Some people find their greatest pleasure in hard work and labor. My paternal grandfather was an auto mechanic. When he wasn't at work fixing cars, he was at home fixing cars, or at a local community college teaching auto mechanics. On those rare occasions he wasn't working on a car he was doing some other kind of physical work like building a patio or repairing the furniture. Not that he wasn't intellectually gifted but his mind and body seemed to mesh perfectly. His labor was an expression of his mind. #futurism
@Bill-Lee:
Well, you could still do things like that as a hobby, and not having to depend upon them for a livelihood might make them even more enjoyable.
Not that I really expect this sort of transition could happen w/o a great deal of suffering in the short term.
-Kle. #futurism
Although Iain Banks' Culture is maybe the only galactic empire I'd actually care to be a member of, I'm not buying it.
While it's fun to believe that socialism and central planning would work if only you were smart enough, I think any economic system is full of perverse incentives, emergent properties, and irrational consumers, all of which conspire to make it fail.
I also don't believe free markets actually exist, although in theory if they did exist I 'd like to think they could work.
I think it's a lot more complex than either the capitalists or the socialists would like to believe. As hard as it is to believe, what we do now may be the best compromise. Although we do keep learning where the flaws are.
Disclaimer: the only connection I have with economics is that once Mrs. Overclock wins big at Powerball, I'm going back to school to study it.
Meanwhile, call me Sol-Terrasa Chip Lord Overclock da'Ohio. #futurism
Looking over all the responses to this article, I'd have to say your's is the best. Economic systems or any system involving sapient minds are inherently perverse. #futurism
@Chip Overclock: But a system where machines do all the work isn't really "socialism", nor does it necessarily require much central planning. It's more like a post scarcity economy where the majority of stuff you could want to buy is essentially free to duplicate, like mp3 files are today...you could still have a quasi-capitalist system in place to deal with goods that are intrinsically scarce, like original artwork or areas of land. #futurism
@Hypnosifl: I'm skeptical that any post scarcity economy can be capitalistic, because it implies (to me anyway) that
- everyone has to work for a living (otherwise it's socialism), but
- all labor and probably most of the lower level white collar jobs have been automated away, so
- where does that leave the people that don't or can't work in the remaining intellectual-labor market?
When we talk about the destruction of the middle class, the mechanism though it occurs is via the loss of those very jobs which are labor intensive or lower level white collar that have either been automated or outsourced.
So I think a post-scarcity economy (if it can occur at all) is necessarily socialistic.
Disclaimer: I am not an economist. I'm just trying to understand things. #futurism
@Chip Overclock: "everyone has to work for a living (otherwise it's socialism),"
Why do you say that? Every able person is supposed to work under socialism too, the idea of most people not working doesn't really fit either contemporary capitalism or contemporary socialism. And socialism implies a large government bureaucracy to distribute money and goods, but that wouldn't need to be the case under post-scarcity--everyone could just have their own fab lab or nanotech factory to build most needed goods, just like we have personal computers that can make copies of mp3s for ourselves. #futurism
I agree entirely. The purpose of technology is to reduce, and eventually one hopes, eliminate the need to labor to survive.
Work for survival's sake is an insult to human dignity. Work for the pleasure of creation, on the other hand, is the highest possible human aspiration. #futurism
"Why shouldn't we, the human race as a whole, build machines to do the hard work we need done, and spend our time enjoying the resulting wealth?"
Because the human race wouldn't get to enjoy the resulting wealth. A small percentage of people would. The people with power and money would. Just look at the state of the world. How many children die every year because of dirty water? We have technology that could provide clean drinking water, it just doesn't make sense financially or politically to provide the resources to these people. If you are not adding to their power base, you have no value. If we did have machines that did ever thing for us, most of us would be left to die. #futurism
"Why shouldn't we, the human race as a whole, build machines to do the hard work we need done, and spend our time enjoying the resulting wealth?"
Ummm, wasn't this how the BSGverse got into all the trouble with the Toasters in the first place?
Besides, if AI's ever take over the economy, you can bet they're not going to be all friendly and Al Gore-y about it after browning our toast for us all these centuries. Oh hell naw. Expect a big honkin' Robot Foot up your gullet when THAT day comes. #futurism
the problem with this altruistic scenario is not, or at least not only, that it involves creating robot servants to do our bidding it is that it completely overlooks the fact that not every person has the right skill set to decide what needs to be done. what do we do with working class people that honestly don't have the skills or the faculty to undertake any other role? what happens to me if my only marketable skills are riviting or welding and robots take all the riviting and welding jobs if i don't have the time or ability to learn another profession? why would anyone sustain my existance with funds when i no longer have useful skills?
i think the mentality that everyone would be a manager or a scientist or a researcher or any number of other white color positions if enough of them were avaialble and there were no monitary barriers to entry is a fantasy. some individuals simply are not capable of that kind of work. who would pay for the robots that sustain these individuals in this hypothetical future? #futurism
@tetracycloide: Vonnegut addressed this in Player Piano. Basically most people without doctorate degrees were in the military or a supersized public works corps. There were still service jobs like bartenders but the people who used to be skilled workers (welders, machinists) were out of work.
The technology is hopelessly outdated but he skewers the bureaucratic manager culture. #futurism
@tetracycloide: this is a great point, and one that is rarely mentioned...not all people are the same. we've been told every day of our lives that 'you can do anything you set your mind to" etc...but this is simply not supported by the actual experiences of the human population of this planet.
some people are better than you at doing/thinking whatever...some people are not good at anything...
I think that's why I've never been able to fully accept the Star Trek universe...what the hell does everybody DO all day? #futurism
@goldfarb: Everybody is good at something--or at least has the potential to be good at something when they're young.
Poverty, soul-killing monotony (have you ever worked a factory job?), and despair at one's place in an arbitrary social hierarchy tend to blunt people's abilities.
If everybody were valued equally from the get-go, regardless of their usefulness or productivity, I think you'd find that people would do what they loved to do, and even if they were no good at it, they would get better--they would live up to much greater potential than they are currently given credit for.
It's this notion of measuring the utility of a person (or nature, or whatever) which is dehumanizing and greatly aggravates all these social differences. It's a holdover from feudalism which our culture has yet to escape.
If you compare that to most hunter-gatherer cultures, where everybody has roughly the same skills (though people are certainly better at some things than others), but there's no permanent power structure; things tend to be fairly egalitarian both politically and economically. #futurism
All well and good until the machines get tired of feeding and fapping us, and decide they want to enjoy the fruits of labor for themselves. Then we become the servants. #futurism
@smcallah: So, wait--is AI when we build a machine that behaves exactly the same way human beings do?
That would be fucking stupid. We can already make plenty of things that behave the way human beings do.
You and I, we've got all kinds of ridiculous atavisms in the way our brains work, that are designed to keep us from being eaten by tigers, or bully us into being proper members of society.
Why would you build the necessary neurochemical conditions into an AI that cause boredom? Resentment? Frustration? What would be the point of that?
Edited by braak: You are, as usual, completely correct. at 11/06/09 9:34 AM
braak: You are, as usual, completely correct. was starred
braak: You are, as usual, completely correct. was unstarred
11/06/09
This explains everything. #futurism
11/06/09
[theyarecomingfor.us] #futurism
11/06/09
11/07/09
Well, you could still do things like that as a hobby, and not having to depend upon them for a livelihood might make them even more enjoyable.
Not that I really expect this sort of transition could happen w/o a great deal of suffering in the short term.
-Kle. #futurism
11/06/09
While it's fun to believe that socialism and central planning would work if only you were smart enough, I think any economic system is full of perverse incentives, emergent properties, and irrational consumers, all of which conspire to make it fail.
I also don't believe free markets actually exist, although in theory if they did exist I 'd like to think they could work.
I think it's a lot more complex than either the capitalists or the socialists would like to believe. As hard as it is to believe, what we do now may be the best compromise. Although we do keep learning where the flaws are.
Disclaimer: the only connection I have with economics is that once Mrs. Overclock wins big at Powerball, I'm going back to school to study it.
