Hacker News Reader

Comment by mbroshi | Hacker News Reader

"The factory of the future will have only two employees, a man and a dog. The man will be there to feed the dog. The dog will be there to keep the man from touching the equipment." - Warren Bennis

View on HN

The Matrix wasn't about a Humanity enslaved by an AI race and fighting for their freedom, it was about a Humanity being kept from complete obsolescence, depression and death by our loving evolutionary descendants in the only way they found that worked, and our accidentally fucking it up royally.

Man, the stories we tell ourselves to justify our mistakes.

From where did you derive this explanation? Truly capitavating. Very different perspective than what I've thought of, and I've spent a fair amount of time thinking about this exact thing

On the spot to express the point. The Matrix is just an easy go-to when referring to possible negative outcomes of the future with AI, and the point I'm trying to express is that as scary as it feels that people, not just jobs, may actually be automated out of existence, that doesn't necessarily have to be as bad as it may sound.

I read a lot of science fiction of random quality and length[1], and there's enough of a scattershot of ideas that an expansive humanity and humans dying off are not entirely uncommon ideas, so I've had reason to think about it fairly often. While I understand a lot of people might be upset at the idea humanity dying off, being a father myself and the understanding that while I can't stick around to experience everything myself, part of what I am (in the *intellectual sense more importantly than the biological one) continues on in part through my children (one of which is not biological, but just as much a continuation in the same sense).

That we might engineer our own obsolescence is scary, but so is the knowledge that we all die. Similar to in our individual lives, I find some comfort that in my old age I might be taken care of by my legacy.

Also, using humans for batteries is stupid. There's plenty of better reasons possible and that have been put forth for that plot point. That's just low hanging fruit for nerds. ;)

1: https://www.reddit.com/r/HFY/ - If you don't know what this is and you like science fiction, you're in for a treat. Check the sidebar for quality classics.

From some discussions I've seen, it seems that the human battery idea was introduced in the last minutes by executive meddling. The original idea by the Wachowskis was exactly what you described: a way of the machines protect themselves from humanity attacking them again, while also giving humanity a paradise as mercy and gratitude. It was never the machines' intention to rebel and attack the humans; they only attacked back as self-protection.

The [Machine War][1] describes how it was in the early days. The conflict started when a robot killed its human masters because they were planning to destroy it and replace by a newer model. That started a Machine Civil Rights Movements, but humanity had become lazy and arrogant due to the new lifestyle yielded by the creation of AI. Most humans refused to acknowledge the robots and the few human sympathizers who did were silenced. It's a great read/watch (if you see the anime), but I better stop here so I don't spoil anything.

After reading this, that has become my single concern about the future with AI: will humanity be able to treat and respect the machines as equals?

PS: I was reading about it just this past weekend. Such a coincidence. This thread was from where I got most of it: https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/4h9ghg/in_the_matri...

[1]: http://matrix.wikia.com/wiki/Machine_War

I think I've actually seen that, long ago, but I didn't recall it until you mentioned it (and still can only vaguely remember it). As I alluded to in my prior comment, the idea that the AI we create will be our equals, friends and comrades has plenty of precedent and fiction of its own. I in no way claim ownership or mean to imply it's an entirely original thought. ;) That said, thanks for the reminder. I had completely forgotten about the Animatrix (which IIRC is what you are referring to).

Of course! I thought you were alluding to these ideas. And you could either come up to these conclusions by your own or through any other material.

I hope my comment didn't look like I was calling you out about these ideas. I was just excited at this coincidence and wanted to share it. They went completely unnoticed to me from watching just the movies. Makes them even better (including the sequels :P).

Yup. I've been thinking about that for a long time too -- ever since reading Asimov's books on the Laws of Robotics as an angsty teen. I hated the premise and thought about whether our ideals about instrinsic rights extend to non-human sentience, even if we were its creators. I'm not an angsty teen anymore, so I don't know if I'd still feel derisive about Asimov's robot stories. However, seeing as how we as humans have difficulty treating other humans as humans, I'm not seeing much hope for treating non-human sentience with respect. If our creations rise against us, it will be because we made them in our image, and that includes both dreams and nightmares buried in our collective psyche.

