|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:No one has come close to showing the exact details on how they are going to automate the jobs either. All parts of talking about any future that is anything but exactly like the exact way it is right now always involves some level of thinking people in the future will figure out things collectively that people in the present don't really know yet. This makes no sense since jobs are getting automated already. Every company that participates in the process can presumably show you the details. You are putting up a strawman. I'm not asking for exact details of establishing an employment-free society, I'm asking for any kind of direction, description, timeline... Anything. The bar is as low as it gets but you're still failing. You might as well say that every citizen will get a unicorn and it's up to the people in the future to discover unicorns and figure out the rest.
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 08:38 |
|
|
Doctor Malaver posted:This makes no sense since jobs are getting automated already. And people live lives outside of traditional employment already right now. If you can claim one side is just prototypes of what is to come why can't you on the other?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 19:37
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:No one has come close to showing the exact details on how they are going to automate the jobs either. All parts of talking about any future that is anything but exactly like the exact way it is right now always involves some level of thinking people in the future will figure out things collectively that people in the present don't really know yet. Just about everything you can flow chart can be automated. The question is compartive cost. Tech automation competes with more traditional automation and the cost of labor.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 19:50
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:And people live lives outside of traditional employment already right now. If you can claim one side is just prototypes of what is to come why can't you on the other? I think people are arguing the shantytowns and homeless encampments are the prototypes for our future.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:And people live lives outside of traditional employment already right now. If you can claim one side is just prototypes of what is to come why can't you on the other? One side is mountains of data showing clear trends, the other side is "Eh, people will figure it out somehow". BTW I see similar conversations popping up occasionally on FB and the optimists are always without a fault IT professionals. They have it good, their close circle is also people in IT and as for the rest...  They'll manage somehow. Human race survived wars and plagues, they'll survive automation too, geez
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I think people are arguing the shantytowns and homeless encampments are the prototypes for our future. It could be, but we could have shantytowns right now, or in the iron age, or in the 1930s or any old time. Automation and technology seems to have virtually no correlation to wealth distribution. (except maybe it's better in more technologically advanced countries but probably for third variable reasons)
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
For being into tech you don't know a lot about the relationship between tech and business, even though it's been posted in this thread.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:For being into tech you don't know a lot about the relationship between tech and business, even though it's been posted in this thread. The relationship is everyone scrambling over each other to think of the grim darkest future nonstop forever. I get it. Every technology will be perfectly poised to perfectly exacerbate exactly every anxiety anyone has about economics but also change no other aspect of society in any way (unless it's some really bad way).
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:I've been looking for this one to post here for a while: OOCC you should look at this and think about what it implies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
You can't say automation will reduce the number of factory jobs, why what if something unforeseen happens and the opposite occurs! Ever thought of that?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:OOCC you should look at this and think about what it implies. I am assuming you just are posting this flow chart totally unrelated to your very recent claim that: BrandorKP posted:Just about everything you can flow chart can be automated. Or else are you suggesting that maybe corporations themselves will end up independent legal organisms that automate away the workers then automate away the managers and just end up being their own entities that rule over us without even being "real" AIs? Because that kinda actually seems like the real thing that will happen.