|
I don't understand why software would care about the vast majority of people who, in all likelihood, would have little to "offer" this Libertopia. In the real world, technological advancements have been leading to tremendous amounts of job losses, as technology's benefit is in making interactions more efficient and cutting out the middle-man, which includes bureaucratic positions, communications positions, etc etc. The more that technology does for us, the less need we have of all these people that we have in the system, so I just don't see where we think people are going to go, or what this software world is going to put together to offer people who don't have much to offer that system. In our current world, we have things like welfare and make-work jobs so that even if people aren't able to produce offerings to get them out of poverty, they can subsist. But I have a strong feeling that a world run by software wouldn't bind itself to these views of morality, especially when technology can provide exact measurements of how little poor people have to offer this system. In fact, this is the conversation we need to have nominally around the country (and even the world), and I definitely won't be trusting a software bureaucracy until we've had the question answered by humans: What do we do with the poor when we've eliminated even the potential for them to hold jobs? I mean we can put people in micro-apartments and give them highly-efficient commutes to their work-pod, but we have a planet of 7 billion people and the ultimate conclusion of technology will have to include a realization that the vast majority of people will have nothing to put into this system and are instead subsisting for the sake of subsisting. RIght now inefficiencies in globalization is what gives people room to exist and subsist - if efficient robots in the most fertile parts of the planet could produce all the food we would need, what would we need with farmers? I have a pretty good feeling what people like Balaji Srinivasan would think we should do - which is why I don't think letting silicon valley libertarians design said system would be a very good idea. I do think it's inevitable, but I would push back on it as long as possible to make sure we figure out what to do with all these people when we do get to these issues. Films like Wall-E solved it by only having a few humans living in the spaceships, which is a fine solution for the 1% of us already at the top, but what about those of us who are poor and don't have the kind of skills a software-run world would find useful?
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2013 18:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 16:39 |
|