Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Everyday robots are slowly leaving the lab

x.company

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–99 of 99 posts

Re: Everyday robots are slowly leaving the lab

#91

Post by true_religion »

MontyCarloHall wrote: post #67
joey_bob wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if misery of the poor and inequality largely aren't the same, there might be a path where inequality increases while the quality of life of the poor also increases?

Globally, at least, we appear to be well along that path. The number of people living in extreme poverty has declined precipitously over the last few decades [0]. Philosophically, why is inequality an inherently bad thing? If the poorest among us universally had the standard of living of today’s millionaires, why should we be bothered by the existence of trillionaires or quadrillionaires? For me, it comes to a differ…

> Philosophically, why is inequality an inherently bad thing?

As you said, it's because money begets control of other people's lives. If the only thing you could do with money is live in luxury, then hardly anyone would care about it but wealth can be used to:

1. Ensure your plans never fail because you continually inject money into the equation. And by that ensure that other peoples plans always fail because they run out of money first. 2. Stymie actions and actors that you dislike. (and revenge on your enemies) 3. Materially, improve the lives of your children.

Re: Everyday robots are slowly leaving the lab

#92

Post by falcolas »

FredPret wrote: post #88
falcolas wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basic unemployment rates are at 4.6%, which is not an all time low. A 20 year low would be Oct '19, which was 3.5% Also, if you dig beyond the basic rates (for example, into the "not in the labor force, but want to be"), you will see that it's around 6M, whereas the 20 year low is closer to 4M. I'm not advocating for removing automation. I'm warning that rolling out the automation of even more jobs is going to cause…

The point is it’s not 99%, even though 99% of the population from 100 years ago would be unemployable today due to automation. Technology and culture change each other

Sure, eventually, culture will shift, and new classes of jobs will be created.

But that's not happening right now (see earlier comments about social legislation), and it won't in anything resembling "in time" to prevent more people from losing their jobs with no reasonable replacements (i.e. above-poverty line wages) in sight.

Re: Everyday robots are slowly leaving the lab

#93

Post by FredPret »

falcolas wrote: post #92
FredPret wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is it’s not 99%, even though 99% of the population from 100 years ago would be unemployable today due to automation. Technology and culture change each other

Sure, eventually, culture will shift, and new classes of jobs will be created. But that's not happening right now (see earlier comments about social legislation), and it won't in anything resembling "in time" to prevent more people from losing their jobs with no reasonable replacements (i.e. above-poverty line wages) in sight.

As someone who works flat-out to increase automation every day, I certainly hope the unlucky will be OK, but I am also convinced that they will be

Re: Everyday robots are slowly leaving the lab

#95

Post by falcolas »

FredPret wrote: post #93
falcolas wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, eventually, culture will shift, and new classes of jobs will be created. But that's not happening right now (see earlier comments about social legislation), and it won't in anything resembling "in time" to prevent more people from losing their jobs with no reasonable replacements (i.e. above-poverty line wages) in sight.

As someone who works flat-out to increase automation every day, I certainly hope the unlucky will be OK, but I am also convinced that they will be

> As someone who works flat-out to increase automation every day, I certainly hope the unlucky will be OK, but I am also convinced that they will be

It's easy to think that our actions have no consequences, or more accurately that "someone else" will take care of the consequences of the actions we take. And the more we say it to ourselves, the more we believe it.

Re: Everyday robots are slowly leaving the lab

#96

Post by FredPret »

falcolas wrote: post #95
FredPret wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who works flat-out to increase automation every day, I certainly hope the unlucky will be OK, but I am also convinced that they will be

> As someone who works flat-out to increase automation every day, I certainly hope the unlucky will be OK, but I am also convinced that they will be It's easy to think that our actions have no consequences, or more accurately that "someone else" will take care of the consequences of the actions we take. And the more we say it to ourselves, the more we believe it.

Your central thesis is that more automation = bad, at least in the short term, and should therefore be halted. I've got a problem with that.

- Why is the amount of automation we have good, and more is bad? That's an "I've got mine" approach. You're essentially saying that you're happy with your gadgets (dishwasher et al) and with the current price level and variety of consumer goods and no further improvement is needed.

- Who decides where the line between enough and too much is? A rich Westerner? Or an African without lights, running water, or a washing machine, who works by manually recycling garbage?

- How did we deal with the massive changes automation has already made to society? We're vastly better off now, why shouldn't we continue?

Re: Everyday robots are slowly leaving the lab

#97

Post by ModernMech »

nbardy wrote: post #83
ModernMech wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I agree the people who build the robots should share in the wealth of the things they create. I said nothing about seizing or violence. I said democratic ownership. That would be a process of everyone coming together and agreeing on how things work.

How do you get from an individual owning something to everyone owning it? You have to take it from the individual.

You can do lots of things that aren’t violent. You can convince them, first of all. Why isn’t that an option? Or we can compensate them. We can use social pressure. We can use the justice system. We can pass laws. There are plenty of options aside from violence.

Re: Everyday robots are slowly leaving the lab

#98

Post by jareklupinski »

foogazi wrote: post #72
guerrilla wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really depends on who owns the robots. As it is now, the richer you are the more robots you'll be able to afford and the less labor you'll need. When labor isn't in demand anymore and most people don't have robots, then most people won't have income anymore, forcing them into poverty and revolution. Robot police and military could make successful revolution impossible.

Did that happen when washing machines became available? Everyone owns washing machines now - people just move on to do other things

while living in a small apartment long ago, I had to give my weekly laundry to someone in the neighborhood who owned many many laundry robots

to their credit, they charged an incredibly fair price, and even folded

Re: Everyday robots are slowly leaving the lab

#99

Post by dang »

madamelic wrote: post #65

They should design a robot to slap them across the face every time someone suggests "Let's change how scrolling works" Please. Stop. Don't do that. It's weird and unnatural, leave scrolling alone.

"Please don't complain about website formatting, back-button breakage, and similar annoyances. They're too common to be interesting."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Post reply on HN