Hacker News Reader

Comment by zelon88 | Hacker News Reader

Makes sense to me. Most jobs are just code that hasn't been written yet or simple machines that haven't been built yet. The only reason why is because there is no regulatory incentive to stop exploiting humans.

We conquered the world already. We have enough technology to replace most human labor with automation and enable people to produce entertainment, media, and innovation of their own accord. Instead people run around anxious and impoverished for basically no reason. You would never know humans are at the top of the food chain looking from the outside.

Why not get UBI done, replace the humans with robots, and then actually enjoy our lives?

View on HN

I find these types of outlooks to be far too rose-tinted.

Productivity and other arguments aside. I think we still need a fair bit of advancement before this is possible.

We need to reach a point where robots can maintain themselves and all of our complex machinery. The maintenance required for a train engine or train tracks is non trivial for example.

We need advancements in energy. Solar is not enough at it's current state but I have hope it soon will be.

I do feel, we're at a point that, if we could focus a lot of resources, we can drive enough development to give everyone a very high quality of life for free.

At this point,the machinery we make the more machinery we have to maintain. And robots are not at the point where they can do this.

> At this point,the machinery we make the more machinery we have to maintain. And robots are not at the point where they can do this.

I hear what you're saying, and I agree it is very optimistic.

But is it really? You can fit an RMV into a Redbox machine. You can fit a Dunkins into a machine the size of a 15 yard dumpster.

Then you don't need the train to transport all those employees to work.

I used to be pro-UBI but no longer. Here's why: most people will stop working and become largely disconnected from society. They will only worry that the UBI is still coming in. A smaller percentage of people will continue working because they are internally compelled to work. These people will make all of the decisions in society. The power will be concentrated in an even smaller pool of people than today, leading to lesser freedom over time for the masses.

What you actually want in society is for as many people as possible to have the means and motivation to contribute to social progress, to keep it as fair as possible. You want more independence, not more dependence.

If universal basic income causes most people to stop working, and if the people who keep working get to amass all the power, then wouldn't everyone want UBI so they could keep working and have all the power?

In my head, universal basic income is more like tax returns, but each month instead of each year. Like a tax refund for food and shelter.

The world of entertainment and media is far more cutthroat and imbalanced than any current work equivalents. I can only imagine how much worse our world would be if we had everyone pursuing clout.

Hollywood is dying. The next generation and the one after don't give a crap about famous actors or singers declared by Hollywood.

Hollywood has 10 years or relevance and 20 years of existence as we know it.

Ask your kids who Chris Pratt is. Now ask them who Jeris Johnson is.

My response is not about Hollywood, but the current influx of “influencers” etc.

> Why not get UBI done, replace the humans with robots, and then actually enjoy our lives?

You still need an army. If everyone stops working then our neighbors can just organize their guns together and steal our robots. Unless of course we had a fully autonomous military (techno dystopia "stop right there criminal scum"). But who oversees the military robots? Who oversees the UBI? Somebody has to do the dirty work, and those people will have power, and as we know, people who have power will ultimately abuse it.

Why wouldn't you continue to have government officials and a standing human army with regular recruitment?

Just because there is UBI and most people don't have to enslave themselves to eat doesn't mean people won't want to do something with their lives. Soldiers and officials get UBI plus salary and they are chosen the same way they are now.

It seems that you just want to setup a straw man argument that you can then knock down.

UBI doesn't replace all human labor. It just incentivizes automation and puts people first. You'll still be able to find a job as a mechanic or robot engineer or programmer if you want. Then you can take a paycheck and UBI. But it will be of your own accord instead of forcing you into compliance with wage slavery like we do now.

there are not a lot of jobs that are "code that hasn't been written yet" unless you include AGI... teachers, programmers, drivers, chefs, truck drivers, engineers, cashier, etc.

How about we hold off on predictions about the impending end of work as long as the unemployment rate is close to 4% (lowest since the 1960s)

>Most jobs are just code that hasn't been written yet or simple machines that haven't been built yet.

This is peak techbro arrogance. No, most jobs are not replaceable by code and "simple machines".

I'm sure manual lathe operators in the 1960s would scoff if you told them by 2000 their job would be done by entry level labor operating robots (CNC machines). And they would have been wrong too, just like you are now.

what do you plan on doing to all the people you won't need anymore as workers.

UBI. Those people get a check in the mail just for being alive. If they decide to find work as a programmer or machine mechanic or something similar then they get UBI plus a paycheck.

UBI by itself is basically a paycheck for doing what you love. Invent a new product. Make projects on github. Write a song. Be happy. Make other people happy.

I guess communism boogeyman is still very scary.

I think people associate "communism" with "corrupt authoritarianism" and then associate UBI with "communism".

The same people also conflate "capitalism" with "democracy" and forget that it is actually possible to have the latter without the former.

Currently the scarily succesful (in terms of material gains) model seems to be capitalism without democracy.

Hundreds of millions died under attempts to impose communism. Yes, it is scary.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com