[pc86]

Every decade was supposed to see fewer hours working for higher pay and quality of life. It didn't happen, as business owners (not just 1% fat cats, the owners of mom and pop shops are at least as guilty as anyone, they just sucked at scaling their avarice).

So the claim that this technological revolution will be different and that it will result in a broad social safety net, universal basic income, and substantive, well-paid part-time work is a joke but not a very good one. It will be more of the same - massive concentration of wealth among those who already hold enough capital to wield it effectively. A few lucky ones who manage to create their own wealth. And those left behind working more hours for less.

[nextaccountic]

You are right that this won't happen by itself. We need another economic system, and not just hope that this time things will magically fix themselves.

[georgeplusplus]

This new economic system you want has been in use since the 70s. Everything about the economy is practically socially managed these days.

What part of printing trillions of dollars to stimulate economic productivity is somehow a free market system?

[nextaccountic]

I wasn't talking about free market, but the state of present economy. Unfortunately, those trillions of dollars aren't being distributed to the people, but instead is concentrated in the hands of the richest.

[georgeplusplus]

Im pretty sure the people got 5000$ on average in stimulus checks at the tune of 9 trillion dollars these last few months.

[c1ccccc1]

I'd agree that many business owners are blameworthy (specifically the ones who have sought monopolies for their product or monopsonies for their labour supply), but we shouldn't forget landlords. A huge fraction of people's income goes to paying rent, especially in urban areas, yet the property tax is relatively low. This leaves a fat profit margin for landlords, even subtracting off the capital cost of the building. The proliferation of "single family house" zoning hasn't helped either. Preventing the construction of high density housing drives up rents, and benefits landlords at the cost of everyone else.

[MaxBarraclough]

> those left behind working more hours for less

Doing what? Isn't the concern here that automation will push many people out of the workforce entirely?

[xfer]

Well as long as humans are more energy-efficient to deploy than robots you will always have a job. It might mean conditions for most humans will be like a century ago.

[MaxBarraclough]

> as long as humans are more energy-efficient to deploy than robots

Energy efficiency isn't relevant. When switchboard operators were replaced by automatic telephone exchanges, it wasn't to reduce energy consumption.

The question is whether an automated solution can perform satisfactorily while offering upfront and ongoing costs that make them an economically viable replacement for human workers (i.e. paid employees).

[mysterydip]

Who debugs the software when there's a problem?

[MaxBarraclough]

Professional software developers, i.e. members of one of the well-paid professions that is not under immediate threat from automation.

[reidjs]

Automated debugging software of course