Go get any easy legal contract.
Automation has already spit out a 20 page monument to legalese with your name and 2 or 3 specific details filled in, waiting on authorization of the various parties, done electronically of course.
Accounting/bookkeeping by automon - check.
Plug in symptoms and get diagnosis - check.
Min/max, inventory, and seasonal variability to do ordering - check.
There aren’t going to be many jobs that don’t require sweat in the near future, imo.
Unfortunately, robot defendants will have robot juries.
A bunch of tech CEOs are pushing it. Perhaps to assuage their guilt at creating the automation. I just don’t see it being anywhere near as rosy as the proponents claim. Aren’t many of the UBI experiments failing?
We’ve seen what generational, irrevocable welfare does to populations. When people have no purpose or struggle they don’t write poetry, get off drugs and have a thankful mindset. Human life needs to have struggle to have meaning.
I think the dire warnings are a bit overblown.
Given the logic of advances in production making labor irrelevant, every single technological labor-saving advancement in history should have been followed by a decrease in population (less laborers needed).
The exact opposite happens though. More productivity means bigger economies and labor shifts into new markets.
There are a significant number of people making a living streaming video games. Just let that sink in. Think about trying to explain that to someone in 1950.
There will be jobs we couldn’t even fathom 50 years from now. I’m excited quite frankly. I want robots to plant my garden and fix my stuff lmao.
I welcome our new robot overlords. It would be hard to program one to be worse than our current overlords. Plus hopefully we give them those cool robot voices which will make them better to listen to.
Yep. All production becomes robotic? Goods become extremely cheap.
Probably. Much like social healthcare in America it’s never actually been tested. Every example has seen such aggressive sabotage from within the govt the GOP Obamacare crowd is taking notes.
That being said I don’t think more than 1k a month (relatively) is sustainable. Especially if it doesn’t have work requirements.
I don’t for the uneducated. There’s never been nearly this much threat of automating average people.
Automation and AI are being pushed with the explicit goal of needing a smaller workforce. Higher productivity is a biproduct of less humans in the vast majority of industries.
There actually aren’t in an absolute sense. While there’s more than 20 years ago video game streaming doesn’t follow the 80/20 rule. It’s more like the 98/2 rule.
Rising costs, stale wages, and an ever normalizing globe don’t paint a great future outlook for America/current 1st world
Some food for thought:
I used to see this same scenario at least 3 times a week at a particular on/off ramp on my way to work, plus a good hand full of other driving patterns of lane switching, merging and ramping that have to be read and responded to over a good distance while in motion.
Not saying Ai can’t or won’t be able to figure out these situations, but it will be a while.
Yeah we aren’t there yet for sure but how much more dangerous are they even right now than the average full time texter? I wish I could say it’s just teens but when I’m on the interstate to Kansas City people over 30 are all on their phones.
Oddly enough I have wondered to myself how many lives might be saved if the maximum speed limit was 55. I realize it would have economic impacts and in some places where it was fairly deserted it might not be as big a deal.
I’m a guy who drives close to 80 in a 75 so obviously I don’t practice what I preach but still. I’ve always wondered if the trade offs for slower transportation with a reduced chance for death/massive injury are worth looking at.
I realize it would be much harder to go back than for us to have not gone forward. I’m just thinking out loud.
Math is sabotaging UBI. The west is reaching critical mass with debt and pretend fiat currencies. More entitlements are going to save us some how?
https://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/universal-basic-income-experiments-fail/
The one claim I can’t even begin to comprehend is that UBI will reduce income/wealth inequality. That’s absolutely nonsensical.
If you give someone who’s already stable $1k/month and they save that for 30 years at even a 6% rate they’ll have $980k at the end of 30 years. The truly needy or truly foolish person who spends it all every month will still have a net worth of $0.
I’d say the texter is an absolute hazard with no comparison on a risk/reward basis. An Ai system doesn’t consciously do something that puts others at risk.
It seems brazenly obvious, but the best way to remove human error is to remove the human. Kind of an “in a perfect world” proposition. A joke I read about automated systems was something like this- “In a perfectly automated machine shop there would be the machines, a machinist, and a dog. The machines to do the work and the dog to bite the machinist when he tries tinkering.”.
Probably about as much as gutting already low taxes while upping spending I guess
In a literal sense, absolutely. It’s literally a redistribution of wealth. That doesn’t mean it’ll eliminate it obviously
That’s not really how the world works for the people’s whose lives will be effected by UBI in a meaningful way.
Correct. It may double the prices of Steel Reserve 211 and cigarettes, but they will still be able to buy way more of both.
You wouldn’t know it based on the actions of the administration. If we don’t even attempt to be fiscally responsible when things are going well in the economy then I fear we never will.
Where are those people that talked about how much Obama was spending?
I’m against UBI but as long as we’re spending over a 100 million for Trump to golf why not? I mean I would way rather my taxes went to give 100 million to random people out of a phone book than pay a billionaire public servant to play golf.
Also fuck golf in general while I’m ranting. The only golf that matters is mini golf. And right now I can still kick my daughters ass at it.
That’s exactly my point. UBI would literally make the rich richer while not moving the needle for the poor (in terms of wealth). Generating the exact opposite of its stated intent.
I understand the logic of not means testing the program because:
I just don’t see the logic in handing my family $12k/year while we’re doing okay. Or Warren Buffet’s family for that matter. If we’re going to spend safety net dollars, they’d be better spent elsewhere imho.
Precisely the problem. No one wants to cut expenditure, or even freeze it, when tax receipts are increasing year on year. They absolutely won’t when those receipts shrink.
The world is getting more equal. It just that the West is losing it’s 400 year primacy and becoming worse off or at least stagnating. Also, inequality inside countries is growing.
You’ve got islands of prosperity with high paying white collar jobs surrounded by countryside with very few economic opportunities and a declining population.
Your point is fundamentally flawed. UBI would make the rich ‘marginally’ richer in the sense that I’m richer when I find a 5 dollar bill on the street. Saying I’m richer is disingenuous at best.
I see more logic in UBI than welfare. UBI could easily provide the stimulus that allows middle bracket Americans to expidite debt paying in a booming economy, and survive easier in a recession.
As opposed to welfare, that only benefits the poor and Walmart sales (hyperbole alert).
I think the plan is that those who are past stable will be paying more than they receive, so they will be saving less than they previously were.
The disc variety is pretty awesome and usually free.
I’ve never forgiven my father for trying to make me take up golf. It went down like a lead balloon, so it was just aggravating us both for a year.