Meanwhile, call me Sol-Terrasa Chip Lord Overclock da'Ohio. #futurism
11/06/09
Looking over all the responses to this article, I'd have to say your's is the best. Economic systems or any system involving sapient minds are inherently perverse. #futurism
11/06/09
11/07/09
11/07/09
11/07/09
- everyone has to work for a living (otherwise it's socialism), but
- all labor and probably most of the lower level white collar jobs have been automated away, so
- where does that leave the people that don't or can't work in the remaining intellectual-labor market?
When we talk about the destruction of the middle class, the mechanism though it occurs is via the loss of those very jobs which are labor intensive or lower level white collar that have either been automated or outsourced.
So I think a post-scarcity economy (if it can occur at all) is necessarily socialistic.
Disclaimer: I am not an economist. I'm just trying to understand things. #futurism
11/07/09
Why do you say that? Every able person is supposed to work under socialism too, the idea of most people not working doesn't really fit either contemporary capitalism or contemporary socialism. And socialism implies a large government bureaucracy to distribute money and goods, but that wouldn't need to be the case under post-scarcity--everyone could just have their own fab lab or nanotech factory to build most needed goods, just like we have personal computers that can make copies of mp3s for ourselves. #futurism
11/08/09
11/08/09
11/06/09
Work for survival's sake is an insult to human dignity. Work for the pleasure of creation, on the other hand, is the highest possible human aspiration. #futurism
11/06/09
11/06/09
Because the human race wouldn't get to enjoy the resulting wealth. A small percentage of people would. The people with power and money would. Just look at the state of the world. How many children die every year because of dirty water? We have technology that could provide clean drinking water, it just doesn't make sense financially or politically to provide the resources to these people. If you are not adding to their power base, you have no value. If we did have machines that did ever thing for us, most of us would be left to die. #futurism
11/06/09
Ummm, wasn't this how the BSGverse got into all the trouble with the Toasters in the first place?
Besides, if AI's ever take over the economy, you can bet they're not going to be all friendly and Al Gore-y about it after browning our toast for us all these centuries. Oh hell naw. Expect a big honkin' Robot Foot up your gullet when THAT day comes. #futurism
11/06/09
i think the mentality that everyone would be a manager or a scientist or a researcher or any number of other white color positions if enough of them were avaialble and there were no monitary barriers to entry is a fantasy. some individuals simply are not capable of that kind of work. who would pay for the robots that sustain these individuals in this hypothetical future? #futurism
11/06/09
The technology is hopelessly outdated but he skewers the bureaucratic manager culture. #futurism
11/06/09
some people are better than you at doing/thinking whatever...some people are not good at anything...
I think that's why I've never been able to fully accept the Star Trek universe...what the hell does everybody DO all day? #futurism
11/06/09
Poverty, soul-killing monotony (have you ever worked a factory job?), and despair at one's place in an arbitrary social hierarchy tend to blunt people's abilities.
If everybody were valued equally from the get-go, regardless of their usefulness or productivity, I think you'd find that people would do what they loved to do, and even if they were no good at it, they would get better--they would live up to much greater potential than they are currently given credit for.
It's this notion of measuring the utility of a person (or nature, or whatever) which is dehumanizing and greatly aggravates all these social differences. It's a holdover from feudalism which our culture has yet to escape.
If you compare that to most hunter-gatherer cultures, where everybody has roughly the same skills (though people are certainly better at some things than others), but there's no permanent power structure; things tend to be fairly egalitarian both politically and economically. #futurism
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
Also, he sounds like every program manager I've ever had. "We'll make all the decisions and let the peons do it." #futurism
11/06/09
11/06/09
For some reason, the project ended badly.
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
You know, the FAP bots will be leading the charge. #futurism
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
That would be fucking stupid. We can already make plenty of things that behave the way human beings do.
You and I, we've got all kinds of ridiculous atavisms in the way our brains work, that are designed to keep us from being eaten by tigers, or bully us into being proper members of society.
Why would you build the necessary neurochemical conditions into an AI that cause boredom? Resentment? Frustration? What would be the point of that?
11/06/09