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:It could be, but we could have shantytowns right now, or in the iron age, or in the 1930s or any old time. Automation and technology seems to have virtually no correlation to wealth distribution. (except maybe it's better in more technologically advanced countries but probably for third variable reasons) This has been brought up again and again and you are just wrong each time. Income inequality in developed economies has been drastically increasing over the last decades. It is something that is measurable and it has been measured. How can you disagree with this, outside of some idiotic conspiracy theory that the data is "manipulated"? Where I am from(Germany), there were no ghettos a generation ago. Now there are. I can see them with my own loving eyes. I can talk to people who tell me how these buildings used to look like in the 80s. Are my eyes and ears part of the global conspiracy? These effects have been clearly linked to automation and the drastic decrease in high paying office and manufacturing jobs. Running a society on lovely McJobs is just not sustainable and any better jobs have not materialized for lots of people. People bringing up poo poo like antibiotics and the green revolution that are introduced in the developing world today have nothing to do with this. The 3rd world is not going through 21th century automation, it is catching up to the 20th century and nobody itt claimed that antibiotics and hybrid seeds are a bad thing. We know that worldwide average development metrics are rising overall, it just has nothing to do with what we are talking about. GABA ghoul fucked around with this message at 21:00 on Dec 8, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
Raspberry Jam It In Me posted:Income inequality in developed economies has been drastically increasing over the last decades. increased in undeveloped countries too. Been real bad in the past and not bad at other times in the past. Almost like it's unrelated to technology or immigration or the other stuff that people point at and say "see! it's him! he stole your health insurance!" and it's exactly related to the guy that told you you don't get health insurance anymore but wants you to blame anyone but him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
There’s seems to be this ‘it’ll shake out’ approach to social problems from the optimists in the thread, sorta like how evolution works , only over a long time period, the way evolution works is through survival of the fittest leading to extinctions of the less capable. The lack of jobs is a social problem if we have no answer to what will the remaining 99.9% of people in the world do? If the answer is subsist or starve and be denied class mobility, that’s a real loving shaky start to a post job utopia. If war begins in such a situation, with nuclear weapons being employed, we could very well be a footnote statistic in the Fermi paradox rather than a continually advancing situation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
Maluco Marinero posted:The lack of jobs is a social problem if we have no answer to what will the remaining 99.9% of people in the world do? If the answer is subsist or starve and be denied class mobility, that’s a real loving shaky start to a post job utopia. No one has ever died from a lack of a job. (now you type HOW DARE YOU SAY THAT! TAKE THAT BACK. and post some statistic about how many people die from starvation or homelessness or lack of medical care or whatever, then you go on to the weird hyper capitalist take that we need to distribute "jobs" to people as some weird contrived charity instead of just giving them like, food or water or whatever or even better, making society so it's not even a situation that we "give" people food, like we don't ration out air, we just have enough of it and it's just where people need it anyway)
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
Like people didn't have "jobs" for like 99% of human history. Like even most of the time people worked in the last 2000 years the structure wasn't anything like a modern "job" and this exact formulation is absolutely not vital to human life or irreplaceable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 21:39
|
|
|
My god you’re just wilfully ignoring the point. We don’t distribute things around the world fairly as it is, which is why the elite countries are literally throwing metric tons of food into the trash while others starve. This isn’t some hyper capitalist need for everyone to have a job, it’s an extrapolation of the societal values of the country leading the charge (America), and what consequences it could have once it disenfranchises the majority of its own population. What’s to stop the powerful from disenfranchising those who remain with their power? What makes them obligated to distribute said wealth? It sure as gently caress isn’t optimism that I’ll shake out. What kind of an existence is one where capitalist ownership still exists, charity gives the rest of the world food and water, and you don’t get any say beyond that but at least you won’t die? Optimism won’t avoid that situation based on the current trajectories, America doesn’t even believe as a collective in proper universal health care, and you’re talking about America just naturally coming to the conclusion that everyone gets universal basic needs met. We’re making great strides in automation. Are those being matched by great strides in the social progress necessary for our societal system not to collapse in the face of unemployment? You say that jobs are not necessary for life, only for the current dominant social system IT IS. The only way you can better your life is through that system, otherwise you’re damned as a charity case subsisting off what you can get and no more, with little hope and optimism for the future. Assuming it’ll shake out is allowing THAT kind of life to become more common than ever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 21:52
|
|
|
What's the big deal about people wanting jobs? Why most people were serfs or slaves for centuries and we can just return to that!
