4 ms·
You said it yourself. Do we have sufficiently advanced economic systems to handle this thing? Ideally, everyone would benefit from robotic efficiency. But the w
by normloman 13y ago
You said it yourself. Do we have sufficiently advanced economic systems to handle this thing? Ideally, everyone would benefit from robotic efficiency. But the way things are going, only the rich will enjoy the benefits. The poor will be at their mercy.
- saosebastiao 13y agoI think it will be like this for a while, with only token changes. But change in that direction isn't impossible...in fact, at some point it will be inevitable. The problem with those types of changes right now is that the world is still highly meritocratic. I know a lot of people would scoff at that idea, but they end up riding the bus to work in the morning thinking that the bus driver might be worth a comfortable living wage but definitely doesn't deserve their college-educated salary because they worked harder for it. And they think that they are better at their job than Joe CubicleMate, and they think they can run the company better than Director Jim, and they think that their friend's step son is a worthless piece of garbage that shouldn't be allowed to collect welfare unless he checks himself into rehab first. And as such, the people who fight for reduced inequality may have a point about billionaires and such, but they don't want so much equality that they can't think they are better than their neighbor. If they want sweeping change, they have to change themselves. Until then, the only meaningful change can be targeted at the extremes.
- ScottBurson 13y agoAll your hypothetical example people are male.
- saosebastiao 13y agoSo are you, and half the world.
- yardie 13y ago> everyone would benefit from robotic efficiency. I think we are just seeing the start of everyone enjoying robotic efficiency. 10-15 years ago a rapid prototype machine cost in $30-60k, for small objects. Last year the news was filled with 3D-printers in the range of $500+.