[berkay]

I feel most of the discussions on this topic miss the fact that the most critical challenge is not what will happen when machines will be able to do all the work, rather it's whether we'll survive the transition. Even a small increase in unemployment can cause significant social unrest, all kinds of dangerous politics, trigger wars, etc.

[ythn]

Not this apocalyptic rhetoric again. This is reminiscent of Steven Hawking warning us that we might not survive the transition to artificial superintelligences (ASI). The problem is that ASIs are fictional.

Is there significant evidence that automation is stripping us of jobs at an unsustainable rate (i.e. we are losing jobs faster than new jobs are being created)? I am optimistic that there will be work enough to do for everyone, even with mass automation.

[sitkack]

Optimism isn't science and at the scale of the problem it is a mistake that gets to happen only once.

[ythn]

> Optimism isn't science

Pessimism isn't science either.

> and at the scale of the problem it is a mistake that gets to happen only once.

The problem doesn't even exist yet. It's a potential problem. We are speculating on potential solutions to a potential problem. There are an infinite number of potential problems. I think it's a waste to start solving them until it becomes abundantly clear there is a problem.

I don't see science happening at any level here.