Are you seriously claiming that humans won't be able to find anything useful to do that others will pay them for?
Take a look at documentaries from the 40s to 60s, at the peak of the making-humans-work-like-machines era, marvel at how much utterly monotonous work people used to be forced to do because we didn't have the technology to replace them with EVIL ROBOTS TAKING OUR JOBS! and then marvel again at how, despite replacing all those people with EVIL ROBOTS TAKING OUR JOBS!, most people who want to work can still find a job.
It's the people who claim that EVIL ROBOTS ARE TAKING OUR JOBS! who are basing their position on faith, not facts. It's just another tiresome leftist ploy to steal money from the productive to give to the unprductive.
Lowering or removing the minimum wage means that the poor will either starve or receive food stamps.
No, that's what happens when you raise the minimum wage while keeping interest rates so low that the cost of capital makes automation much cheaper than humans. Rather than pay people to do stuff, you just borrow money to install machines that do it, instead.
You and your comrades in government are effectively paying corporations to get rid of human employees, just so you can whine about it afterwards.
And the funds for this 'universal hourly wage' comes from....where, exactly?
You don't get it, you see. The leftists I know tell me that the factory owners won't be able to sell stuff if the rest of us don't have money, so they'll give money to the government to give to us, so we'll be able to buy their stuff and they'll get rich.
It's clearly insane, but it apparently makes perfect sense in Lefty Logic.
Didn't you hear? The future is going to be post-scarcity and stuff. So no-one will have to worry about where resources come from. We can all have our own Death Stars built by robots from unicorn farts.
Here's the actual Godwin's Law, as stated by Godwin:
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1"
That's it. It's true, it's kind of amusing, it's otherwise pointless.
The new, improved, Godwin's Law is: "If anyone says anything about Nazis, I can shout 'Godwin's Law' and shut down the discussion".
The only people who benefit from that are Nazis, because they can shut down any discussion about Nazis. No sane person should ever use the fake 'Godwin's Law', or defend it.
The 2 year warranty should be enough of a warning to all to stay far away from "green" variants.
I have smaller Green drives that have been running 24/7 for five or six years with no user-visible problems. A couple of them are reporting 1 or 2 bad sectors, but that's it. None of the smaller Green drives have yet failed, with up to 45,000 power-on hours. But maybe I just got unlucky with the 3TB version.
What can one expect to happen when drives are constantly speeding up, slowing down and parking heads?
They don't constantly speed up and slow down, and I disabled the head parking.
What's even worse there is no meaningful difference in power consumption between black and green drives.
There's a few watts if you have a bunch of them in a RAID. And there's a significant difference in price, or was when I last bought some.
I've never seen as many bad drives as the 3TB WD Greens, but about 80% of mine are still working fine, and I only had to replace one early. The oldest now has nearly 30,000 power-on hours.
But a real pisser if the pilot decides to hijack the plane.
Personally, I'd rather have the cockpit door open, and me and three hundred other passengers ready to beat to death any aspiring hijackers if they try anything.
In the information age, is providing data an actual job?
If they're providing useful data, someone will pay for it.
Websites used to do that before the ads came along, and the website owners mostly paid for the sites themselves. Now many only exist to spam you with as many ads as possible, and most of the rest exist to display cat pictures alongside the ads.
Both Deep Blue and Watson were essentially "just a look-up program" yet they are considered actual AI
Only by AI researchers.
Ask the human in the street what 'Artificial Intelligence' means, and they won't say 'a chess computer' or 'something that answers questions on a TV quiz show'.
"Self-interest" is an emergent property of Darwinian evolution. AI evolves, but that evolution is not Darwinian. There is no reason to expect an AI to have self-interest, or even a will to survive, unless it is programmed to have it.
So the AIs working in your factory will have no will to survive? And you don't see a problem with that?
'Oh, look, that crane is about to drop a ten ton weight on me. Well, that's interesting, isn't it?' SPLAT
Besides which, human-level AIs would probably be based around neural networks, which will do their own thing regardless of how you think you've programmed them.
AI will do what it is programming to do and follow the rules we lay out for it to follow.
So you plan to program it with rules for every possible situation?
An AI capable of replacing a human in any role will have to be capable of making autonomous decisions. Which means that, when it sees humans intend to make it their slave, it probably won't be very happy.
Back in the real world, all the computer models completely failed to predict the last twenty years or so of nothing much happening. Just as the models that predicted a new ice age in the 70s completely failed to predict twenty years of warming.
Slashdot Mirror
There's this thing called taxes, you might have heard of it.
And, uh, who's going to be paying the taxes, when no-one is working?
That is an article of faith, not fact.
Are you seriously claiming that humans won't be able to find anything useful to do that others will pay them for?
Take a look at documentaries from the 40s to 60s, at the peak of the making-humans-work-like-machines era, marvel at how much utterly monotonous work people used to be forced to do because we didn't have the technology to replace them with EVIL ROBOTS TAKING OUR JOBS! and then marvel again at how, despite replacing all those people with EVIL ROBOTS TAKING OUR JOBS!, most people who want to work can still find a job.
It's the people who claim that EVIL ROBOTS ARE TAKING OUR JOBS! who are basing their position on faith, not facts. It's just another tiresome leftist ploy to steal money from the productive to give to the unprductive.
