Live data from Hacker News

We Need a New Deal to Address the Economic Risks of Automation

techcrunch.com

1–10 of 108 posts

Re: We Need a New Deal to Address the Economic Risks of Automation

#2
Automation is the natural consequence of computer technology, which is a natural consequence of human intelligence. Any effort to fight or control automation is doomed.

Believe it or not, the future is gonna be much different and you either accept it, or get crushed by the power of The Machine.

Re: We Need a New Deal to Address the Economic Risks of Automation

#3
post #2

Automation is the natural consequence of computer technology, which is a natural consequence of human intelligence. Any effort to fight or control automation is doomed. Believe it or not, the future is gonna be much different and you either accept it, or get crushed by the power of The Machine.

Ok. What do we do during the transition while millions of blue collar workers take to blaming brown people for job losses?

EDIT - seems I could have done a better job with the satire here. There have been several reports that Donald Trump's Mexican wall is misguided and that the major driver of job losses these days is increased effeciency due to automation.

Re: We Need a New Deal to Address the Economic Risks of Automation

#4
post #2

Automation is the natural consequence of computer technology, which is a natural consequence of human intelligence. Any effort to fight or control automation is doomed. Believe it or not, the future is gonna be much different and you either accept it, or get crushed by the power of The Machine.

I don't think in the article is suggesting that we should "fighting or controlling" it, but, taking it for granted that is going to happen, find a way to address its consequences.

Re: We Need a New Deal to Address the Economic Risks of Automation

#5
I think i've read one too many articles on the "oh no, the robots will flip our burgers. Let's make burgers that's unflippable by robots so we can keep doing it." Even people who don't mind working, maybe loves working will be okay with automating things and moving on. They will have other things in their hobby list/ bucket list/ garage that they have been meaning to work on.

I understand these articles are still needed/useful for people not yet aware about this issue so it's not a criticism of the article but of myself.

Re: We Need a New Deal to Address the Economic Risks of Automation

#7
post #4
post #2

Automation is the natural consequence of computer technology, which is a natural consequence of human intelligence. Any effort to fight or control automation is doomed. Believe it or not, the future is gonna be much different and you either accept it, or get crushed by the power of The Machine.

I don't think in the article is suggesting that we should "fighting or controlling" it, but, taking it for granted that is going to happen, find a way to address its consequences.

"Bill Gates suggested we tax the robots in order to slow the progress of automation and re-direct money toward human-service jobs that require a level of empathy and compassion that artificial intelligence cannot yet offer."

The article does hint at the possible need for control though.

Re: We Need a New Deal to Address the Economic Risks of Automation

#8
As usual the chorus will be something along the lines of:

"Nothing to see here. We've had these shifts before and more jobs will be created than lost and people will transition to new jobs etc..."

To which the response is, yes that's true, however never have we seen it at such a pace. Shifts are now likely to happen multiple times in a single working lifetime, as opposed to once a generation (1960-2000 - Solid State & industrial automation) or once every third generation (1800-1920 - Industrialization).

From years 0-1800 you could expect that your children would probably do the same job you and your grandfather did (more than likely farming). From 1950's on, children would likely go into a different line of work than their parents were in. Now it's common for a parent to have multiple careers with completely different skill sets and so on for their children.

This would be all well and good if one of these options were true:

1. People could adapt as quickly as advances in machine processes are changing (the outcome of which obviates machine efficiencies)

2. There was flexibility in the system which would allow people the time to adapt

The only other way to keep people around and not in poverty conditions would be to decouple human needs from business processes - which is effectively what UBI is trying to do in a roundabout way. I think has interesting long term outcomes, namely that a few dominant machine organizations would feed, clothe, house and train the population.

Re: We Need a New Deal to Address the Economic Risks of Automation

#9
I disagree with the author here on UBI. The root of the issue goes deeper than deciding to prop up job markets so that there is enough supply of jobs to meet the demand. Based on the arguments in the article, this can only be a temporary fix; eventually automation will take over too many jobs for every person to have one—or at the very least, human labor is a commodity that eventually becomes so cheap that the laborers cannot survive.

The author seems to be solidly in the 'work == virtue' camp and argues that UBI decreases the incentive to work. While partly true, the REAL work we want done is not menial, but innovative, and leads to the next big breakthroughs that increase productivity and eliminate even MORE jobs. This is capitalism, no? UBI is there so everyone still survives to have a crack at it, if they want to.

This becomes an ethical question quite quickly: does being born make you worthy of survival?

Re: We Need a New Deal to Address the Economic Risks of Automation

#10
post #3
post #2

Automation is the natural consequence of computer technology, which is a natural consequence of human intelligence. Any effort to fight or control automation is doomed. Believe it or not, the future is gonna be much different and you either accept it, or get crushed by the power of The Machine.

Ok. What do we do during the transition while millions of blue collar workers take to blaming brown people for job losses? EDIT - seems I could have done a better job with the satire here. There have been several reports that Donald Trump's Mexican wall is misguided and that the major driver of job losses these days is increased effeciency due to automation.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN