|
Doctor Malaver posted:I work as a project manager and I can't even begin to imagine how my job could be automated. I have to be a psychologist and a product designer and make decisions from marketing to technology. Either I'm deluding myself or the companies that I've been working for are too small and chaotic for that kind of automation. You wont come into work one day and find yourself be replaced by PROJECT MANAGER 3000, you will gradually see small parts of your job be automated. Or perhaps not even your own job, but the jobs of the people you are managing as part of your own job. Until a moment comes were you really arent that necessary anymore.
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2016 13:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 05:37 |
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Because the software exists right now? And we have like 5% unemployment. Yes, but that 5% is anheavily manipulated number. Pretty much every job created during obama's presidency is low-paid and part time. Millions upon millions of people are stuck in poo poo jobs and are pretty much one accident, like losing their job, away from being homeless.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2016 14:17
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I think this has come up before but is the 2010s the ideal peak of human society or is there any automation technologies from earlier times we should have banned/restricted/made illegal? All jobs should be automated so we can live in a society based on fully automated luxury gay space communism. Unfortunately capitalism still lives so all profits get sucked out of the system into the hands of the few, and thus we end up in a situation that job protection might be a good thing.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2017 16:55
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 08:44
|
|
|
ColoradoCleric posted:How does a currency have any value when you're just giving it away to burn through resources? What a dumb argument. Currently you get currency in exchange for productivity, that wont change with a UBI, you just get part of societies total output as a UBI.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2017 13:26
|
|
|
A Wizard of Goatse posted:45% of Sweden's GDP is in exports (mostly traditional heavy industry) and they've got a 6.5% unemployment rate; the population as a whole is massively economically productive (that is, they produce things of value, not that they consume a lot, which is not productive) and the welfare state diverts a small percentage of their productivity to maintain them as such. This is completely unlike a situation where welfare is primarily directed towards supporting a large and growing class that produces nothing of value, ever. Rich people have lots of money, but its value ultimately derives from their stake in actual industry making things and providing services, that doesn't mean you can write yourself a check for a billion dollars and become rich too. It doesnt matter if is 1 person/computer producing everything or 100 million people. Its not about how many people are productive, but about the total amount produced. If that stays the same with less people than yes, you can give those people who now do nothing the same amount of money as they got before without any wealth loss for society (well except for the capitalist i guess). In fact it might be better to give it to those people so they can continue to consume.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
Sethex posted:That doesn't work in capitalism.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2017 09:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 05:37 |
|
|
Give it 5 years and it will do everything needed to make a burger. Or multiple robots combined will do it all.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2017 08:07
|
|