5 ms·

Maybe so, but 50 years, a hundred years from now, do you want to be doing the same things as today? And if it's not us, it's going to the developing world that

Maybe so, but 50 years, a hundred years from now, do you want to be doing the same things as today? And if it's not us, it's going to the developing world that picks up that mantle anyways. In a few decades you might find yourself in the same situation as former colonial states. Blocking creative destruction has been cited as one of the major factors in why nations fail.

cptaj 2y ago
Ignoring the reasons why this happens is just as bad as ignoring the consequences. The need for security is just as much a force of nature as the need for innovation. Unless you provide a solution for both, the cycle will keep repeating.
Eddy_Viscosity2 2y ago
Personally, I won't likely be alive in 50 and definitely not in 100 years. I have to pay mortgage and buy groceries right now or I end up starving and homeless.
argiopetech 2y ago
No, I want to be doing the same things I was doing 30 years ago, and I want the same opportunity for my children. I think it just as likely that social media-induced social discohesion tanks the country as lack of innovation (particularly since a large proportion of innovation seems to be taking us further and further from a world where normal human interaction doesn't involve a screen).
keybored 2y ago
This is a simple and straightforward problem of self-interest. It’s the difference between being able to use ChatGPT in your work and ChatGPT replacing your job and any kind of job you could “re-skill” into. The problem was then and has always been capitalism: the owners own the tech. which means that The House (owners) always wins in the end as we approach more and more automation. Meanwhile we bicker about “doing the same thing [like some old-fashioned has-been]” and “losing the competition to the developing world” as if that is relevant to anything. The tech. was never the focal point of the issue.
lupusreal 2y ago
Expecting textile workers to embrace poverty because their great grandchildren would have dirt cheap t-shirts from Asia is a big ask.
coldtea 2y ago
>Maybe so, but 50 years, a hundred years from now, do you want to be doing the same things as today? First, I want to survive the next working years, without me and my family starving. I could not give less f... what they'd be doing 100 years from now, if that means being unemployable now... Then, to answer your question, in many cases, sure, I want to be doing the same things as today. Even better if we regress in some areas, and we do the same things as 20, 30 or even 50 years ago. I could live in a society without smartphones for example (and without even more addictive and worse replacements)...

cptaj 2y ago

Ignoring the reasons why this happens is just as bad as ignoring the consequences. The need for security is just as much a force of nature as the need for innovation. Unless you provide a solution for both, the cycle will keep repeating.

Eddy_Viscosity2 2y ago

Personally, I won't likely be alive in 50 and definitely not in 100 years. I have to pay mortgage and buy groceries right now or I end up starving and homeless.

argiopetech 2y ago

No, I want to be doing the same things I was doing 30 years ago, and I want the same opportunity for my children. I think it just as likely that social media-induced social discohesion tanks the country as lack of innovation (particularly since a large proportion of innovation seems to be taking us further and further from a world where normal human interaction doesn't involve a screen).

keybored 2y ago

This is a simple and straightforward problem of self-interest. It’s the difference between being able to use ChatGPT in your work and ChatGPT replacing your job and any kind of job you could “re-skill” into. The problem was then and has always been capitalism: the owners own the tech. which means that The House (owners) always wins in the end as we approach more and more automation. Meanwhile we bicker about “doing the same thing [like some old-fashioned has-been]” and “losing the competition to the developing world” as if that is relevant to anything. The tech. was never the focal point of the issue.

lupusreal 2y ago

Expecting textile workers to embrace poverty because their great grandchildren would have dirt cheap t-shirts from Asia is a big ask.

coldtea 2y ago

>Maybe so, but 50 years, a hundred years from now, do you want to be doing the same things as today? First, I want to survive the next working years, without me and my family starving. I could not give less f... what they'd be doing 100 years from now, if that means being unemployable now... Then, to answer your question, in many cases, sure, I want to be doing the same things as today. Even better if we regress in some areas, and we do the same things as 20, 30 or even 50 years ago. I could live in a society without smartphones for example (and without even more addictive and worse replacements)...