this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2024
84 points (96.7% liked)

Technology

84881 readers
3535 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BudgieMania@kbin.social 9 points 2 years ago (3 children)

I really wanna hear what the proposal is for removing "unqualified" jobs en masse without implementing universal basic income.

The low pay and bad conditions of "unqualified" jobs often gets excused because they, allegedly, are "stepping stones", a means of sustaining oneself while working towards more specialized careers.

If you destroy a significant amount of those positions, where does that leave those people? Are we so drunk on cyberpunk-esque lust of AI evolution that we are fine eliminating the means of entry to society for so many?

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

You're making a fundamentally bad assumption: that this is in any way "good faith".

The billionaires and giant corporations can make more money by employing less people. That's it.

It's limitless greed. They don't care about living wages or "stepping stones" or funding the country or how many people get thrown out onto the street. It sounds like I'm exaggerating, but it's the truth and we're all witnessing it. This is capitalism run amok: They can become even richer and nothing matters more than that.

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

We don't have to let corporations rule us. If voters weren't so fucking brainwashed we could make a system that works for everyone. I'm hoping at some point it will be too obvious for anytime not to notice that a system where give swathes of the population are just left to starve isn't something we can tolerate.

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The solution is - instead of rejecting technology, which isn't going anywhere and will only progress and can't be stopped, because under capitalism it will lead to workers starving - we reject capitalism.

It's literally the only way that would actually prevent people from suffering (and significantly help the planet, too).

https://www.globallearning-cuba.com/blog-umlthe-view-from-the-southuml/marx-on-automated-industry

https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/mar/18/fully-automated-luxury-communism-robots-employment

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 3 points 2 years ago

The problem is that humans are really bad at caring for unproductive people. If you use wealth generated by natural resources as a proxy for wealth generated by robot labor, humans have a bad record of distributing the material wealth.

[–] Wanderer@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

If it's anything like Maggie's legacy in the UK. It just leads to generations of poverty and society degradation that even now don't look like they will be reversed. Like it's mad that life was better when people crawled in a hole to mine coal by hand.

But hey it least it was an excuse for a party when she died.