|
basically we are screwed but if robots take over food production and building homes, is providing you with the bare minimum all the ruling class need provide you? Is it okay to be paid food and shelter or should you be left to die?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
basically we are screwed but if robots take over food production and building homes, is providing you with the bare minimum all the ruling class need provide you? Is it okay to be paid food and shelter or should you be left to die?
I would imagine in such a scenario, the people, that would likely number enough to destroy said robots and have enough left over to go on to do the same to the ruling classes, would play a large part in that decision.
Personally, I imagine a future where nearly everything is automated, people are given what they need to survive, and those that wish to do more are given additional luxuries.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Human: Y'know, being a pet isn't so bad.
Cat: I've been telling you that for years.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
basically we are screwed but if robots take over food production and building homes, is providing you with the bare minimum all the ruling class need provide you? Is it okay to be paid food and shelter or should you be left to die?You're kind of seriously mistating the problems decribed in that article which is mainly about resource scarcity. The Southwest part of America is looking at literally running out of drinkable water. Climate shifts may cause drastic changes in agriculture. The problem may be a serious shortfall in basic food and water needs.
Should LazarX be fed to the robots first?
|
Should LazarX be fed to the robots first?basically we are screwed but if robots take over food production and building homes, is providing you with the bare minimum all the ruling class need provide you? Is it okay to be paid food and shelter or should you be left to die?You're kind of seriously mistating the problems decribed in that article which is mainly about resource scarcity. The Southwest part of America is looking at literally running out of drinkable water. Climate shifts may cause drastic changes in agriculture. The problem may be a serious shortfall in basic food and water needs.
No, Robots only drink motor oil and eat the dreams of young children. So LazarX is safe for now. What we need to watch for is that coalition of human robot security that wants to eat the dreams of adults.
basically we are screwed but if robots take over food production and building homes, is providing you with the bare minimum all the ruling class need provide you? Is it okay to be paid food and shelter or should you be left to die?
Humans will die out (go extinct) long before robot overlords becomes a problem.
And, we'll have done it to ourselves..
basically we are screwed but if robots take over food production and building homes, is providing you with the bare minimum all the ruling class need provide you?
As usual, YD provides his usual insightful view into the nature of reality itself. Since food production and building homes are, of course, the only forms of activity available to humankind today, when robots have moved into those two areas, there will literally be nothing left for humans to do except starve in the streets.
... well, except that the streets won't exist, because in the dingo-verse, the only things tasks ever undertaken are homebuilding and food production, and this specifically excludes street creation and maintenance.
|
|
basically we are screwed but if robots take over food production and building homes, is providing you with the bare minimum all the ruling class need provide you? Is it okay to be paid food and shelter or should you be left to die?I would imagine in such a scenario, the people, that would likely number enough to destroy said robots and have enough left over to go on to do the same to the ruling classes, would play a large part in that decision.
Personally, I imagine a future where nearly everything is automated, people are given what they need to survive, and those that wish to do more are given additional luxuries.
Yeah, you really need to read rossums universal robots (the play). As a consequence of robots, the poorest are forced to live in badlands struggling to grow their own foods right up until the bot armies that pushed their protesting asses from cities and good farmland crush the last remaining human holdouts on behalf of the ruling class.
Yeah, you really need to read rossums universal robots (the play). As a consequence of robots, the poorest are forced to live in badlands struggling to grow their own foods right up until the bot armies that pushed their protesting asses from cities and good farmland crush the last remaining human holdouts on behalf of the ruling class.basically we are screwed but if robots take over food production and building homes, is providing you with the bare minimum all the ruling class need provide you? Is it okay to be paid food and shelter or should you be left to die?I would imagine in such a scenario, the people, that would likely number enough to destroy said robots and have enough left over to go on to do the same to the ruling classes, would play a large part in that decision.
Personally, I imagine a future where nearly everything is automated, people are given what they need to survive, and those that wish to do more are given additional luxuries.
I'm building a robot over the next few weeks. Now you've laid this immense guilt trip on me :(
The Southwest part of America is looking at literally running out of drinkable water.
Yes and no. The more scarce water gets, the higher the price goes, the more economically viable desalinization becomes. I would say that it seems likely that, as a species, we will have to spend many more resources to secure sufficient fresh water (and therefore food), acting as a (significant) drag on our economy. But I really can't see anyone in North America literally dying of thirst.
basically we are screwed but if robots take over food production and building homes, is providing you with the bare minimum all the ruling class need provide you? Is it okay to be paid food and shelter or should you be left to die?
You do realize that for the last 50+ years "scientists" have been predicting that the world will run out of food. Supposedly the world cannot produce enough food for 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 or 7... billion people.
Soylent Green is People!
Yeah, you really need to read rossums universal robots (the play).
Why? Do you have any basis to assert that it's a more believable future than Star Trek?
Lazar, you're discounting new innovation in the desalinization process.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You keep electing presidents who are sure god is on your side...Why? Do you have any basis to assert that it's a more believable future than Star Trek?
Yeah, you really need to read rossums universal robots (the play).
If the candidates don't say God is on their side half the country wont vote.....
If the candidates don't say God is on their side half the country wont vote.....You keep electing presidents who are sure god is on your side...Why? Do you have any basis to assert that it's a more believable future than Star Trek?
Yeah, you really need to read rossums universal robots (the play).
Sometimes I'm pretty much convinced a god is on their side, I'm just scared which one it might be.
You keep electing presidents who are sure god is on your side...Why? Do you have any basis to assert that it's a more believable future than Star Trek?
Yeah, you really need to read rossums universal robots (the play).
They have aliens on their side too.You keep electing presidents who are sure god is on your side...Why? Do you have any basis to assert that it's a more believable future than Star Trek?
Yeah, you really need to read rossums universal robots (the play).
For some reason this makes me think of those "LolJesus" pictures.
"Hey tell them about the one time with the dragon"
"That never happened Jesus"
"lol tell them anyway"
They have aliens on their side too.You keep electing presidents who are sure god is on your side...Why? Do you have any basis to assert that it's a more believable future than Star Trek?
Yeah, you really need to read rossums universal robots (the play).
I like how Obama in that picture is like, "Alien, dude, i'm trying to give a speech here."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm building a robot over the next few weeks. Now you've laid this immense guilt trip on me :(Yeah, you really need to read rossums universal robots (the play). As a consequence of robots, the poorest are forced to live in badlands struggling to grow their own foods right up until the bot armies that pushed their protesting asses from cities and good farmland crush the last remaining human holdouts on behalf of the ruling class.basically we are screwed but if robots take over food production and building homes, is providing you with the bare minimum all the ruling class need provide you? Is it okay to be paid food and shelter or should you be left to die?I would imagine in such a scenario, the people, that would likely number enough to destroy said robots and have enough left over to go on to do the same to the ruling classes, would play a large part in that decision.
Personally, I imagine a future where nearly everything is automated, people are given what they need to survive, and those that wish to do more are given additional luxuries.
And there's your problem. A true engineer would have stepped up to the plate and said "Challenge accepted."
Desalinization is not ever an economical answer, it's incredibly energy intensive, highly consumptive in terms of fossil fuels and has a resulting high carbon footprint. And there is the question of the salty sludge leftover.
It is most certainly economical when the alternative is dying of thirst. ;-)
Effectivization of production has gone on since the dawn of humanity. Thing is, effectivization of production no longer benefits humanity as a whole - it just benefits the capital, who can extract a higher degree of surplus value from the workers.
When the hours needed to create something from scratched it halved, the reasonable action would be to halve how much people need to work with it to get their pay. Despite that, the working class has to constantly work more and more, when it should be working less and less.
What we need to do is to demand a stop to the private ownership of the means of production, as that is what makes technological advancements result in poverty among the working class. Not the technological advancements in themselves. I refuse to say unemployment, because in ANY reasonable ideology, the goal should be as high unemployment as possible while maintaining a good standard of living.
In other words,
Long live the Revolution!
Love live technology!
Long live robot communism!
But this isn't new. Historically it hasn't benefited the workers or humanity as a whole. Look at the early industrial age or Gilded Age before the Depression. It's only been when the workers have managed to force it to be otherwise that their conditions have improved. Through political or economic action.
I'm not convinced the end of private ownership of the means of production is the solution. State ownership didn't really seem to do a much better job.
No doubt it isn't new - but the industrial age is pretty young in the scale of the timeline of humanity as a species.
But of course I agree with you that only when the workers have forced their conditions to better have they been bettered. The ruling class as a whole doesn't care about sensible arguments, it cares about maintaining its power.
State ownership is private ownership, unless the state is actually in reality governed by the people. I mean, there's really not a lot of difference between a corporation controlled by a small plutocracy owning the means of production and a state controlled by a small plutocracy owning the means of production. A corporation that buys enough land for all intents and purposes becomes a state, a state governed by a plutocracy (even a plutocracy that calls itself a democracy) that owns the means of production becomes a capitalist. I care less about titles than their actual roles and position in society.
I'm just so g+%+$@n tired of all these so called "left" politicians trying to save us through "everyone should have a full time job!", often through "reforms" that lower our wages. No. That's not what I want at all.
As the late social democrat Ernst Wigfors said:
"If the goal of societal progress should be that we all should work maximally, we would be insane. The goal is to free the human to create maximally. Dance. Paint. Sing. Yes, whatever you wish. Freedom."
"Om målet med samhällsutvecklingen skulle vara att vi alla skulle arbeta maximalt voro vi sinnessjuka. Målet är att frigöra människan till att skapa maximalt. Dansa. Måla. Sjunga. Ja, vad ni vill. Frihet."
No, when I say common ownership of the means of production I'm not talking about having some Stalin v. 2.0 controling the means of production.