11–20 of 500 posts
The article is good, but the comparison to cars might not be exactly apt. You might ask why can J.K.Rowling afford a maid and a nanny but not a Falcon X rocket today. Perhaps her great grand children will.
"Even if someone managed to invent a robot nanny that kept kids safe as well as a human being, I wouldn’t want it to take care of my baby. I bet you wouldn’t either." This glosses over the purpose of child care -- it's more than safety, it's socialization, learning, etc. In a world where some level of automation (or offshoring) is possible for these services, I could definitely see some adoption. Think "Diamond Age."
I always feltin Diamond Age they were basically describing the iPad. We have that now but it's still not quite there. Maybe it's not personalized enough or comprehensive enough?
Things got cheaper because they are being made where wages are cheaper. At the end of the day, everything that is a expense to me is a source of income to somebody else. Only robots don't get paid.
Their owners do, though. (And their makers.)
So a single car not very expensive car costs the same as 5 years of a full-time nanny and part-time maid.
And that's without figuring in all the extra costs of a car, especially parking. There's not really free parking most places here. So you'll be paying for parking literally everywhere you go.
Even worse, most houses (unless they are luxury houses >$500,000 built in the last 5ish years) aren't built with a garage for a car, so you're looking at buying land, smashing down the existing structure, and then rebuilding something with a garage. And the space for a garage isn't cheap either. If you're a middle income family you're probably living in one of the capital cities and most people would probably be shocked at how expensive land is in the capital cities nowadays.
[1]: https://www.honda.com.vn/o-to/san-pham/honda-civic/index.htm...
"Even if someone managed to invent a robot nanny that kept kids safe as well as a human being, I wouldn’t want it to take care of my baby. I bet you wouldn’t either." This glosses over the purpose of child care -- it's more than safety, it's socialization, learning, etc. In a world where some level of automation (or offshoring) is possible for these services, I could definitely see some adoption. Think "Diamond Age."
Low productive services have at least a few shades of exploitation, inherently. The less the richest person can afford of the poorest's time, the better!
Things got cheaper because they are being made where wages are cheaper. At the end of the day, everything that is a expense to me is a source of income to somebody else. Only robots don't get paid.
Even among goods and assets there's variation