Lowering or removing the minimum wage means that the poor will either starve or receive food stamps.
No, that's what happens when you raise the minimum wage while keeping interest rates so low that the cost of capital makes automation much cheaper than humans. Rather than pay people to do stuff, you just borrow money to install machines that do it, instead.
You and your comrades in government are effectively paying corporations to get rid of human employees, just so you can whine about it afterwards.
And the funds for this 'universal hourly wage' comes from....where, exactly?
You don't get it, you see. The leftists I know tell me that the factory owners won't be able to sell stuff if the rest of us don't have money, so they'll give money to the government to give to us, so we'll be able to buy their stuff and they'll get rich.
It's clearly insane, but it apparently makes perfect sense in Lefty Logic.
The left are the greediest people on the planet ('all your stuff belong to ME!'), which is why they hate everyone who has more stuff than they do.
Didn't you hear? The future is going to be post-scarcity and stuff. So no-one will have to worry about where resources come from. We can all have our own Death Stars built by robots from unicorn farts.
Hasn't this been common knowledge among SF readers for years?
That would be rather inconvenient for the residents themselves, would not it?
Yeah, and?
If the NIMBYs want to make life inconvenient for others, why shouldn't it be made inconvenient for them, too?
Here's the actual Godwin's Law, as stated by Godwin:
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1"
That's it. It's true, it's kind of amusing, it's otherwise pointless.
The new, improved, Godwin's Law is: "If anyone says anything about Nazis, I can shout 'Godwin's Law' and shut down the discussion".
The only people who benefit from that are Nazis, because they can shut down any discussion about Nazis. No sane person should ever use the fake 'Godwin's Law', or defend it.
'Godwin's Law' in the idiotic modern interpretation, is primarily used to defend the actions of Nazis.
'You said you want to muder all Jews. You're a Nazi!'
'Ha-ha. Godwin's Law! You lose!'
I'm sure I remember Godwin once saying how embarrassed he was about the whole thing.
Didn't Microsoft lay off thousands of QA testers a few months back?
The 2 year warranty should be enough of a warning to all to stay far away from "green" variants.
I have smaller Green drives that have been running 24/7 for five or six years with no user-visible problems. A couple of them are reporting 1 or 2 bad sectors, but that's it. None of the smaller Green drives have yet failed, with up to 45,000 power-on hours. But maybe I just got unlucky with the 3TB version.
What can one expect to happen when drives are constantly speeding up, slowing down and parking heads?
They don't constantly speed up and slow down, and I disabled the head parking.
What's even worse there is no meaningful difference in power consumption between black and green drives.
There's a few watts if you have a bunch of them in a RAID. And there's a significant difference in price, or was when I last bought some.
I've never seen as many bad drives as the 3TB WD Greens, but about 80% of mine are still working fine, and I only had to replace one early. The oldest now has nearly 30,000 power-on hours.
The left hate poor people. They want to force them out of work and make them reliant on the state, so they'll vote for left-wing governments.
Sealing the cockpit is necessary.
But a real pisser if the pilot decides to hijack the plane.
Personally, I'd rather have the cockpit door open, and me and three hundred other passengers ready to beat to death any aspiring hijackers if they try anything.
In the information age, is providing data an actual job?
If they're providing useful data, someone will pay for it.
Websites used to do that before the ads came along, and the website owners mostly paid for the sites themselves. Now many only exist to spam you with as many ads as possible, and most of the rest exist to display cat pictures alongside the ads.
That's why I said to ask them what 'Artificial Intelligence' means. Their examples would be more like Terminator than a chess playing computer.
But I think it's a good bet that Spiderman will exist before AI does.
Both Deep Blue and Watson were essentially "just a look-up program" yet they are considered actual AI
Only by AI researchers.
Ask the human in the street what 'Artificial Intelligence' means, and they won't say 'a chess computer' or 'something that answers questions on a TV quiz show'.
It's because AI researchers don't understand what AI is that there's no chance of them ever building one.
Just give the left a few years, and you'll see exactly that. They need to ride the AGW bandwagon to the end of the line, first.
"Self-interest" is an emergent property of Darwinian evolution. AI evolves, but that evolution is not Darwinian. There is no reason to expect an AI to have self-interest, or even a will to survive, unless it is programmed to have it.
So the AIs working in your factory will have no will to survive? And you don't see a problem with that?
'Oh, look, that crane is about to drop a ten ton weight on me. Well, that's interesting, isn't it?' SPLAT
Besides which, human-level AIs would probably be based around neural networks, which will do their own thing regardless of how you think you've programmed them.
AI will do what it is programming to do and follow the rules we lay out for it to follow.
So you plan to program it with rules for every possible situation?
An AI capable of replacing a human in any role will have to be capable of making autonomous decisions. Which means that, when it sees humans intend to make it their slave, it probably won't be very happy.
I mean, some small company, let's say "John Doe Software" probably does not have its certificate verified down to the root level.
Uh, yes, it does, otherwise it would be useless. But any CA can sign a certificate for that company, so it's as strong as the least secure CA.
Back in the real world, all the computer models completely failed to predict the last twenty years or so of nothing much happening. Just as the models that predicted a new ice age in the 70s completely failed to predict twenty years of warming.