3 ms·

Pretty much this. After all, if you're creating value, I don't think you can go wrong in the grand scheme of things. Destroyed (usually more tedious) jobs mean

Pretty much this. After all, if you're creating value, I don't think you can go wrong in the grand scheme of things. Destroyed (usually more tedious) jobs means people as a whole are now free to do more interesting and creative tasks. I'd happily destroy my job of doing the dishes with a dishwasher (one that fills and empties itself too) by automating it, etc.

malandrew 14y ago
The problem is that the nature of the new problems we create that necessitate new jobs are fundamentally more challenging for humans to solve than the problems that have been automated away. There will always be jobs to be performed. The problem is if there will be enough humans capable enough to perform the jobs that still need doing. We like to think that the industrial and agricultural revolutions created as many jobs as it destroyed. However, while it did do that for humans, the horses were not quite as lucky. Many hundreds of thousands of horses were put out of work permanently between the end of the 19th century and into the first half of the 20th century. What makes people think that humans are too special to avoid the fate of horses?
- shurcooL 14y ago
  A well presented point, I didn't think of it that way. You're probably right. Even so, at this time I want the human race to progress forward (to be more advanced, better capable at surviving even if a meteor is headed towards Earth or from rogue destructive humans, etc.), even if that means the people with less skills will suffer. Like it or not, life is about competition. Personally, I strive to improve myself and get better every day. I prefer to solve more challenging problems rather than keep doing tedious work. I wouldn't want the human race to stagnate its progress just because of fear that least-skilled members of our race cannot keep up. Besides, if enough things become automated, perhaps we will have less work to do in order to maintain comfortable lifestyles. Maybe that won't happen, I'm not sure. Anyway, that's my current view off the top of my head.

malandrew 14y ago

The problem is that the nature of the new problems we create that necessitate new jobs are fundamentally more challenging for humans to solve than the problems that have been automated away. There will always be jobs to be performed. The problem is if there will be enough humans capable enough to perform the jobs that still need doing. We like to think that the industrial and agricultural revolutions created as many jobs as it destroyed. However, while it did do that for humans, the horses were not quite as lucky. Many hundreds of thousands of horses were put out of work permanently between the end of the 19th century and into the first half of the 20th century. What makes people think that humans are too special to avoid the fate of horses?

shurcooL 14y ago
A well presented point, I didn't think of it that way. You're probably right. Even so, at this time I want the human race to progress forward (to be more advanced, better capable at surviving even if a meteor is headed towards Earth or from rogue destructive humans, etc.), even if that means the people with less skills will suffer. Like it or not, life is about competition. Personally, I strive to improve myself and get better every day. I prefer to solve more challenging problems rather than keep doing tedious work. I wouldn't want the human race to stagnate its progress just because of fear that least-skilled members of our race cannot keep up. Besides, if enough things become automated, perhaps we will have less work to do in order to maintain comfortable lifestyles. Maybe that won't happen, I'm not sure. Anyway, that's my current view off the top of my head.