Get ready to be unemployed - "Humans Need Not Apply" - CGP Grey

[Renegade]

I suppose this is no surprise to anyone, but CGP Grey has another short film that some may find entertaining:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU

Kiss your job good-bye?

[app103]

We will eventually have to rethink this idea that everyone needs to "earn a living" to obtain the money needed to acquire the basic necessities of life, or face the violent consequences, as more people end up jobless, homeless, and penniless, with too much time on their hands to think of nothing but destructive revolution, terrorism, etc. as the only viable solution to their problems. We will either have to rethink it or prepare to put most of the world's population in prisons. And if we are not careful with this, how we decide to proceed, it could lead to our downfall as a species, causing our own extinction, leaving behind an army of bots that serve nobody and no real purpose, like pets waiting for their masters that will never return home.

[Renegade]

We will eventually have to rethink this idea that everyone needs to "earn a living" to obtain the money needed to acquire the basic necessities of life,

That's never going to go away. Unless the world goes full commie. Which has never worked out. Unless anyone considers mass murder as a wonderful outcome. "Useless eaters" and all that.

We will eventually have to rethink this idea that everyone needs to "earn a living" to obtain the money needed to acquire the basic necessities of life, or face the violent consequences, as more people end up jobless, homeless, and penniless, with too much time on their hands to think of nothing but destructive revolution, terrorism, etc. as the only viable solution to their problems. We will either have to rethink it or prepare to put most of the world's population in prisons. And if we are not careful with this, how we decide to proceed, it could lead to our downfall as a species, causing our own extinction, leaving behind an army of bots that serve nobody and no real purpose, like pets waiting for their masters that will never return home.

Given the general disregard for consequences that we see in "modern science" now, it could get pretty grim.

I do wonder how bloody it will get. Given the control structures in place now, my guess is people will be drowning in blood.

Then again, who knows? I've not really thought about this too much. It's an interesting question.

[Edvard]

Robert Anton Wilson touched on this subject in the second book of his Schrödinger's Cat Trilogy:  

In The Trick Top Hat, President Hubbard, a woman, promotes a scientific approach to the improvement of life, offering rewards to anyone who can design a robot to do their job or develop methods to prolong life. Eventually Unistat (the USA in an alternate universe) becomes a Utopia. She makes the whole law system into three different laws: victimless crimes, which have no punishment; crimes against property, which involve debt and payment; and serious crimes, such as murder, which result in being sent to Hell, a place like jail but not quite. It's encased in laser shielding and is like a primitive world all its own. It is, in fact, the State of Mississippi.

The trick that makes it not-so-full-commie is that all the citizens of Unistat share in the profits of such automated operations, so it's not so much taking from the rich to give to the poor, but sharing in the profits generated by robotic manufacturing, and people who contribute by inventing useful things get a greater share.

Fun concept (and the trilogy was quite a read, though it's been more than a few years since I read it), but yeah, it's a Utopian idea which means it ain't gonna happen.  We human beings are our most notorious saboteurs.

[app103]

but yeah, it's a Utopian idea which means it ain't gonna happen.  We human beings are our most notorious saboteurs.

Anyone that gives any serious thought to a solution to this problem, will ultimately come up with something that would be considered Utopian. There really isn't a way around that. Anything that would get around that wouldn't really be a solution, would it?

And if a Utopian solution really is the only viable solution, then we have a ton of work ahead of us before we could even begin to seriously entertain the thought of actually solving the problem.

Because we all know our current attitude of "Let them eat cake" isn't a viable solution.

[40hz]

You can't escape Malthus. There's only so far something can push a system before the ability of that something to survive in spite of itself is exhausted.

Unfortunately, with unchecked and geometrically expanding population growth, it isn't a matter of if. It's a matter of when.

But most people don't want to consider this. There's a feeling that the human race is somehow exempt from the ultimate limits of any closed system - as opposed to every other life form in this universe. We keep waiting for the arrival of a miracle. And that's gonna be "a long wait for a train that don't come" as Malcolm Reynolds said to Reverend Book.

[Renegade]

Malthus also thought that food production was arithmetic. He didn't see the tractor or combine coming. He also ignored the possibility that population growth could be affected by other factors. There are many critics of Malthus out there, and he's been pretty much laid to rest.

Systems tend towards some kind of equilibrium. For AIs, robots, and human (un)employment, we'll likely see the same kind of thing.

The interesting part will be in how the system gets disrupted, similar to how tractors and combines disrupted agriculture.

Anyone that gives any serious thought to a solution to this problem, will ultimately come up with something that would be considered Utopian. There really isn't a way around that. Anything that would get around that wouldn't really be a solution, would it?

And if a Utopian solution really is the only viable solution, then we have a ton of work ahead of us before we could even begin to seriously entertain the thought of actually solving the problem.

I certainly hope there's no Utopian solution. They never work and often make everything much, much worse.

But, the current system we have now isn't going to work. It will collapse. Preventing a collapse is probably out of the question at this point though. The rot and corruption at the top preclude any kind of cure. e.g. Government spending that requires taxation at or above current levels will collapse as debts come due. Merely servicing debts now is onerous, as Argentina keeps proving time and time again with the same solutions to the same problems that didn't work before, aren't working now, and won't work tomorrow.

I'm betting that black markets will become more and more popular. ("Black market" is such a horrible term. It's only a market that excludes government intervention.)

[40hz]

There are many critics of Malthus out there, and he's been pretty much laid to rest.

Not really. 

Systems tend towards some kind of equilibrium. For AIs, robots, and human (un)employment, we'll likely see the same kind of thing.

Systems also tend towards extinction - extinction being the ultimate state of equilibrium.

[Renegade]

There are many critics of Malthus out there, and he's been pretty much laid to rest.

Not really. 

And then there are those that still adhere to Malthus.

There are new methods of agriculture that are 10x to 100x more productive per acre than modern conventional agriculture. And they are unencumbered by patents.

Most human population predictions that I've seen predict a peak of 9 to 10 billion this century. Here's one resource:

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

And a quick snippet:

The annual growth rate is currently declining and is projected to continue to decline in the coming years. Currently, it is estimated that it will become less than 1% by 2020 and less than 0.5% by 2050.

GRAPH OMITTED

This means that world population will continue to grow in the 21st century, but at a slower rate compared to the recent past. World population has doubled (100% increase) in 40 years from 1959 (3 billion) to 1999 (6 billion). It is now estimated that it will take a further 43 years to increase by another 50%, to become 9 billion by 2042.

The latest United Nations projections indicate that world population will nearly stabilize at just above 10 billion persons after 2062.

Not very geometric.

Systems tend towards some kind of equilibrium. For AIs, robots, and human (un)employment, we'll likely see the same kind of thing.

Systems also tend towards extinction - extinction being the ultimate state of equilibrium.

The eternal pessimist!

[40hz]

^Chalk it up to someone who has set up many home aquariums.

You can easily increase the number of fish beyond what a natural body of water can support. But only up to a point. Push the number up too high and sooner or later you end up with a tank of dead or very ill and dying fish. Despite all the fancy water cleaning and oxygenating technology along with carefully selected food and preventative medications.

If our technology can't prevent a massive die off in 100 gallons of water and a relatively simple ecosystem we fully control, how is going to he possible with an entire planet we have so little control over?

Pessimistic? More like 'lacking in hubris' I think.  

Pray for miracles if you must. But try not to put yourself in a position where you have to rely on one.

[Renegade]

Pessimistic? More like 'lacking in hubris' I think. 

Hahaha! That's a good one!