Hacker News Reader

Comment by glangdale | Hacker News Reader

40 people isn't a "small town". 40 people is a hamlet. There are likely economies of scale for "The Machine" if it exists, so having one such machine for 40 people is outlandish. In any case, who wants to live in a hamlet/town of 40 people?

This whole treatment manages to ignore the entire service sector (which won't go away because of a magical "Machine"). Unless we're also positing robot teachers, doctors, cleaners, masseurs, ... this happily glosses over quite a large portion of what people actually do in the society we have now. Farming and manufacturing are not what they used to be.

It's not a bad thing to think about in general, but it's so far off base that it's a lousy starting point for a thought experiment (or an actual real-world project).

View on HN

These 'hamlets' could be neighborhoods within a big city depending on the size of "The Machines".

Detroit could certainly fit a few. Perhaps it would be an ideal testing ground because of the combination of its space and its manufacturing infrastructure.

Agreed. We have the Machine right now, it's called China and the Midwest + Rail/Tractor Trailer Trucks + Walmart.

Author here.

An important distinction between China and The Machine is that a group of people can purchase and wholly own The Machine.

If you can't purchase it, you have to agree to the social contract offered by those who do. For us that means we have to accept the state of the labor conditions in Bangladesh for example, which I would rather not do.

This is a classic problem with capitalism.

If a group of people can purchase The Machine then they can decide for themselves what they are willing to accept. And in general if survival is automated and the knowledge for how to reproduce this is free, we're way less likely to see people in far off places being exploited for manual labor.

I agree with the goals, and one day the dream will come true. But that day requires a breakthrough like energy to matter replication.

But I salute you, it's better to light a candle than curse the darkness.

Thank you.

I agree it is a difficult challenge and I am looking at 100+ year timescales.

That said we can certainly make machines that for example recycle plastics in to new mechanical parts and machines that grow food in a fully automated way. But portions of The Machine are intentionally more fanciful in order to stimulate good discussion.

You are aware that 80% of the US economy is services, right? Will The Machine do all that, too, after it's completely conquered such minor inconveniences as "Economies of Scale"?

> robot teachers

People who teach don't do it for money. They enjoy teaching. If their needs are met, they would be happy to teach. In fact I would be happy to teach with no compensation if my needs were met.

> doctors

You average family practitioner can easily be replaced by a sophisticated AI to diagnose illness and prescribe drugs and therapies.

> cleaners

Easily replaced by a machine.

> masseurs

Again easily replaced by a robotic arm or arms.

People tend to do jobs for money...Needs have a different meaning to everybody, and having my needs met is something only I can decide, not something society/culture/the machine can decide for me.

We have not seen any AI that can conduct an actual physical exam yet. There are important steps before that can happen. AI will probably help, but they are far from a reality.

No, housekeepers will not be replaced by machines. we lack a good energy source for small robots, and we need to focus more on the fact robotic dexterity is no match for humans yet.

Masseurs really cannot be replaced by robots until we have much better haptic feedback systems that can be fed back into control mechanisms. In specific types of massage, it is possible a robot could eventually do a good job, however, i find it far fetched that a robot will ever do a better jobs than a person at doing things which "feel good" since a robot doesn't feel. Also, human contact is not the same as robot contact.

Remember that I'm talking about this on a 100+ year timescale. (Actually, now I can't recall if I made that clear...)

I think the energy problem for mobile robots will be solved. Lithium batteries are already decent there as long as you can recharge often.

As far as massage, I'd say that's one of the things I'd envision people doing for pleasure. Or perhaps you will just pay for it, nothing about this system prohibits the use of money.

And the primary reason I work is not for money. I work because I believe automation can solve an ancient problem with humanity - the problem of exploitation of humans for the gain of others. The ultimate embodiment of my work would be The Machine.

In truth even if it existed we would have many problems, but I'm very concerned with problems related to exploitation of labor.

Professional teachers(particularly in STEM) accept wages below the market for those skills to pursue their Vocation of teaching.

Many of my peers in Secondary Ed would happily teach for free if their other needs were met.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com