in agreement. I had the sense you're pro keeping jobs (like accountants, programmers, doctors whatever) even if they become obsolete due to A.I just for the sake of people doing something. Which is fine, but I lean more towards what you wrote in the end - focusing on humans. So I say basically we can shift/create new jobs that focus on that. The accountant doesn't really feel much gratification I think, arguably neither does the programmer (ok that's a loaded statement we can debate in another time). We can simply focus on the humans and let A.I do all the rest if it gets that good.