Seems that both authors don't really see strong AI as a possibility (at least within say next 50 years). I wonder what HN readers take on that is, but to me it seems quite likely. Not necessary designing one from the scratch, but "uploading" human brain (once we have good enough resolution and technology). It changes quite a bit about everything.
Dear Marc Andreessen
31–40 of 194 posts
Re: Dear Marc Andreessen
#32Very nice to see pmarca's neoliberal idiocy taken apart so thoroughly. Peter Thiel could do with similar treatment imho.
So things we disagree with now can just be labelled as idiocy? And no matter how much you and other statists hate neoliberalism and how it's taken over the world, thing is the world has never been so rich, so peaceful and people have never lived so long and so healthy in the whole history of humanity. So, if neoliberalism is having a bad effect on the world, I wonder what it would do if it had a good effect. I would…
[deleted]
Re: Dear Marc Andreessen
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_the_excluded_middle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_to_moderation
Right, the fallacy of the excluded middle is a particular kind of argument to moderation.
EDIT: nope, I mis-remembered argument to moderation. Sigh.
Re: Dear Marc Andreessen
#34tl;dr: Rich assholes abuse language to protect their power by rah-rahing the weak into spirituality-based causes. Business as usual.
Re: Dear Marc Andreessen
#35"Taxi drivers protesting Uber aren’t saying that they want apps out of their cabs. They want leverage to negotiate wages and working conditions so they aren’t barely scraping by. The pushback is on exploitative business models, not technology." I have been on the receiving end of exploitative business models. The answer is Exit, not Voice. Here's why: enough people exit -> wages go up and/or working conditions improv…
Or they get a gun and start robbing you and kidnapping your kids for ransom.
When people can't eat, they get desperate. When enough people can't eat... well, let's just say Egypt's government didn't fall because people wanted freedom.
Re: Dear Marc Andreessen
#36> Taxi drivers protesting Uber aren’t saying that they want apps out of their cabs. Of course they aren't saying that, it would be political suicide to say it. But given the stubborn resistance to even using the credit card readers forced on them by utility commissions, do people really think that cabbies are aching to have apps between them and their customers that would thwart their ability to skip inconvenient far…
>Of course they aren't saying that, it would be political suicide to say it. But given the stubborn resistance to even using the credit card readers forced on them by utility commissions, do people really think that cabbies are aching to have apps between them and their customers that would thwart their ability to skip inconvenient fares or grab an easier ride on their way to a call?
And why should they? I'm against micromanaging any sector to death, and getting them to work with the smallest margins possible. If they can hold their own, all the better to them.
When does "applying technology" stops and abuse starts? One can imagine employees in offices fitted with colars that give them electric shocks (or automatically reduce their paycheck) everytime they slack even momentarily (e.g check HN or think something of their own outside work).
Would we go for a automated hell of surveillance and micromanaging of every action and transaction to get everybody to work as a maximum productivity machine?
Re: Dear Marc Andreessen
#37Re: Dear Marc Andreessen
#38"Taxi drivers protesting Uber aren’t saying that they want apps out of their cabs. They want leverage to negotiate wages and working conditions so they aren’t barely scraping by. The pushback is on exploitative business models, not technology." I have been on the receiving end of exploitative business models. The answer is Exit, not Voice. Here's why: enough people exit -> wages go up and/or working conditions improv…
To the quote above: wages are determined by productivity, not negotiation leverage. The moral implications of "barely scraping by" don't factor in.
Re: Dear Marc Andreessen
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that's really the point of al3x's post. I think it's more we should be very worried that someone with such a balck & white, infantile view of society and economy is in a position to throw billions of dollars at advancing his world view. I love technology but fear for the world we'll end up with if people like pmarca are left to pull the levers.
I would sure rather have pmarca pulling the levers rather than people like {politicians, bankers, ...}.
How about neither of the above :) I'd prefer that.
Re: Dear Marc Andreessen
#40I don't think pmarca is saying people are against robots per se, but against the efficiency-driven unemployment they see. I'm firmly on the side of pmarca and technology here -- I'd love to see virtually all crappy jobs today disappear, and we could find new and better things for those people to do (through the market, ideally, but I'd be open to Basic Income or other forms of wealth distribution if needed). I cannot…
> I'd love to see virtually all crappy jobs today disappear, and we could find new and better things for those people to do
I agree with you, but I won't share your optimism until I start seeing way more ideas for what this future would look like that are way less hand-wavy than what I've seen so far. Vonnegut's "Player Piano" feels a lot more familiar than Star Trek's no-scarcity-or-need-to-work-but-everything-is-amazing.