Submitted by Otarih t3_11b25kv in philosophy
roscoelee t1_j9ygojt wrote
Reply to comment by Rayqson in The Job Market Apocalypse: We Must Democratize AI Now! by Otarih
What is going to happen when we've automated everyone's jobs to AI and then there is no one working with any money left to buy the products that have had their entire production process/supply line automated?
Drawmeomg t1_j9yhwev wrote
When it’s literally every job, who knows? Cultural realignment.
For real world examples of what happens to workers when large industries are automated to the point where whole communities are no longer needed, look at former steelworking communities in the Rust Belt in the US. Brain drain, people who can move away do, people who can’t end up dependent on government assistance, skyrocketing drug abuse and general despair.
Judgethunder t1_j9yrz2c wrote
The difference between previous automations in textiles and transportation is that those actually created more jobs than they replaced.
What we are taking about here is potentially eliminating ALL jobs besides owning capital.
ReptileCultist t1_j9z6t8m wrote
The question is why this time automation should be different than before
Judgethunder t1_j9zbi6p wrote
Because an artificial intelligence is not the same thing as a railroad or a textile machine.
The assumption that you should be questioning is why it should be the same.
Feynnehrun t1_j9zfdhl wrote
Because, when a single industry automates a process, there are other places those workers can go after retraining. It certainly sucks for them but society is minimally impacted. When labor becomes a thing of the past, we still need to trade for and acquire goods. It would make zero sense to have a fully autonomous society that produces everything we need, but nobody is able to acquire those things because there are no jobs. Likely this would translate into a universal income.
Mintfriction t1_j9yskdz wrote
That's actually the premise of communism
Marx saw the massive technological strides happening in his lifetime so the question was what will happen, when efficiency due to machine will make the worker either unnecessary or easy to replace. Who will own the means of production then and how the people will be able to survive
People think communism was a about the soviet union or abolition of markets, but it's about this point in human history.
Tolbek t1_j9z0kkw wrote
Thank you! So few people appreciate, or even recognize, the actual roots of what Marx was getting at with his theories, it's rather been overshadowed by the parts the Bolsheviks would go on to cherry pick for their own agenda.
Communism isn't something you can just make happen, it's a theoretical societal evolution. Violently forcing communism into being is like undergoing chemotherapy because it'd be really cool to have a third arm.
faculties-intact t1_j9zqn40 wrote
In a reasonable world this would be the goal of society, not something we're afraid of.
Jgarr86 t1_j9ysy1x wrote
I'm skeptical the powers that be will progress themselves into thin air, especially when AI renders the concept of a working class moot. I think we're heading for a highly regulated, corporate welfare state where our UBI checks get smaller every month.
Nayr747 t1_j9ysy2n wrote
Workers and consumers are only needed by those who own the means of production in order to produce their insanely lavish lifestyles. When automation is advanced enough it can produce that lifestyle on its own and all of us will no longer be needed.
Vizjira t1_ja0d1cg wrote
Don't worry about no one having money, that is just a simple logistical fix with redistribution, but there is just no indication that we can maintain birthrates above/at replacement-level.
Maybe we are just the species that creates the next big thing and than just retire our type.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments