100% Unemployment: on keeping busy when the robots take over • Hacker News Board

Re: 100% Unemployment: on keeping busy when the robots take over

#91

Post by TeMPOraL » Wed, Feb 18, 2015, 11:49 AM UTC

api wrote: post #90

bryanlarsen wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there is a (relatively) easy path from here to there. Let's presume that we want to create a Star Trek post-scarcity future. One theory I like for Star Trek economics is that they've got an extremely high basic income, the equivalent of $10M/year or so. Energy costs about the same (~10c/kwh), and is the limiting factor in replicator economics. Some stuff is really expensive, like land and human labour. Replic…

That's the only cogent explanation of how the Trek universe's economy might actually function I've ever heard. So huge goods (e.g. Starship) would be pricey, but everything else except labor feels "free." Definitely describes how that society seems to operate, and I could imagine it working if you had replicators, matter antimatter power generation, and other kinds of mega-technology.

I always thought it's the agreed-upon explanation ;). I.e. Star Trek's post-scarcity society is enabled mostly thanks to the replicator technology. So food, clothing and basic construction materials are essentially free and unlimited. People do whatever they want - most civilians just go and live and further their passions; some do work for others (e.g. Sisko's dad and his restaurant), but they do this because they want to, not because they have to. Many join Starfleet, which basically offers people grand goals and adventure, and enforces structure and obedience based solely on non-monetary incentives.

Things like starships are pricey partially because they're huge (and thus reaching the limit of civilization's energy output) and partially because some things apparently just can't be replicated with their-era replicator technology.

Re: 100% Unemployment: on keeping busy when the robots take over

#92

Post by tracker1 » Wed, Feb 18, 2015, 5:40 PM UTC

redeemer wrote: post #52

TeMPOraL wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds like a cool idea - if and only if everyone coordinates to it together fairly, which seems extremely hard to achieve. I can see tons of caveats, e.g. - If you automate away your non-tech co-worker (someone who can't contribute much to the automation of jobs other than his own), will he get the bonus? If so, how do you assure people doing the automating won't feel treated unfairly as the non-tech guy just g…

> If you automate away your non-tech co-worker ... will he get the bonus? Yes, and you get nothing. It's fair; just don't automate away other people's jobs, automate away your own. > If someone automates you away, will you get anything? Yes, 100% of the bonus. It's not a choice, you must leave. I still think that's fair. > If you keep automating away your co-workers, who's gonna be left to help you automate yourself…

Isn't what you just describe about automating other peoples jobs away a huge part of IT to begin with... we take paper forms that have long review chains and turn them into electronic forms (more effective data entry, fewer needed) with mostly automated review chains (cut middle management)... yeilding higher returns.

This is why IT is considered White Collar (especially software developers and engineers)... It's our job to automate people out of jobs... which then churns the need for jobs developing ever more complex systems that aren't human. Often badly written.

We'll never reach greater than say 60% unemployment... there's just to much crap to shovel (even in automation).

Re: 100% Unemployment: on keeping busy when the robots take over

#93

Post by lowbloodsugar » Wed, Feb 18, 2015, 6:43 PM UTC

"You and I and everybody else, if the present trends continue, will be selling what we do to the highest bidder."

That's how its supposed to work. The problem here is not "selling what we do to the highest bidder", its the "You and I and everyone else". If you are competing against "everyone else" then the highest bid is going to be pretty low.