>From some discussions I've seen, it seems that the human battery idea was introduced in the last minutes by executive meddling. The original idea by the Wachowskis was exactly what you described: a way of the machines protect themselves from humanity attacking them again, while also giving humanity a paradise as mercy and gratitude.

Amazing bit of irony if that's the case!

It's kind of in the animatrix if you listen and think about it. It's not super obvious though.

I think The Matrix applies now and not necessarily just in the future. Our daily existence (work, chores, passive entertainment) sits us within the enslavement capsules while the 1% have politicians paid and on puppet strings to keep everyone fearful and busy.

Is life only worth living for working?

This touches such an important issue! The answer is "yes" but it must become "no". Our culture has made it such that we think life is about work and "accomplishing things". "Things" are of course work things. We might or might not get to a point where we don't need everyone to work. That should be awesome. Basic income guarantee might solve the economic problem associated with it, but not the social problem. We cannot derive our self-worth from our work. We need to learn to appreciate "free time". We need to legitimize enjoying and practicing the arts. I personally would love a future in which I could focus on practicing potter, learn Japanese, study economics just for fun and build the occasional video game or AI player for existing video games without worrying if it makes money or not. From conversations I've learned that this is not the case for many people. In a recent interview Marc Andreessen claimed that people in the midwest don't want checks form the so called coastal elites, but they want opportunities. We need to learn to be happy about the freedom we get form just getting the checks.

Maybe a good possible future would be that people focus on earning and saving capital when they are young and try to get to financially independent (ie., can live off the production of saved capital) as soon as possible. If most people were financially independent, jobs people did not want to do would pay well and people could quickly reach financial independence working these jobs (in a decade or so?). I think working hard and having the feeling of earning a life full of choices would go a long ways to prevent the psychological malaise of sucking from some one else's (the government) teat ones whole life. Also, having most of society overseeing capital instead of the 1% would probably be a good thing. This is possible today in the USA, Europe, Japan, South Korea, Australia, etc. See the Mr Money Mustache[1] blog for an extended description and discussion of one way of living this life.

[1]http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/

Of course not. But let's be clear, anything that can be automated to better effect, will be, and I see no reason to believe that will stop are purely functional pursuits. Artists? What's to say true AIs might not squeeze people out of that field as well?

A great many people find purpose through achieving some greater goal, or less loftily, through feeling like they matter, even if they do not. How easy is this fiction to perpetuate when you are, quite literally, house pets to the true intelligences running our society as house pets are to us?

Lest you think we'll have a place in running a future where we might have actually designed our betters, consider dogs. We love them, we pamper them, but we don't let them run wild in the streets and cause problems, because clearly they don't know what's best for them in the society they are now living. Humans may not be the dogs of the future, but let's not assume we're safe form that threat without real good assurances. To me, life in the matrix might be preferable to an existence where I'm constantly confronted by my inadequacy in any matter of import. Then again, my dog loves me, and while I feel sorry that I can't take him out as much as I believe he deserves, I'm not sure he realizes there's more to life (depending on point of view) than what he has.

So, is life without work worth living? Is contented slavery okay? I don't know. Truly. It seems like it should be bad, but how much of that is rational thought and how much of that is my culture speaking through me? My allusion to the Matrix was actually one of the more Utopian possible outcomes. At least we retain our sense of agency, even if it's a lie in reality.

Most animals are perfectly fine to live without much work. Humans are animals.

I'm wondering why are you being downvoted.

You don't need "work", but you do need some kind of purpose. For basically the entire history of life on earth, that purpose has been "survive and reproduce" but humans have won that game so we have to find something else.

