Post-Work Society?

tuco · **#21** by **tuco** » Mar 04, 2017 11:59 am

If that would be the case, then indeed only privileged ones would survive. We are, however, in post-work society thread dealing with challenges related to robots replacing humans on a job. From here I insist that it makes little sense for businesses to replace humans with robots and humans being unemployed and without income as businesses exist for profit not for production.

Clive Durdle · **#22** by **Clive Durdle** » Mar 08, 2017 10:15 pm

Or we could go for a utopia for realists, using appropriate and convivial technologies, building commonwealth

Chrisw · **#23** by **Chrisw** » Mar 19, 2017 11:56 pm

Well I'm with (most) of the economists - I don't see why technology should suddenly start causing a net destruction of jobs when it has never done this in the past.

Computer technology has been eliminating jobs since WW2 and at a pretty high rate for the last 40 years. But this has been balanced by the jobs it created either directly or indirectly through the increased wealth and hence spending power that automation creates.

I remember very similar debates in the 1970s, so many people were convinced that we were on the brink of a jobless future thanks to the microprocessor. If they were right it's taken a long time coming.

It's also worth bearing in mind that computer power has barely been advancing in the last decade. The recent boom in machine learning AI has been driven by huge data storage, pervasive networking and concentration of computer power in giant server farms. We aren't getting the sort of regular free increases in actual computing power that we used to get. Moore's Law as a whole will effectively end soon (probably in the next ten years).

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/116561-the-death-of-cpu-scaling-from-one-core-to-many-and-why-were-still-stuck

crank · **#24** by **crank** » Mar 20, 2017 2:54 am

We're entering a different era, where virtually all jobs can be replaced, there just aren't enough avenues for the masses to migrate to some kind of work short of some kin of make-work. At least, not without some major cultural changes, I can't see anything people can do that robots won't soon have the capability to do.

It makes a huge amount of sense for businesses to replace humans with robots, how could it not? Far less costly, far more productive, don't get sick, don't make mistakes, at least nothing like the rate humans do.

One thing to think about is that it might not be the workers that get replaced so much as the businesses. If most folk have their own machines to make most of what they want, many businesses will have no customers.

laklak · **#25** by **laklak** » Mar 20, 2017 6:14 pm

THX1138. Go to work, make colored cubes. Come home, put the colored cubes in a disposal unit. Rinse and repeat.

Keep It Real · **#26** by **Keep It Real** » Nov 19, 2017 3:47 pm

Great thread peeps.

lpetrich wrote:luxury communists.

Ooooh - sexy.

Macdoc · **#27** by **Macdoc** » Nov 19, 2017 7:45 pm

I don't see work as the issue but rather moving to a basic income model for national economies so nations are rewarded along with shareholders.
The tax dodging is a real problem in bringing the benefits of technological induced efficiencies to the benefit of society as a whole.

There will always be a segment of service work and in some respects society has moved on - ie in agriculture where only 3% feed the rest of us.

Even sex work is under tech threat tho I'm not certain of robot teeth cleaning ......

Dispersion of benefits of technology rather than "work" may be the area to focus attention.

While shelter is under predatory free for all tho.....work and universal income is very problematic and increasingly income disparity will rise.......there be dragons.

Keep It Real · **#28** by **Keep It Real** » Nov 19, 2017 7:58 pm

Well; I know you're an anthropogenic global warming champion Macdoc, and I remember, perhaps above any other lesson from my degree, my environmental economics tutor Richard O'Doherty (he was the head of the whole economics department actually) saying "Economic activity is basically bad for the environment". There's so much unnecessary economic activity going on these days IMO and I agree with you - a basic standard universal income would be very helpful in alleviating that problem as well as a host of others.

Macdoc · **#29** by **Macdoc** » Nov 19, 2017 11:16 pm

It sort of condenses down to over population .... also certain types of economic activity ...ie silva culture can have some very positive environmental benefits as can sustainable agriculture practices and diverting say predation on wild salmon stocks to farmed .....can be beneficial but also not without risks.

I'm content we have a technological civilization. I'd like to seem limits on it but have little idea of how to limit population in an imposed manner.

We can't even seem to preserve the elephants sucessfully.

We are an epic pest.

The only good thing is seeing places like Japan and Germany nearly in demographic freefall. Japan is an interesting experiment...

Macdoc · **#30** by **Macdoc** » Nov 20, 2017 2:09 am

We should all be working a four-day week. Here’s why
Owen Jones
Ending life-sapping excessive hours was a pioneering demand for the labour movement. For the sake of our health and the economy we need to revisit it

Thursday 16 November 2017 01.00 EST Last modified on Thursday 16 November 2017 09.07 EST

Imagine there was a single policy that would slash unemployment and underemployment, tackle health conditions ranging from mental distress to high blood pressure, increase productivity, help the environment, improve family lives, encourage men to do more household tasks, and make people happier. It sounds fantastical, but it exists, and it’s overdue: the introduction of a four-day week.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... urs-labour

Keep It Real · **#31** by **Keep It Real** » Nov 20, 2017 2:23 am

Godamn it so much to do...drunk now mac...ego supremacy competition (player hating/perhaps even pseudo sadism) seems like the no.1 problem to me right now....maybe global warming is worse...dunno...must work harder.

Macdoc · **#32** by **Macdoc** » Feb 25, 2018 11:08 pm

Some real life in the experimental towns

From ‘barely surviving’ to thriving: Ontario basic income recipients report less stress, better health
The three-year pilot project, which began last summer, is testing whether no-strings-attached cash support can boost health, education and housing for people living in poverty.

more

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2018/0 ... ealth.html

Matthew Shute · **#33** by **Matthew Shute** » Feb 26, 2018 12:22 pm

Excellent, another promising Basic Income experiment.

As well as taking people from barely getting by to thriving, lifting people up to the level where they can be economically active helps to stimulate economies, strangely enough. Who woulda thunk?

The "no-strings" nature of UBI means we could do away with lumbering bureaucracies that force people to jump through hoops to qualify for a payment, one saving that could offset costs. UBI also means that there's never an extra incentive not to work, which can happen with some current welfare models. Nobody loses the payment by finding employment.

Matthew Shute · **#34** by **Matthew Shute** » Feb 26, 2018 12:52 pm

Researchers from a U.S. think-tank have released a report detailing how a universal basic income could impact the overall economy. Based on their research, a UBI of $1,000 per citizen per month could help the economy grow by the trillions in just eight years.
https://futurism.com/new-report-claims- ... -trillion/

laklak · **#35** by **laklak** » Feb 26, 2018 8:59 pm

An extra two large for me and the missus certainly wouldn't go amiss.

Matthew Shute · **#36** by **Matthew Shute** » Feb 27, 2018 12:12 pm

crank wrote:We're entering a different era, where virtually all jobs can be replaced, there just aren't enough avenues for the masses to migrate to some kind of work short of some kin of make-work.

As CGP Grey said, it's different this time.

A relevant data point I saw today...

The nation's top lawyers recently battled artificial intelligence in a competition to interpret contracts — and they lost.
https://mashable.com/2018/02/26/ai-beat ... WabO6IhkqG

For anyone who thinks that automation will put truck drivers and retail workers out of jobs, but the professions are safe, think again.

laklak · **#37** by **laklak** » Mar 01, 2018 5:18 am

Politicians are safe, no AI would ever be so venal and self-serving.

lpetrich · **#38** by **lpetrich** » Mar 01, 2018 6:39 am

laklak wrote:Politicians are safe, no AI would ever be so venal and self-serving.

I wouldn't be too sure about that. If an AI system comes across Machiavelli's The Prince...

Keep It Real · **#39** by **Keep It Real** » Mar 16, 2018 9:45 pm

Reports that robots, automation and artificial intelligence are going to put millions of us out of work may sound troubling, but should we believe them? That largely depends on whether we're technology optimists or pessimists. In our Future of Work series we look at how jobs might change in the future.

Don't what the whole "adapt or die" tagline is about...as if the unemployed automatically die :eh:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43259906

jamest · **#40** by **jamest** » Mar 16, 2018 10:38 pm

There are some jobs which are utterly immune to robot takeover. For instance, any psychology-based job, since a robot can never know what it is like to have emotions. Metaphysicists too.

Post-Work Society?

Re: Post-Work Society?

Ads by Google

Re: Post-Work Society?

Re: Post-Work Society?

Re: Post-Work Society?

Re: Post-Work Society?

Re: Post-Work Society?

Re: Post-Work Society?

Ads by Google

Re: Post-Work Society?

Re: Post-Work Society?

Re: Post-Work Society?

Re: Post-Work Society?

Re: Post-Work Society?

Re: Post-Work Society?

Re: Post-Work Society?

Re: Post-Work Society?

Ads by Google

Re: Post-Work Society?

Re: Post-Work Society?

Re: Post-Work Society?

Re: Post-Work Society?

Re: Post-Work Society?

Who is online