2 ms·
>They were right [Citation needed] EDIT: Oh, we're being pedantic (I guess I kicked it off). "They were right", as in a group of individuals lost the employme
by jamesfeve 4y ago
>They were right
[Citation needed]
EDIT: Oh, we're being pedantic (I guess I kicked it off). "They were right", as in a group of individuals lost the employment they had at a particular time, reasonably believed to be a result of automation. Not that these people were unable to find new employment or that the total number of jobs available was reduced.
- simonh 4y agoJust look up any history of the luddites. There are plenty of resources online. I don’t see why I should have to cite sources when I’m pointing out something utterly uncontroversial for anyone knowledgeable on the subject. Many of them were weaving workshop owners who lost their livelihood to automated factories. The transition to automation in the early 19th century was painful. That doesn’t mean I support what they did or think automation was wrong. In the grand scheme of things it was a necessary transition. That doesn’t mean nobody was hurt by it though. EDIT I’m not being pedantic. I just made a statement that was factually correct that I’m surprised I have to defend. You seem to be inferring a whole lot of baggage that just wasn’t there. BTW for context like the articles author I see LLMs as just being another productivity tool. They will become part of our work flows and will have effects similar to those of other productivity tools.
- namaria 4y agoLuddites were conducting industrial action. Their activity correlated strongly with union busting activity by the English elite. It has nothing to do with 'stopping progress' or trying to reverse automation.