71–80 of 247 posts
I think we are destined for a future of political and social instability in the world if we continue to define labor and its compensation as we do now. We currently don't have a social understanding for navigating a world where little human labor is required. The resentment of the winners (capital owners) by the losers (jobless masses) may lead to great upheaval, to be harnessed by willing politicians of short-sighte…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the land is all owned already, and not by the people who's jobs are being replaced? And so far automation in farming is focused on large-scale operation, with much less good solutions for family -scale.
Economies of scale have been the bread and butter of progress in the last 100 years, but we're entering the age of customization now. Adaptive technologies can work on small scale as well as on large scale. And large scale can still be achieved by coops that provide services for many people at once. People do have capital and resources, it's just spread and divided. What we need is to organize. I give self-replicatin…
Fresh water, for example, is a scarce (and becoming scarcer) resource, and it's impossible to farm or live without it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Machines took a long time to build and replace people. Software can be instantly copied. >In 1960 there were 3 channels. In the 1990's 50. Now it's 100's + online offerings. Exactly, we're already beyond the limits of what we can consume. There won't be jobs producing more stuff when there is no one to consume it.
"Exactly, we're already beyond the limits of what we can consume. " No, because in 1960 everyone had the same thing. Now - you get programming for your niche, which is different than that of the dude next door. Take clothing: even in the year 2000 people did not really wear fashion. We had 'the Gap' and not much more. Everything else was expensive. 'Fast fashion' has changed the world. Young people can now afford an…
There is also a (imho) great SF short story by Marshall Brain about this: http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the land is all owned already, and not by the people who's jobs are being replaced? And so far automation in farming is focused on large-scale operation, with much less good solutions for family -scale.
Economies of scale have been the bread and butter of progress in the last 100 years, but we're entering the age of customization now. Adaptive technologies can work on small scale as well as on large scale. And large scale can still be achieved by coops that provide services for many people at once. People do have capital and resources, it's just spread and divided. What we need is to organize. I give self-replicatin…
I think we are destined for a future of political and social instability in the world if we continue to define labor and its compensation as we do now. We currently don't have a social understanding for navigating a world where little human labor is required. The resentment of the winners (capital owners) by the losers (jobless masses) may lead to great upheaval, to be harnessed by willing politicians of short-sighte…
"We currently don't have a social understanding for navigating a world where little human labor is required" Yes we do. The industrial revolution had far greater impact on labour than any of this mysterious AI will ever have. The first 'machines' powered by coal etc. instantly 'unemployed' hundreds of people per unit. Go ahead and look at the productivity/capita charts for the early 19th century - UK citizens were mu…
Babe Ruth, arguably one of the most famous athletes ever, played from 1914-1935.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"We currently don't have a social understanding for navigating a world where little human labor is required" Yes we do. The industrial revolution had far greater impact on labour than any of this mysterious AI will ever have. The first 'machines' powered by coal etc. instantly 'unemployed' hundreds of people per unit. Go ahead and look at the productivity/capita charts for the early 19th century - UK citizens were mu…
> tell me which people you know, in which industries, have outright 'lost their jobs' due to some AI or machine? As software developers, it's literally our jobs to put people out of work. My software is specifically designed reduce the need for increased labor as the company crows. In my industry, legal, entire departments (like night word processing) no longer exist. The fact is you cannot extrapolate from 100 years…
That is either a very amusing typo or your employers are not nice people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the land is all owned already, and not by the people who's jobs are being replaced? And so far automation in farming is focused on large-scale operation, with much less good solutions for family -scale.
Economies of scale have been the bread and butter of progress in the last 100 years, but we're entering the age of customization now. Adaptive technologies can work on small scale as well as on large scale. And large scale can still be achieved by coops that provide services for many people at once. People do have capital and resources, it's just spread and divided. What we need is to organize. I give self-replicatin…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"We currently don't have a social understanding for navigating a world where little human labor is required" Yes we do. The industrial revolution had far greater impact on labour than any of this mysterious AI will ever have. The first 'machines' powered by coal etc. instantly 'unemployed' hundreds of people per unit. Go ahead and look at the productivity/capita charts for the early 19th century - UK citizens were mu…
> There were no 'pro athletes' in 1930. Babe Ruth, arguably one of the most famous athletes ever , played from 1914-1935.
Correction: there were 'few' pro athletes. Today, it's almost a career path. Back in the day, it was mostly amateurs.