Technological unemployment is (almost) here

[giantdragon]

Tragically, even adding those numbers you'd run short of reaching communism's death toll -- yes it was that bad.

I very doubt you can provide proof about this statement.

fewer welfare programs, less debt; teaching people how to be responsible adults and take care of themselves once again instead of running to the "nanny" every time they have a problem.

I can bet that real unemployment would be 60-80% right after these measures implemented, even without advent of the robots.

While before the advent of the Internet writers could starve until they got a book published and painters had to die before their paintings would sell, these days almost anyone can become a "star". People make money with Youtube videos about the silliest of topics; e-books on Amazon that aren't even edited properly; musicians go on iTunes and ten-year-olds publish game apps for mobile devices. If anything, we're seeing fewer millionaire "rockstars" but instead regular people making smaller amounts of money individually, yet in much greater numbers. They have smaller but more loyal audiences, they cover niche markets with targeted products and they constantly invent new forms of expression. The biggest threat to creativity (and making money out of it) is not automation -- instead we find, yet again,

Real situation is opposite and opportunities to make money with creativity will only diminish as market saturates. 
http://techcrunch.com/2014/01/13/making-apps-pay-gets-harder/

statist power coming down with restrictions and regulations, this time in the form of IP law and its many ugly heads.

This is true - copyright and patent laws are strongly biased in favor of big corporations.

[1715357335]

1715357335

[mrtg]

You are repeating standard argument of the Luddite fallacy's supporter. But its not the law of physics that guaranteed to last forever.

You haven't countered that argument with anything but a lack of imagination. Just because you can't imagine the ways the jobs will change to evolve and adapt to a changing society does not mean it won't happen.

Neither facts or logic have been brought to bear here.  Your imagination that jobs will change in a way which provides something like full employment (if you even do so imagine) does not lend credence to that view.  He countered the argument by observing that it was without foundation.  You countered that argument with your imagination.  If the foundation is your imagination, I wonder how much load it will bear.  Will it withstand a storm of empirical evidence, or an earthquake of logic?  If so, is it a monument or a blight?

The facts here are quite simple:
1. Historic fact
2. Current level of development in science and technology

Anything apart from this is conjecture since nobody can predict the future, of course. The "Luddite fallacy" argument is that we have encountered similar situations in the past and we've already documented the way society can move past them. Given the current state of events, we can already envision some of the solutions that will be used to go over the next step as well. The counter to that was that even though it worked in the past it will not work in the future any more, because a less labor intensive economy could not absorb the lost jobs. The idea that all labor intensive or not jobs that could ever exist have already been discovered and there is no way for some completely novel ones to appear in the future (despite evidence to the contrary in our historical data) is nothing but an argument from incredulity:
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity

Again, anything can happen in the future, we're all interpreting existing facts to come up with possible scenarios, some might pan out while others won't. However the argument that whatever problems we are facing will be solved by surrender to world-wide communism is anything but an earthquake of logic.

Amounts of money inadequate to alleviate abject poverty in almost all cases.  Not relevant to the question "how will people survive".  Relevant, perhaps to the question "how will wealthy people self-actualize".

But then you have all these armies of robots making tons of products with utmost efficiency. Prices would in such a case drop to levels where a small amount of money might well be enough for a simple existence.

Centralized solutions to wealth inequality are pretty terrible in their unintended (sometimes intended) consequences.  Decentralized mechanisms have been offered; often in the alt-coin space, this goal is pursued, if never adequately.  A (1) decentral structural change which creates enough incentives to gain viral opt-in, without (2) creating a new kleptocracy, and (3) facilitating enough dispersion of wealth to enable humanity to avoid dystopic outcomes, seems desirable to me.  Bitcoin offers the first, but does nothing to address the remaining points.

Fully agreed on the above. I actually believe crypto-currency will not be enough to reach all the goals stated above, we will need other changes in society regarding education, politics and values. It's a great step and a way to influence things in that direction, but not the solution in itself.

Tragically, even adding those numbers you'd run short of reaching communism's death toll -- yes it was that bad.

I very doubt you can provide proof about this statement.

Communism -- some say around 100 million, others go much higher to 150 million:
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/4230/so_how_many_did_communism_kill
http://www.scottmanning.com/content/communist-body-count/

Great Depression in the US -- between 7.5 million and 10 million:
http://www.cherada.com/articulos/10-million-americans-disappeared-during-the-great-depression-time

European Colonialism -- difficult to find estimates; 10 million in Congo, a couple million elsewhere in Africa:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scramble_for_Africa

Slavery in the US --  huge variance in numbers, from 6 to 60 million:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade#Human_toll

Can you see that even considering the lowest estimation on one side and the highest on the other you're still short about 18 million? That's the population of a medium-sized country...

However this should not in any way be construed as an attempt to downplay the seriousness of those events -- they are all, together with the wars that killed hundreds of millions more, a horrific tragedy and a wound in our collective consciousness. All I want to point out is that communism managed to outdo them all.

Real situation is opposite and opportunities to make money with creativity will only diminish as market saturates.
http://techcrunch.com/2014/01/13/making-apps-pay-gets-harder/

That is an interesting link, thanks for sharing. I would note however that one of the points made in the article is that "freemium" apps which are free to download but offer in-app purchases are actually on the rise; a glance in the "top grossing" category in any app-store will reveal the same -- the most income is produced by otherwise "free" apps. It also talks about new advertising avenues -- via word-of-mouth, reviews and social media -- becoming more important. I would say that is the market adjusting and diversifying -- remember that it is still a very young market with a lot of potential for growth, and this will mean a large amount of volatility. Also, "less than $1250 per app per day" does not sound too shaby for a small developer; it might not entice a million-dollar 100 person development team, but for a single developer that's gold!

[giantdragon]

Communism -- some say around 100 million, others go much higher to 150 million:
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/4230/so_how_many_did_communism_kill
http://www.scottmanning.com/content/communist-body-count/

Stats in the U.S. traditionally biased against communism, so I think you can reduce this amount to half or even quarter.
And don't forget to add to the capitalism's count the victims of Benito Mussolini fascist regime.

Also, "less than $1250 per app per day" does not sound too shaby for a small developer; it might not entice a million-dollar 100 person development team, but for a single developer that's gold!

May be $1250 per day for a superstar app is good, but $0 for other apps in the same category doesn't look so!

[giantdragon]

Google chairman Eric Schmidt have admitted existence of the problem on World Economic Forum in Davos.

Mr. Schmidt's comments follow warnings from some economists that the spread of information technology is starting to have a deeper impact than previous periods of technological change and may have a permanent impact on employment levels.

He said that governments needed to invest in education systems to improve skill levels and human cognition. "It is pretty clear that work is changing and the classic nine to five job is going to have to be redefined," he said. "Without significant encouragement, this will get worse and worse."

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101360659

[johnyj]

Actually this phenomenon has long been aware in ancient china, there was a saying: When the hunting is done, the hares are finished, then the dogs will be cooked for the meal

The ultimate question is: Suppose that a group of people are capable of producing all the things that human needs, what is the motivation that they still keep all the other humans on the planet? Purely depends on their kindness?

Historically over-production usually caused a war which wiped out excessive amount of humans. But now when a controlled war is no longer feasible due to nuclear weapons, what is a peaceful way to solve such a problem?

Current resolution is to greatly reward these people so that they spare a few coins for the rest of the human to survive, while they can accumulate majority of the wealth on the planet.  But this only works temporarily, eventually they would have no more wealth to accumulate

[giantdragon]

Current resolution is to greatly reward these people so that they spare a few coins for the rest of the human to survive, while they can accumulate majority of the wealth on the planet.  But this only works temporarily, eventually they would have no more wealth to accumulate

99% won't ever agree that bourgeoisie and lucky techies must have "greatly reward" while others have to live on the pauper's support that provide only water and bread, so almost certainly will start the war against capital owners if the state won't have fair redistribution scheme.

This is just a beginning what will be:
http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/01/protestors-show-up-at-the-doorstep-of-google-self-driving-car-engineer/

[TCraver]

Of possible interest to those posting to this topic:
      https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=430364.new#new
It's a very preliminary proposal for an altcoin that would generate a guaranteed income for anyone.

This would do an end-run around governments and the whole "Tax some to pay others" mess.

[giantdragon]

Of possible interest to those posting to this topic:
      https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=430364.new#new
It's a very preliminary proposal for an altcoin that would generate a guaranteed income for anyone.

This would do an end-run around governments and the whole "Tax some to pay others" mess.

Nobody of the capital owners will accept these altcoins IMHO.

[toomsie]

The truth is there are loads of things that need to get done, and plenty of things that you need to get done. But of you employ somone else do do it and don't comply with the thousands of laws, you go to jail.  Government get in the way.

[giantdragon]

But of you employ somone else do do it and don't comply with the thousands of laws, you go to jail. 

Do you mean labor laws, e.g. minimum wage, safety on workplace, limit on working hours, child labor prohibition etc?
If you repeal them, there will spiral to the bottom resulting in the conditions existed in Medieval feudalism. Would you like it?

[aminorex]

Do you mean labor laws, e.g. minimum wage, safety on workplace, limit on working hours, child labor prohibition etc?
If you repeal them, there will spiral to the bottom resulting in the conditions existed in Medieval feudalism. Would you like it?

Health and safety laws, when reasonable, serve a useful social function, preventing exploitative inhumane practices.  Child labor laws in some cases may prevent exploitative and inhumane practices, but often serve to prevent young people from having opportunities to escape poverty.  Poverty is often fatal.  Minimum wage laws mostly just cause jobs to get outsourced, or left undone, and reduce growth while increasing unemployment.  Collective bargaining is a much more efficient way to raise the market value of labor, in the long run, albeit not without its complications and struggles. 

Rather than comparing obsolete historical circumstances, you should be comparing modern jurisdictions with different labor standards but similar economies.  If we stop using printing presses due to the advent of computers, does that mean we are condemning ourselves to Black Plague? That something is a modern practice does not mean other aspects of modern life are crucially dependent on that practice.

[Rassah]

Communism -- some say around 100 million, others go much higher to 150 million:
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/4230/so_how_many_did_communism_kill
http://www.scottmanning.com/content/communist-body-count/

Stats in the U.S. traditionally biased against communism, so I think you can reduce this amount to half or even quarter.

Stats in US about the harms of slavery are also traditionally biased, so you can reduce the other amount to half or even quarter, too (source - same as yours)

Also, relevant: http://www.xkcd.com/1319/

[practicaldreamer]

I very doubt you can provide proof about this statement.

Communism -- some say around 100 million, others go much higher to 150 million:
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/4230/so_how_many_did_communism_kill

Some say around 100 million ? Who - thecommentator.com ? They are hardly a reputable source are they ?

I have just realised that quoting/referencing third party's on internet forums as a source of authority is a completely useless practice.

What we should do really is quote our own credentials and our self interest in that over which we are passing opinion. But of course - thats not going to happen is it ?

All I know for sure is that, as JK Galbraith once said, " The fortunate find virtue in that which perpetuates their good fortune"


From www.thecommentator.com   - " What We Believe :    The West has a huge and dramatic fight on its hands. Not just from the outside, but from the inside too. Our economics are in the tank. Budgets are bloated, taxes are too high, existential threats to our interests at home and abroad have rarely ever been more concerning. We seek to shed light on these core 'civilisational' issues.

We argue that now is not the time for big government; it's not the time to bow before tyrants, dictators or terrorists; and it's not the time to abandon our only true ally in the Middle East: Israel. "




Call me old fashioned - but to me that is not a reliable, impartial or perspicacious source of information  

[Rassah]

Some say around 100 million ? Who - thecommentator.com ? They are hardly a reputable source are they ?

I have just realised that quoting/referencing third party's on internet forums as a source of authority is a completely useless practice.

What we should do really is quote our own credentials and our self interest in that over which we are passing opinion. But of course - thats not going to happen is it ?

Ooh, I can do that!

So, communism: confiscated my family's acres of land (I guess to do collectivist farming), confiscated my family's mansion to turn it into a kindergarten (making us nearly homeles), had my great-grandparents lined up against the wall and shot, persecuted by grandfather as he ran and stayed hidden around the country, hoping to get him shot too, killed off a few family members on the other side of the family in the civil war, and resulted in the remaining survivors of my family under near constant surveilance, and frequent attempts at blackmail to try to get us to spy on each other. We went from a mostly well off royal family, to a mostly dead and struggling to survive (but stil royal) family. Worse yet, everyone else we knew ended up just as poor, broken, and miserable as we were, so at least everyone was equal (equally poor, broken, and miserable).

Capitalism: allowed us to start with $300 and janitoreal jobs, and got us to the point where we own multiple rental properties, have a house with enough rare art and old collectibles that could make it a small museum, and easily over $1mil in assets, all within about 20 years. And that's only my parents.

So, even if we don't use the total numbers and just use our own credentials and  self interest:

Communist death toll: ~8
Capitalist death toll: 0

Ok, your turn. How has your family or people you know been killed by capitalism?

[giantdragon]

@Rassah, history repeats itself and soon there may be new civil war if no action taken to resolve tech joblessness problem! This time it can be 1000x times bloodier than it had been during Russian revolution and civil war.
Also you won't have any chances to start with janitorial job in the countries where capitalist and tech elites will save the power because they simply won't need human to do these entry-level jobs!

[Rassah]

@Rassah, history repeats itself and soon there may be new civil war if no action taken to resolve tech joblessness problem! This time it can be 1000x times bloodier than it had been during Russian revolution and civil war.

If that happens, supply of labor goes down, demand for labor goes up, whatever jobs still remain have their wages go way up. Also, one way in which history won't repeat itself is that people with money (in bitcoin) will actually be able to leave and take their money with them, instead of having all of it seised at the border.

Also you won't have any chances to start with janitorial job in the countries where capitalist and tech elites will save the power because they simply won't need human to do these entry-level jobs!

No, that's true. But likewise we won't need to start with janitorial jobs, because all our money won't get confiscared at the border, with us only being able to take $300 with us.

[giantdragon]

If that happens, supply of labor goes down, demand for labor goes up, whatever jobs still remain have their wages go way up.

This will happen only if the unemployed will be killed but not the bourgeoisie and tech elite (as history shows, it is very unlikely).

Also, one way in which history won't repeat itself is that people with money (in bitcoin) will actually be able to leave and take their money with them, instead of having all of it seised at the border.

But likewise we won't need to start with janitorial jobs, because all our money won't get confiscared at the border, with us only being able to take $300 with us.

Do you really think the Internet will continue working and/or Bitcoin/TOR/anonymizers won't be blocked after revolutionary forces will take the power!?

[heretolearn]

There is still time guys .. chill.

[Vandroiy]

There is still time guys .. chill.

And once there isn't, chances are no unaugmented human will have a say in what happens next. Their productivity would be so low in comparison that they can't even revolt efficiently.

History is not a useful comparison as the past elites weren't that much smarter than their followers. True higher intelligence is an insurmountable opponent. Numbers usually don't play a role when facing a sufficient gap in knowledge and technology.

A well-educated human is valued at hundreds of uneducated humans today, at almost any task, civil or military. I have no idea what an intelligent entity with a brain/processing hardware of the size of a skyscraper would be valued at. It might be able to stop any and all attackers just by talking to them after reverse-engineering their thought patterns, or by creating a virus that kills them, or by manipulating some of them to fight the rest, or by altering society to depend on it, or any of millions of other methods.

Bottom line: we have little idea what happens if machines surpass humans in general mental tasks. It's quite possible that the first one undergoes an intelligence explosion and seals the fate of the solar system or more. If that happens, I just hope the person who programs it chooses the goals wisely.

[giantdragon]

I have no idea what an intelligent entity with a brain/processing hardware of the size of a skyscraper would be valued at. It might be able to stop any and all attackers just by talking to them after reverse-engineering their thought patterns, or by creating a virus that kills them, or by manipulating some of them to fight the rest, or by altering society to depend on it, or any of millions of other methods.

If you have ever taken an AI course you must know that developing an intelligent agent (robot) able to "live" in the competitive environment is much more complicated task than developing the AI for "friendly" conditions. Respectivly, the robots replacing most workers in manufacturing and services will appear decades earlier than military robots able to suppress riots the of unemployed.