Hacker News Reader

Comment by ovi256 | Hacker News Reader

> While I hate to put human beings out of work

That's understandable, but think that these people will probably find more fulfilling and productive jobs. As long as the layoffs are gradual, they will have time to retrain and find other jobs. Of course, if their skillsets are really obsolete and many are laid off at once, this can lead to structural unemployment. Eastern European countries went through that after the fall of communism. The transition was not pretty.

But smaller layoffs and career changes are just the cost of technical progress. Have a look at the Industrial revolution [1] and Luddites [2].

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite

Also, here's my first law : "Anything that can be automatized WILL be automatized, whatever the costs."

View on HN

No, their debts will spiral and their ability to get any sort of loan for "retraining" will plummet, if they're in the U.S., that is. American households average something like $10,000 credit card debt these days. Unemployment compensation pays 2/3 or 3/4 what they had been earning. Hence their bills pile up and, with bad credit, they can't get "retraining." They're hosed.

> But smaller layoffs and career changes are just the cost of technical progress.

You assume that there are jobs to be had, that retraining is feasible, and that technological progress does not obsolete people as workers. Capitalism will not survive the intelligence singularity.

I know these are a lot of assumptions, but they held up until now. Actually, the most important assumption is that technological progress does not obsolete people as workers. As manual workers, the time will surely come. As white collar, intellectual, or knowledge workers, I dare say never. There are simply too many difficulties.

Never say never.

White collar workers can be programmed out of a job.

As white collar, intellectual, or knowledge workers, I dare say never [will they be obsoleted by technological progress]. There are simply too many difficulties.

Development of AI will simply stop before it reaches knowledge-worker-class strength? Why would it stop?

What do you think about Theodore Kaczynski's take on this?: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=435437

> Also, here's my first law : "Anything that can be automatized WILL be automatized, whatever the costs."

The point of automation is greater efficiency and efficacy, not some fetish with robots. Your "law" probably does not hold.

It does hold, because humans aren't as specialized as a robot designed specifically for the job.

It does hold, because humans aren't as specialized as a robot

That humans are not as specialized as specialized robots was not contested. What about the "whatever the costs" part?

Try those:

"... whatever the costs are now." or "... whatever the costs to society."

Reply on news.ycombinator.com