The question is less about whether or not there are still meaningful tasks to complete once your job is automated. The question is about whether or not you can get paid for it.
Sure, we could busy ourselves with the arts, ushering in a new Renaissance. But who's going to pay for it? What CEO in the modern work will pay these "jobless layabouts" (as they'll be labeled) to lounge around on the government dime and draw pictures all day?
Personally, I'd love to see people freed up from mundane tasks to pursue higher goals. Be it art, science, academia, etc. a lot if good could come from a world like that. But the world we live in currently will not allow such a thing to happen. Not without some radical changes first.
Really? There are people considered "moderate" regarding ISIS/L?
"You know, I'd heard that they were gruesomely beheading people with rusty knives, and burning people alive... but I kinda figured it was no biggie until now."
You lost it on your second sentence : "absent collusion"
There will always be collusion in limited markets. Perhaps not immediately, but over the course of a few years, it will creep in and become status quo. At that point, getting rid of the collusion takes an act of congress, or in this case, a presidential decree.
Only by opening up the market, can you eliminate collusion, by making it cost prohibitive.
My guess : See the world. Think about how far we've come in the last 40 years.
40 years ago, Pong was first released on home console. And now I'm using a device with orders of magnitude more computational power than all of the pong consoles ever created combined. I just asked this device where I should go for lunch. It gave me a few suggestions and helpfully drew me a map.
40 years ago, Voyager was still in the planning phases. It wouldn't be launched for another two years. And now, it's exited the heliosphere, and taken the most amazing Family Portrait ever captured.
And I can't begin to imagine how much better life is for women, minorities, homosexuals, or really anyone that's not a 'normal' white male, compared to 40 years ago
Given the option of dying at 80, or living to see what another 40 years might hold... well...
Cameras cause shorter yellows. Shorter yellows cause accidents. Ergo, cameras cause accidents
Of course, this presupposes a greedy and corrupt government that would willfully endanger their own people to earn a buck, which of course sounds completely... uh... well it actually sounds completely plausible. So yeah, let's go with that.
Do you think that the phone in your pocket is actually doing the voice recognition and translation?
Put your phone into airplane mode and try.
The actual voice recognition software is "in the cloud," if you'll excuse the jargon. Your phone just saves the snippet of voice as a sound file and sends that file back to the Apple/Google/MS servers to process.
The given reasons are to improve their recognition software. Every time you change a word that went through the process, the server learns a little more. Of course, there may be other reasons to take everything you've ever said into your phone and store it in a centralized database...
True. The cost becomes moot if we simply don't have the ability to fix anything
But we've done it in the past. Japan and Germany are looking quite nice these days, despite one of them getting nuked twice and the other going through a REALLY rough stretch post WWII. Of course, the US didn't single-handedly help those countries back onto their feet, but I don't see why we couldn't leverage some UN assistance in the matter.
I think you hit the nail on the head though, in defining "long term." For most lawmakers these days, "long term" is "the next election date." Anything that happens beyond that may as well not exist We need to be able to plan for 10, 25 or even 50 years out. Mexico is going to be our neighbor for a long long time. It would behoove us to help them out.
I'm not saying that we should bankroll them indefinitely. Just get the ball rolling.
But really, it's all hypothetical anyway. Considering the job we've done helping other countries around the world, I doubt we could actually improve our southern neighbors.
It's a long and sordid tale, where those in power vehemently refuse to help Mexico build anything resembling a modern society. The reasons are numerous, but it mostly boils down to cheap labor.
Simply put: if Mexicans were allowed to come across legally, employers would have to pay them minimum wage. And if Mexico wasn't so shitty (especially the border towns) people wouldn't be leaving in droves.
If we really wanted to solve the whole immigration problem, securing the border isn't the proper answer. Notice the lack of emergency situation at the US's northern border, despite the lack of a fence to keep out the hockey-lovers (or to keep us Statesfolk out of Canada). Take the proposed Mexico fence budget (however much that is) and pour it into getting Mexico's infrastructure up to snuff. Spend some money weeding out corrupt policemen. Work some real campaign reform (lord knows we can't do it here.) Build some roads and hospitals. Help bring Mexico up to the same standards of living as the rest of the first world, and the immigration problem will solve itself.
Payday loans aren't intended to circumvent the normal processing period between banks. They're intended to bridge the gap between rent is due today, and I don't get paid till Friday.