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 21:53
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:increased in undeveloped countries too. Lol, that's the whole loving point. People who worry about effects of automation don't want a repeat of the Great Depression and the times when communists and fascist were smashing each other's heads in the streets with iron bars. We want actions to mitigate the bad effects of 21th century automation as much as possible. But before you can do that you first need to even admit they exist, instead of shrugging them off. quote:Almost like it's unrelated to technology or immigration or the other stuff that people point at and say "see! it's him! he stole your health insurance!" and it's exactly related to the guy that told you you don't get health insurance anymore but wants you to blame anyone but him. Lol², what does that even mean? The media is responsible for my cousin losing his truck driver job to automation, not the automation itself? What are you even talking about. People are well aware why they are stuck in McJobs and what they parents did for a job and how much they earned. Owlofcreamcheese posted:No one has ever died from a lack of a job. Yeah, just convince Nestle to hand out food and water to every poor person in India. What a brilliant plan to solve food insecurty. Why didn't anyone think of that before? Owlofcreamcheese posted:Like people didn't have "jobs" for like 99% of human history. Like even most of the time people worked in the last 2000 years the structure wasn't anything like a modern "job" and this exact formulation is absolutely not vital to human life or irreplaceable. lol³, yeah lets go back to subsistence farming. life only goes downhill after you hit 30 anyway, might as well just die. Toil that soil
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 21:53
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:What's the big deal about people wanting jobs? Why most people were serfs or slaves for centuries and we can just return to that! I've wondered if UBI will end up being a return to serfdom. You're kept barely alive, unable to change or improve your situation, just in case you are ever needed for "service" to the state.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
That's why you combine UBI with free college education. There will still be jobs that can't be automated (at least for another 20 years), but they are mostly gated by a college education.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 22:05
|
|
|
Raspberry Jam It In Me posted:Yeah, just convince Nestle to hand out food and water to every poor person in India. What a brilliant plan to solve food insecurty. Why didn't anyone think of that before? If nestle can't manage the food and water correctly then nestle shouldn't be in charge of the food and the water, the answer is not that people work 40 hours a week to be some weird inefficient trick to get nestle to give them water.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 22:11
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:If nestle can't manage the food and water correctly then nestle shouldn't be in charge of the food and the water, the answer is not that people work 40 hours a week to be some weird inefficient trick to get nestle to give them water. You don't seem to understand that the only leverage the populace currently has with Nestle is that in the first world at least, we can vote for laws that control them, and threaten collective action because of our necessity as workers. You are of course aware of what Nestle has done in countries with less power than we have right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 22:18
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:If nestle can't manage the food and water correctly then nestle shouldn't be in charge of the food and the water, the answer is not that people work 40 hours a week to be some weird inefficient trick to get nestle to give them water. Seriously, that's what I have been saying for years. Drag the Nestle CEO out into the streets and guillotine that fucker. Welcome to the party Freakazoid_ posted:That's why you combine UBI with free college education. There will still be jobs that can't be automated (at least for another 20 years), but they are mostly gated by a college education. Nah, plenty of countries in Europe still have relatively extensive welfare systems and free universities and it's not some huge game changer. They have the same problems as the US, sometimes even worse. That whole miraculous self-fulfillment economy is still lightyears away from materializing itself, if it ever will. You probably need an entire different type of people to run it than what we have now. Some kind of homo-sovieticus, if you will
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 22:19
|
|
|
Freakazoid_ posted:That's why you combine UBI with free college education. There will still be jobs that can't be automated (at least for another 20 years), but they are mostly gated by a college education. Are you sure? One of the first talks that I saw on this subject made the opposite claim, that education is not a good weapon against automation. I can't find it now but it was the head of a company that made medical software, without employing any doctors. My advice to kids these days would be to first try programming, if that fails then something vocational. Plumbers, electricians, roofers... will in the foreseeable future still be needed because you can't fix a broken pipe with software or a robot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 22:27
|
|
|
Maluco Marinero posted:You don't seem to understand that the only leverage the populace currently has with Nestle is that in the first world at least, we can vote for laws that control them, and threaten collective action because of our necessity as workers. Yeah, maybe this whole system where nestle exists was a really bad system and maybe we shouldn't have nestle or work jobs for them or have them in charge of giving us food or water. Maybe we should figure out some way to get goods and services provided to people without involving companies. Maybe that sort of crazy idea is absolutely impossible now but could be possible if we invented machines that could just provide goods and services at the cost of materials.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 22:36
|
|
|
Doctor Malaver posted:Are you sure? One of the first talks that I saw on this subject made the opposite claim, that education is not a good weapon against automation. I can't find it now but it was the head of a company that made medical software, without employing any doctors. Plumbers, electricians, roofers, etc. earn dog poo poo though(on average). Can't support a middle class lifestile + family on that. And their average wages are gonna continue to fall as more and more people with no higher education join the McJob economy. My advice for kids would be to just take up heroin.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 22:37
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Yeah, maybe this whole system where nestle exists was a really bad system and maybe we shouldn't have nestle or work jobs for them or have them in charge of giving us food or water. We already have the means to clothe the naked, feed the hungry, and heal the sick. We choose not to ( unless they can afford it ). Do you not get that?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
Raspberry Jam It In Me posted:My advice for kids would be to just take up heroin.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
NerdyMcNerdNerd posted:We already have the means to clothe the naked, feed the hungry, and heal the sick. We choose not to ( unless they can afford it ). seems like they're just mad people say "automation causes x bad thing" rather than saying "automation within the current capitalistic context causes x bad thing" every single time instead
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
I'm looking forward to the bright and shining future where every retail worker at my store gets automated out of a job and just 3D prints cars from the factory in their closet instead.Trabisnikof posted:seems like they're just mad people say "automation causes x bad thing" rather than saying "automation within the current capitalistic context causes x bad thing" every single time instead I keep thinking that I'm missing something because it seems like the argument is that rich people will just go "Robots?! Finally, we can share the wealth! Bezos, unleash the drones!" If you're a member of the working class and your only leverage in society is the labor you provide, yeah, you're going to be anxious about jobs going away.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 22:53
|
|
|
NerdyMcNerdNerd posted:I keep thinking that I'm missing something because it seems like the argument is that rich people will just go "Robots?! Finally, we can share the wealth! Bezos, unleash the drones!" "Unleash the hypno drones!"
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
It's basically the concept that if society is so altered that normal human jobs largely don't even exist anymore that social structures will also change. Like if you time traveled some guy from many hundreds of years ago and he kept objecting 2017 wouldn't work because how could you tithe crops to the king if you worked as a web developer and you can't get through that there is no king and most people don't have "crops" and that maybe taxes to the elected government has similarities but is different in a bunch of ways but he just keep saying "but if you don't have CROPS you will STARVE" and "if you don't have a KING who will protect the country?!" If everything changes so drastically that all labor is obsolete everything is going to be different. Maybe everything will be awful forever when things are different. It's possible, but it's always possible under any system for everything to be awful and not some special property that we need to keep stuff how it is now, bad parts and all on some feeling that this is the only viable system ever. If the rich guy has no customers his factory no longer makes him rich.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 23:16
|
|
|
My last tilt at the windmill: the society where everything is different because everything is automated is about 30 years away. Not 'many hundreds of years' in the future. We aren't talking star trek bullshit, we're saying that people alive today, in a few decades, will have no means of continuing to survive because they'll have no money and no job to get said money. I get what you're saying but the problem is there isn't going to be a sudden tipping point where we fall into post scarcity communism and live happily ever after because the wealthy have no incentive to bring this about. And any political progress to that effect will be glacially slow compared to the speed with which we're racing toward that outcome. Societies under such stresses tend to start massive international wars or collapse into anarchy and social cannibalism. Not to mention the added effects of a collapsing ecosystem that is irreversible even if every country in the world started applying themselves to the problem tomorrow. Like seriously just read some books, educate yourself in even some basic poo poo about how societies function, how technology has impacted past societies and especially what happens to nation states when the population as a whole is experiencing extreme hardships (hint: it starts with ww).
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 23:31
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:It's basically the concept that if society is so altered that normal human jobs largely don't even exist anymore that social structures will also change. Paradoxically, we "doomsayers" (basically, every poster here except you and another guy) are doing more to create this better future than you are. The first step to change is to make as much people as possible aware that the change is needed. Posting on a dead gay forum about it is a minuscule thing, but it's a mountain compared to "Lol you guys the society will change, don't you get it? I don't know how, I don't know when, people from the future will work it out"
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 23:31
|
|
|
OTOH it appears to me most labor economists whose job it is to track job displacement and identify its causes don't think the case for permanent technological employment is very strong. Instead this viewpoint seems to mostly be limited to a bizarre internet echo chamber alliance of doomers and technofetishists with even media looking on with only agnostic curiosity rather than the abject terror expressed in this thread.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2017 00:01
|
|
|
Your assertion is false and your understanding of who is concerned about this issue is purposely moronic.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2017 00:03
|
|
|
Alright man.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2017 00:06
|
|
|
Here is my complete argument restated as one post: automation is a normal part of all human development and there has been dozens of times that dominant jobs became obsolete and instead of being replaced in some direct 1:1 way they simply opened society up to work on newer bigger and more abstract concerns. Once one guy can manage 1000 forklifts someone comes up with projects that need 2000 fork lifts because it's possible now. Eventually we will hit some high future where that stops and "but this time robots can just literally do anything, if you think of a new job robots can already do it better than anyone alive" but at that point you are talking about some high fantasy sci-fi singularity story where you have to deliberately ignore how that would change literally every aspect of human life on earth to the point discussing anything like "jobs" misses the point of how radically altered the world would inherently be to be anywhere even near that point. Maybe we can build a robot to ask it what to do once we machines that obsolete all human labor.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2017 00:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 08:38 |
|
|
You're a moron.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2017 00:08
|
|