Whenever AI is more effective, use it. Full stop. Yes, people are going to lose their jobs. MOST people will across every single industry under the sun. Okay? That’s just reality. That is our future, it’s not stopping. For so many reasons.
You cannot, and will not, compete on the global market full stop if you do that. Not only that, keeping Jobs around and forcing people to work when they are contributing zero to society, is morally reprehensible. That’s just making them work just cause. Wasting their life working just cause. Don’t need to, they have no real use, they are worse at the job, but make them do it anyway just to give the average guy something to do.
Can’t have a population with idle hands! Right guys?? But why. Lol. There’s no reason we as a population have to work full time forever. None. Zero.
It is not companies jobs to figure out how society is going to work here. Call. Your. Congressman.
This is the feds job.
Until it is truly sentient, it isn’t a real AI. And until it can pass a Voidt-Kompf empathy test (/s for those that need it), it would be immoral to replace humans with it.
Morals are an exclusively human thing. Take humans out of the equation, and it’s amoral through and through.
Note the difference between immoral and amoral. Immoral goes against it, amoral is a lack of it.
Considering humans have been the sole proprietor and producer of said morals, taking the human element out of the situation is removing the morals themselves.
As far as population with idle hands, look how far we’ve come automating things. Look at the general mental disposition that has arisen within the last century. We have become a population of mostly idle hands. How much good has that done us? Suicide is higher now than before, crimes more rampant, and the belief in oneself at an all time low. Humans need something to do, like dogs need to play. You think a beaver gnaws on wood for fun? If it didn’t, it’s teeth would grow back into it’s skull and it would die. Animals need busy work, they need an outlet for the energy they keep consuming.
It would be immoral to remove any and all work from the world. Because the humans need it to stay sane and humans created morality.
It would be amorally the best decision to have an entire planet run by hyper efficient machines, but that would also be a planet that was anathema to human existence. It would be no more than a factory.
And before you go and say humans would do just fine with nothing to do, I suggest you take a few months and sit alone in an empty room with nothing to do. See how that fairs on your psyche. Just because you’re too lazy to work, doesn’t mean it’s good for you.
Assuming all my hobbies weren’t also automated away I’d always find projects to occupy my time. Just because some people would just idley sit there consuming doesn’t mean everyone will. No one is going to be just sat in a room with nothing to do. At worst you’ll have all the AI generated media to enjoy.
See the first paragraph and try that again.
What you call “AI” are merely advances programs. Until its fully sentient it isn’t a true AI. And at that point you’d still have to teach it empathy to produce proper art. So you’re easily centuries away from this dream of yours.
I’m not talking about just computer generated images, I’m talking true-blue art of any kind. Good art such as books, paintings, and physical works such as pottery didn’t get that way because of it’s composition, it got that way because of the love the artist put into making it so. They put their hopes, dreams, and soul into their art and an AI (true AI) lacking in empathy could merely produce a replica of something it’s seen or a reamalgamation of what it’s seen.
So sure, you have now envisioned a world where you have no purpose other than your hobbies, which will cost you money you are giving up by not working, and soulless media who’s only purpose is to rake in the money you still aren’t earning.
So your hobbies slow down due to lack of money, your media is meaningless cash-grabs, and you aren’t allowed to do any work because some politician outlawed organic workers as “immoral”
The issue here is that if you wanted to do something like woodworking, you couldn’t afford the wood to do so, nor would you be allowed to commit public deforestation, and you’d be left with nothing to do but consume the free media provided for you. Eventually the lack of heart and care put into the “art” you’re consuming will wear on you and you’ll seek something else to do and… BOOM empty room analogy.
And before you come out here with UBI, if everybody got paid for doing nothing and you used that meaningless money to buy things, how high do you think the price of any hobby is gonna become? They can make more money by charging you more, then UBI increases to account for it, then they charge more money because they can, then UBI increases to account for it, then they charge more money because they can… oh wait, just like minimum wage… weird, it’s almost like it wouldn’t change anything. Except you’d lose the opportunity to make more than minimum…
By accepting UBI and doing nothing extra you are accepting a life of poverty, for no reason. The only cheap things will be run by your advanced programs and so you’ll be left with no hobbies to preform, as the materials for said hobbies would be too expensive. I enjoy painting minis as my hobby, specifically Warhammer 40k, I can barely afford this hobby as is. If I was basically making minimum wage, I’d have to put down the hobby period. And now we’re back to an empty room filled with empty media to loosely bandage the empty hole in your chest.
Nice rant there except you are assuming that “work” at that point is still the method we are using to allot resources to people. Guess you are against the internal combustion engine that put buggy whip makers and many stable hands out of work. Or maybe the massive weaving looms that put weavers out if work. Or CNC machines that put various artisans out of the job?
Once more see my original reply. We have become a population of mostly idle hands. This is why workers are fighting for their rights to keep working. I already addressed that.
Also in the cases you’ve mentioned people still respect the handmade work. But OP is arguing that having organic workers would be “immoral” and wants to remove the human aspect from work. So while right now we have weavers who still do it the old way, that’s because there is still a market for it. If you outlaw those weavers (the people themselves), then yes the argument becomes more relevant.
And what do you suppose people would be doing for your resource allotment?
I’m not sure he’s advocating outlawing human labour, more that he views people having to do jobs they don’t really like or care about to secure their allocation of resources is immoral.
We are assuming a transition to a post scarcity economy so there would be a base line allocation (UBI) that would eventually be increased to cover all basic needs and people would do jobs because that is what they wanted to do with their time, not to supplement their income anymore.