| HN Mirror

Y	Hacker News new \| ask \| show \| jobs


	by jgtrosh 225 days ago
	The game looks fun and pretty, but am I the only one to get triggered by the “replaced” naming? All of these eager claims to replace humans feel violently antisocial. (And in many instances hypocritical if coming from people who defensively claim “it's just a tool”…)

5 comments

pixl97 225 days ago

>All of these eager claims to replace humans feel violently antisocial

Then I suggest you dig ditches with a spoon.

The problem isn't replacing human labor in itself. It's a few hording all the resources and leaving the rest to starve, aka the luddites and why they revolted.

If you had a way to live, then boutique farming, or whatever would be leisure if you chose to do that.

link

sebstefan 225 days ago

Farming isn't artistry, society benefits from its automation

Is it still bad if the farmer gets replaced?

link

cies 225 days ago

I like the word farmer to be replaced.

It usually means EITHER land cultivator OR animal exploiter.

My choice of word maybe gives away that I'm not so okay with the latter category. While I think the first category is doing God's work on earth feeding the ever growing human population.

link

9rx 225 days ago

> My choice of word maybe gives away that I'm not so okay with the latter category.

I initially figured that use of the cultivator was also intended to be in the same vein, as seen by the no-till advocates. I was quite surprised that you later call it God's work. Mouldboard mafia representing.

link

tantalor 225 days ago

What's so special about artists?

Farming is an ancient human practice. It would be a huge loss to society if we forgot how to do it with our hands, without automation.

link

sebstefan 224 days ago

>What's so special about artists?

People like doing it

If you automate away jobs people like, their labor gets re-routed to other things they don't like. Like not being able to sell illustrations and turning to being a cashier

link

abdullahkhalids 225 days ago

I don't disagree with your central point, humans were creating art hundreds of thousands of years before they started farming at large scales. Creating art is a fairly fundamental aspect of our species.

link

9rx 225 days ago

> Is it still bad if the farmer gets replaced?

A farmer is an owner of a farm. To replace the farmer you would have to completely eliminate the entire concept of human ownership that we hold. Socialist or other community ownership structures around farms wouldn't do as that would not replace the farmer, it would make everyone a farmer.

> society benefits from its automation

Economies benefit from its automation. It's far less clear if societies benefit. Farm work is hard, but there is a sense of accomplishment when it is done, which is good for the psyche. The never ending "bullshit" jobs that most people seem to find themselves in nowadays has not lead to happiness.

link

sebstefan 225 days ago

> To replace the farmer you would have to completely eliminate the entire concept of human ownership that we hold.

Why?

> Economies benefit from its automation. It's far less clear if societies benefit. Farm work is hard, but there is a sense of accomplishment when it is done, which is good for the psyche. The never ending "bullshit" jobs that most people seem to find themselves in nowadays has not lead to happiness.

"Farming is good for the psyche" doesn't hold to the suicide rates.

Automate hard jobs where people kill themselves or destroy their bodies, future generations get jobs that are easier on the body and they get to live healthy longer. It's not rocket science!

Why aren't you a farmer?

link

9rx 225 days ago

> Why?

I already attempted to explained why. If there is a gap I overlooked or if something wasn't made clear, you're going to have to try and work with me with greater specificity.

> "Farming is good for the psyche" doesn't hold to the suicide rates.

Farmers are known to have high suicide rates, but being the owner doesn't imply doing the work. That is the role of the farmhand. I cannot find anything to suggest that suicide rates are high for farmhands.

> Why aren't you a farmer?

I don't understand your question. I am a farmer.

link

sebstefan 225 days ago

Ok I get the confusion

The framing of the debate is not using your terminology so this isn't useful

Being a farmer isn't owning a farm, it's doing the farming. Farmhands are farmers. This is the definition that most people have, and if we use your definition, the entire debate doesn't make sense. Remember we're talking about a game, and the game is called "replacing the farmer", in which you don't play a humanoid android handing out cash to a previous owner to buy a farm and then sitting on his ass paying out farmhands. The game is about automating the farming. There is no reference to ownership.

link

9rx 225 days ago

> Being a farmer isn't owning a farm

Not according to the government. To legally become a farmer you need farm receipts of a certain amount or more. Selling your labour to a farmer is not that. And not according to the dictionary either. There are multiple words surrounding this topic for good reason.

> Farmhands are farmers.

It is possible that a farmer also works on his farm, or another farmer's farm for that matter, but they would be a farmhand while in that capacity. People can be more than one thing, unsurprisingly. But not all farmers are also farmhands and not all farmhands are also farmers. Many farmers never lift a finger, so to speak. I personally work with farmers who don't even know what is growing in their fields.

> Remember we're talking about a game, and the game is called "replacing the farmer"

Actually, we were talking about some pedantic take on the word "replace", which transitioned into a pedantic take on the word "farmer". There is no discussion about a game going on in this thread. This indicates that you didn't bother to read the thread before replying. Why?

link