I always figured the Matrix (complete with Zion and the machine war backstory) was just a VR game for humanity to keep ourselves occupied with while we waited for <world event X> to happen in the real world. (Colony ship to arrive, global warming to reverse itself, radiation to die down, whatever.)

Or even (plot twist!) for all the people in the Matrix to be sims / ems in a game, with the agents being actual humans playing the game, who of course have superpowers and a mysterious overarching goal because what video game character doesn't?

Sign me up. (If I can reload saved games after dying, that is.)

I wonder what sort of qualifications you need for that sort of job. I would like to be prepared for that sort of future.

A Doctorate in Dog Food Science with a minor in kennel cleaning.

And minimum seven years experience with existing factory dog.

No I would think the minimum requirement would be 20 years of experience with the same factory dog with the sort of requirements that go on these days with businesses -- it's only going to get worse.

You guys are all wrong. The only requirement for this job is that you have to be a Good Boy.

Oh you've only got experience with Labradors? This is a rottweiler company.

My sons and I were talking the other day about how George Jetson of The Jetsons had some job akin to this and was constantly being yelled at by his psycho boss for falling asleep at his desk. He also apparently had no life. He walked his dog on a treadmill. He seemed to have no hobbies, no friends, etc.

And yet, unlike many of my friends, still kept cash in his wallet (its in the intro).

Oh, man, that is so old school. Cash? WTF?

I assume you were downvoted for leaving out /s, thus your comment was not "obviously" sarcastic.

This lead several presumably cash-loving individuals to take offense at your remark.

And to demonstrate protest at the insinuation of the obsolescence of fiat currency, they clicked the little minus.

I found your comment entertaining and it ranks 1/1 stars from my karma bucket.

I figure they just think I am too stupid to know the show was made well before debit cards were a thing.

Ha! Fooled you! I'm not even a real blonde.

I remember an old throw away scifi book.

Almost everything was automated except for bars[1]. Having an actually job required an inane mount of schooling, testing and credentials. But gave you a life where you got to live and associate with people with somewhat meaningful lives.

[1] Automated bars existed, but to the authorities dismay, few people would patronize them.

Yeah, this is another serious issue. People have intellectual, social and emotional needs. Merely satisfying their basic physical needs is not enough.

Domino Harvey* comes to mind. She was supposedly a model turned bounty hunter. A lot of adrenaline junkies currently get their thrills doing EMS work and similar jobs. Or they have dangerous hobbies. If you take away all the constructive outlets for adrenaline junkies, you are basically left with dangerous hobbies and fomenting revolution or pursuing illegal activities merely to feel alive once in a while. This will likely not go good places.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domino_Harvey

> People have intellectual, social and emotional needs. Merely satisfying their basic physical needs is not enough.

This is one thing I think went wrong with all the 20th century modernisms. The thinking that social and emotional needs didn't matter infected all sorts of fields[1] like a cancer. Before 1960 they used to keep sick infants in sterile boxes where they failed to thrive and eventually died. Okay they don't do that now. But the equivalent exists in all sort of other places.

Player Piano by Kurt Vonnegut. Barbers, too, until some enterprising barber automated his own job and retired and forced the others out of a job too.

Excellent book.

Reminds me of how we have perfectly good machines for automatically producing espresso drinks, but they still have Starbucks stores with baristas doing it manually on every corner. At least that's what I would have commented three years ago. My last two jobs have had espresso machines and I never go to Starbucks anymore.

And this, surely, is the end game. We're now working on autonomous vehicles; there's no reason to think drivers will be required beyond maybe ten years hence. So, they're on the scrapheap. Store assistants, fast food cooks? Same deal, maybe another few years for legal assurances (hot oil can be unfriendly).

How many professions do you come in contact with who seem unlikely to be candidates for automation?

At some point - and we're unfortunately rather a long way from that societally - we need to take stock, and consider: who, exactly, is all of this for?

20 years experience as a dog — only furries will be able to find work.

a bright future for some of us ^^

Funny. But watchdog or security robots already exist.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com