Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Top-level
http :verified:

@remenca @sjuvonen @tinker I fail to see the political thing in it. We all have electricity and laundry machines now and profit from cheap food, not just "the rich". And we cannot relax and let the machines do most of our work; it's just that our work has changed to most of us being no longer farmers. Same I expect for AI. I have no idea where AI will be most successful, but if it can produce "better art" or "more secure coders" (both not the case now, by far) or whatever, then these jobs will be replaced and we will do even harder work on things AI cannot do.

9 comments
Remença replied to http

@http @sjuvonen @tinker

I'm tempted to reply but think it will be better if you reach the conclusion by yourself, so I will only ask: You say that if AI takes over our jobs we will end doing the more menial tasks that AI cannot do. But those task must have been being done now anyway, no? So what will change?

http :verified: replied to Remença

@remenca @sjuvonen @tinker New kind of jobs and especially services came out of electrification. I don't expect that AI will take only the mental part and we end up with currently existing jobs of being hairdressers and waiters, but instead new services will emerge. 200 years ago, nobody could imagine a world with most jobs being not a farmer or craftsman.

Remença replied to http

@http @sjuvonen @tinker

I'm not a native speaker and sometimes I'm unable to convey what I meant. My question was more to point that those menial jobs, like farmer or waiter, that cannot be automatized with AI (at least in its present incarnation) are already being fulfilled by humans, so it does not matter how much AI we add to society, those jobs will still to be done all the same. Nothing will change in that regard.

Remença replied to http

@http @sjuvonen @tinker

Also, your statement of "we al have electricity and we all profit from cheap food" is not true in almost the entire planet and in around 30% of USA I think, but let's leave that aside for the moment being.

http :verified: replied to Remença

@remenca @sjuvonen @tinker If you look at the industrialization, this helped everyone worldwide and extreme poverty levels have sunken to historic lows. So yes, this indeed helped everyone.

Remença replied to http

@http @sjuvonen @tinker

No, this is not true. When industrialization is paired with capitalism it results in that the capitalist take over everything and the rest get poorer.

sciencedirect.com/science/arti

http :verified: replied to Remença

@remenca @sjuvonen @tinker The charts on en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_ shows what I meant. Your article (colonialism, capitalism) might be true, but is a different topic. Yes, when everyone is a farmer and can care for theirselves, there is almost no extreme poverty. Too off-topic to discuss further though.

Remença replied to http

@http @sjuvonen @tinker

I fail to convey my point. What I say is that what problem there is with artists and other intellectual workers losing their jobs and joining the ranks of the manual workers? Is manual work lesser than intellectual work?

Go Up