Which is all good in theory... until the parliament/congress becomes more interesting with infighting and navel gazing than actually improving the country.
When was the last time that congress worked for the genuine benefit of the country, without a primary focus on how it will affect their reelection numbers?
The system, as it currently stands, is broken. Beyond broken. And if it takes an unconstitutional tyrant to get us back on the proper track, so be it. Perhaps a smidgen of anarchy is necessary to remind us why we chose order
Anecdotal, but: Our last two hires were picked up through this type of recruiting, and both are terrible
They're both nice guys, sure. Great for a chat over lunch or coffee, persistent in getting someone's attention and small talk... but absolute garbage as sysadmins, the thing we're actually paying them to do.
I wonder how much money the government would save if they worked with banks to "give" (temporarily loan) some of the empty, foreclosed houses out to homeless people. We've got a bunch of people without houses, and a bunch of houses without people. Seems kind of obvious to me.
Provide shelter with a few basic stipulations. No illegal activity (e.g. drugs) and general upkeep on the house. Provide them with brooms, simple green and such. "You clean it up and fix a leaky faucet or two, and the house is yours for a year." (or something like that) I bet a lot of homeless people would get real handy real fast.
A roof over your heads and a steady mailing address certainly make it a lot easier to find some kind of job, if only temporary. Having access to a shower might help as well.
I trust that the community at large will always be one step ahead of youtube.
If they make ads harder to block, people will write better software to block the new ads. Currently ABP is a one stop shop, but if I had to install a separate "YouTube Adblock" extension, I certainly would.
Or just stop using youtube. There are much better things in life than staring blankly at the screen.
Slashdot Mirror
The question is less about whether or not there are still meaningful tasks to complete once your job is automated. The question is about whether or not you can get paid for it.
Sure, we could busy ourselves with the arts, ushering in a new Renaissance. But who's going to pay for it? What CEO in the modern work will pay these "jobless layabouts" (as they'll be labeled) to lounge around on the government dime and draw pictures all day?
Personally, I'd love to see people freed up from mundane tasks to pursue higher goals. Be it art, science, academia, etc. a lot if good could come from a world like that. But the world we live in currently will not allow such a thing to happen. Not without some radical changes first.
Really? There are people considered "moderate" regarding ISIS/L?
"You know, I'd heard that they were gruesomely beheading people with rusty knives, and burning people alive ... but I kinda figured it was no biggie until now."
What? Fox News can't do a little pro bono work from time to time?
Having been to Europe, I can confirm some minor indications of actual life.
Further studies to commence shortly.
You lost it on your second sentence : "absent collusion"
There will always be collusion in limited markets. Perhaps not immediately, but over the course of a few years, it will creep in and become status quo. At that point, getting rid of the collusion takes an act of congress, or in this case, a presidential decree.
Only by opening up the market, can you eliminate collusion, by making it cost prohibitive.
My guess : See the world. Think about how far we've come in the last 40 years.
40 years ago, Pong was first released on home console. And now I'm using a device with orders of magnitude more computational power than all of the pong consoles ever created combined. I just asked this device where I should go for lunch. It gave me a few suggestions and helpfully drew me a map.
40 years ago, Voyager was still in the planning phases. It wouldn't be launched for another two years. And now, it's exited the heliosphere, and taken the most amazing Family Portrait ever captured.
And I can't begin to imagine how much better life is for women, minorities, homosexuals, or really anyone that's not a 'normal' white male, compared to 40 years ago
Given the option of dying at 80, or living to see what another 40 years might hold... well ...
It's transitive.
Cameras cause shorter yellows.
Shorter yellows cause accidents.
Ergo, cameras cause accidents
Of course, this presupposes a greedy and corrupt government that would willfully endanger their own people to earn a buck, which of course sounds completely ... uh ... well it actually sounds completely plausible. So yeah, let's go with that.
Do you think that the phone in your pocket is actually doing the voice recognition and translation?
Put your phone into airplane mode and try.
The actual voice recognition software is "in the cloud," if you'll excuse the jargon. Your phone just saves the snippet of voice as a sound file and sends that file back to the Apple/Google/MS servers to process.
The given reasons are to improve their recognition software. Every time you change a word that went through the process, the server learns a little more. Of course, there may be other reasons to take everything you've ever said into your phone and store it in a centralized database...
True. The cost becomes moot if we simply don't have the ability to fix anything
But we've done it in the past. Japan and Germany are looking quite nice these days, despite one of them getting nuked twice and the other going through a REALLY rough stretch post WWII. Of course, the US didn't single-handedly help those countries back onto their feet, but I don't see why we couldn't leverage some UN assistance in the matter.
I think you hit the nail on the head though, in defining "long term." For most lawmakers these days, "long term" is "the next election date." Anything that happens beyond that may as well not exist We need to be able to plan for 10, 25 or even 50 years out. Mexico is going to be our neighbor for a long long time. It would behoove us to help them out.
I'm not saying that we should bankroll them indefinitely. Just get the ball rolling.
But really, it's all hypothetical anyway. Considering the job we've done helping other countries around the world, I doubt we could actually improve our southern neighbors.
You assume the owners can actually see what's passing through their wires.
How's that working out so far?
If we're going to dump some money into the problem, we should target the root of the problem, not a symptom.
Initial investment. Probably.
Long term maintenance and upkeep: probably not.
It's a long and sordid tale, where those in power vehemently refuse to help Mexico build anything resembling a modern society. The reasons are numerous, but it mostly boils down to cheap labor.
Simply put: if Mexicans were allowed to come across legally, employers would have to pay them minimum wage. And if Mexico wasn't so shitty (especially the border towns) people wouldn't be leaving in droves.
If we really wanted to solve the whole immigration problem, securing the border isn't the proper answer. Notice the lack of emergency situation at the US's northern border, despite the lack of a fence to keep out the hockey-lovers (or to keep us Statesfolk out of Canada). Take the proposed Mexico fence budget (however much that is) and pour it into getting Mexico's infrastructure up to snuff. Spend some money weeding out corrupt policemen. Work some real campaign reform (lord knows we can't do it here.) Build some roads and hospitals. Help bring Mexico up to the same standards of living as the rest of the first world, and the immigration problem will solve itself.
cuz we broke.
Payday loans aren't intended to circumvent the normal processing period between banks. They're intended to bridge the gap between rent is due today, and I don't get paid till Friday.
I think there's a lot of overlap is the Venn diagram of security minded slashdot enthusiasts and those familiar with the uses of bit coin.
Which is all good in theory... until the parliament/congress becomes more interesting with infighting and navel gazing than actually improving the country.
When was the last time that congress worked for the genuine benefit of the country, without a primary focus on how it will affect their reelection numbers?
The system, as it currently stands, is broken. Beyond broken. And if it takes an unconstitutional tyrant to get us back on the proper track, so be it. Perhaps a smidgen of anarchy is necessary to remind us why we chose order
For varying values of "only"
It does if they're hooked up to a polygraph machine ;)
They know they'll get caught, but still do it for two reasons: money and addictions.
The people run the site and sell the drugs for the money.
The people use the site and buy drugs because they're addicted, and no legal recourse exists
Anecdotal, but: Our last two hires were picked up through this type of recruiting, and both are terrible
They're both nice guys, sure. Great for a chat over lunch or coffee, persistent in getting someone's attention and small talk ... but absolute garbage as sysadmins, the thing we're actually paying them to do.
Doesn't change the fact that the amount of sunlight present in your evening is dictated by your work, not by the time you wake up.
The sticking point is work. Any random Joe working 9 - 5 is going to get off work at 5, regardless of when he woke up.
I wonder how much money the government would save if they worked with banks to "give" (temporarily loan) some of the empty, foreclosed houses out to homeless people. We've got a bunch of people without houses, and a bunch of houses without people. Seems kind of obvious to me.
Provide shelter with a few basic stipulations. No illegal activity (e.g. drugs) and general upkeep on the house. Provide them with brooms, simple green and such. "You clean it up and fix a leaky faucet or two, and the house is yours for a year." (or something like that) I bet a lot of homeless people would get real handy real fast.
A roof over your heads and a steady mailing address certainly make it a lot easier to find some kind of job, if only temporary. Having access to a shower might help as well.
I trust that the community at large will always be one step ahead of youtube.
If they make ads harder to block, people will write better software to block the new ads. Currently ABP is a one stop shop, but if I had to install a separate "YouTube Adblock" extension, I certainly would.
Or just stop using youtube. There are much better things in life than staring blankly at the screen.