51–60 of 130 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you read the parent I am replying too? How is road safety relevant to a discussion about zero sum games?
For one, it makes it a non-zero-sum game.
Sure you can cherry pick your perspective and make OPs statement true, but whats the point of that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How? How do the uneducated in the rust belt benefit? And perhaps more importantly when? I agree that technology for society in general make us better of over time, but society consists of individuals who don't necessarily benefit from this. In fact 12 million jobs are in danger of being lost to automated cars. How are they going to benefit from that?
> In fact 12 million jobs are in danger of being lost to automated cars. How are they going to benefit from that? Jobs are going to be lost anyways, whether from cars or from a different technology. Are you arguing the problem is that people aren't able to continue to do trivial things which technology can easily replace them at? Or that they will not have a relevant skill / source of income? If the former than we sh…
Think back to when people were just becoming aware of computers and how they will change the workplace. The same arguments were made - high unemployment, etc.
Look where we are today. Imagine a world without computers!
I see the same for automated driving. It will lead to the creation of more jobs than it will kill. Yes, some jobs will go, just as computers killed some professions.
Get ready for change folks. Embrace or go the way of the dodo
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That doesen't change that for some people their job is all they have. If you take that away they have no realistic future unless it's some post scarcity society. This has always been the case throughout history: new technology makes some jobs irrelevant, and humans adapt by doing new jobs. It's unfortunate for people who cannot or will not adapt, but historically people have been resilient to such changes. It's a l…
It hasn't always been the case though. It's only been the case for around 200 years. Before that the progress was so slow that there was no issues transitioning as most kind of work took generations to change. The problem is that now things changes so fast that lots of people simply can't re-educate them selves and the market doesn't really need that many people, yet we have no plan what so ever for this issue beside…
I thought we were talking about automation and technology? What do China and India have to do with this? I never said it's good for a society when their jobs are displaced to another region.
> I would really urge anyone who think that technology creates more jobs than it removes to show where those new jobs are
I would really urge people to think of "jobs" and "productivity" as separate metrics, since productivity will likely continue to climb as the number of jobs continues to fall. The challenge will be reacting to that effectively; trying to reverse the hands of time to bring back jobs is futile.
If jobs are moving from one region to another, that's mostly unrelated to technological progress. Instead, it's because low skill labor has moved to low cost markets with low standards of living. We'll get these jobs back when we have a lower standard of living then rural China and India.
In the meantime, our scientific and technological edge has been one of the few things keeping our economy semi-competitive. Can you imagine if we lost the low wage jobs and the highly skilled jobs? We probably won't have to wait much longer.
How come no one has figured out that these self driving cars can be tested with light soft and fuzzy tops which only look like real cars, so if they crash into something, even at high speed, they wouldn't hurt anyone and couldn't be sued for a lot? They could then skip to testing much more daring maneuvers on higher speed than they would otherwise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It hasn't always been the case though. It's only been the case for around 200 years. Before that the progress was so slow that there was no issues transitioning as most kind of work took generations to change. The problem is that now things changes so fast that lots of people simply can't re-educate them selves and the market doesn't really need that many people, yet we have no plan what so ever for this issue beside…
> But jobs moving to China and India isn't solving the underlying issue I thought we were talking about automation and technology? What do China and India have to do with this? I never said it's good for a society when their jobs are displaced to another region. > I would really urge anyone who think that technology creates more jobs than it removes to show where those new jobs are I would really urge people to think…
With regards to your second:
We are. I was just trying to pre-empt the claim that more jobs have been created.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For one, it makes it a non-zero-sum game.
The claim was that we will all benefit. So I am asking how is that benefitting those who loos their jobs. Sure you can cherry pick your perspective and make OPs statement true, but whats the point of that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For one, it makes it a non-zero-sum game.
The claim was that we will all benefit. So I am asking how is that benefitting those who loos their jobs. Sure you can cherry pick your perspective and make OPs statement true, but whats the point of that.
They get cheaper and better self-driving cars. I know that's not nearly enough to compensate for lost income and self-worth. The rest of society has easily enough gains to compensate them property, but because of outdated ideas about work, worth and capitalism we haven't done so.
I worry about the regulatory aspects of getting self-driving cars off-the-ground in the United States. It is inevitable that self driving cars will make mistakes and people will be injured or killed as a result. It is also inevitable that people will be injured or killed as a result of people driving cars. But in the long run, it's virtually guaranteed that self-driving technology will result in safer cars and fewer…
The issue is that self driving cars are naturally _worse_ than human drivers, and the only way to ensure that only the _good_ self driving cars get on the road is regulation. Like flying, if anyone could build an airplane and fly it, flying would be more dangerous then driving. It's the FAA which keeps these things in check.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In fact 12 million jobs are in danger of being lost to automated cars. How are they going to benefit from that? Jobs are going to be lost anyways, whether from cars or from a different technology. Are you arguing the problem is that people aren't able to continue to do trivial things which technology can easily replace them at? Or that they will not have a relevant skill / source of income? If the former than we sh…
People seem to be too focused on jobs that will be lost because of automated cars/vehicles, but are not looking at the jobs that will be created because of that. Think back to when people were just becoming aware of computers and how they will change the workplace. The same arguments were made - high unemployment, etc. Look where we are today. Imagine a world without computers! I see the same for automated driving. I…
You must be able to point to some jobs that actually provide more, just claiming it will create more while the reality is that it doesn't unless we are talking wallmart jobs isn't an argument thats more a religious belief.
There are around 3-4 million software developers in the US. 18million worldwide. Those and some other areas of STEM jobs are providing some of us with a future and rising income. But for most other people they are on the wrong side of that divide.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The claim was that we will all benefit. So I am asking how is that benefitting those who loos their jobs. Sure you can cherry pick your perspective and make OPs statement true, but whats the point of that.
> So I am asking how is that benefitting those who loos their jobs. They get cheaper and better self-driving cars. I know that's not nearly enough to compensate for lost income and self-worth. The rest of society has easily enough gains to compensate them property, but because of outdated ideas about work, worth and capitalism we haven't done so.