3 ms·

I liked your post. The issue is that with modern technology,tech is not just replacing ONE job like fish catching. Tech is replacing ALL jobs..... fish catchi

I liked your post. The issue is that with modern technology,tech is not just replacing ONE job like fish catching. Tech is replacing ALL jobs..... fish catching, clothes making, accounting, medicine, programming, etc. Sufficiently advanced tech can replace just about ANY job. And do it better than a person can. So the issue is where does everyone go? And I don't think 7 billion people can all be inventors.

gregpilling 12y ago
My friend owns http://www.potterusa.com/ http://www.potterusa.com/ which sells tools for Jewelry making and his customers are 95% hobbyists and 5% professionals who actually make a living. The 95% make stuff, sell it at a profit and get to feel like a business. But it really isn't when they spend 10 hours making something and the end results is they earned a $1 per hour. They don't care, they are middle to upper class. They are just having fun. I think that is more the future. I think it will be a nice enjoyable future.
cell303 12y ago
Actually, I think they can (also be entrepreneurs and artists) They just can't all be successful ones. However, due to the non-linearity of success, the winners would offset the losers, which is also why incubators like y combinator can make a profit. So what it boils down to really is a social issue, where you have to find a way to ensure a fair treatment of the losers. Theoretically they were just as likely to be huge successes (I think this is especially true for artists) as those who actually turned out to be. If that wasn't true one could easily run a successful incubator on their own. However, culturally, the idea of compensating the losers seems alien (and even outrageous in some places) as we used to live in a economy with a much more linear relationship between effort and return. I guess this is why ideas like 'basic income' have such a hard time being even discussed, although they would address the issue, maybe even solve it.

gregpilling 12y ago

My friend owns http://www.potterusa.com/ http://www.potterusa.com/ which sells tools for Jewelry making and his customers are 95% hobbyists and 5% professionals who actually make a living. The 95% make stuff, sell it at a profit and get to feel like a business. But it really isn't when they spend 10 hours making something and the end results is they earned a $1 per hour. They don't care, they are middle to upper class. They are just having fun. I think that is more the future. I think it will be a nice enjoyable future.

cell303 12y ago

Actually, I think they can (also be entrepreneurs and artists) They just can't all be successful ones. However, due to the non-linearity of success, the winners would offset the losers, which is also why incubators like y combinator can make a profit. So what it boils down to really is a social issue, where you have to find a way to ensure a fair treatment of the losers. Theoretically they were just as likely to be huge successes (I think this is especially true for artists) as those who actually turned out to be. If that wasn't true one could easily run a successful incubator on their own. However, culturally, the idea of compensating the losers seems alien (and even outrageous in some places) as we used to live in a economy with a much more linear relationship between effort and return. I guess this is why ideas like 'basic income' have such a hard time being even discussed, although they would address the issue, maybe even solve it.