> Don't halt the progress that has dramatically improved the human condition.
You clearly accept this as Progress, but isn't the core debate here that it doesn't improve life for humans?
You clearly accept this as Progress, but isn't the core debate here that it doesn't improve life for humans?
Does literally no one look at things from a historical perspective? The history of automation is right there on the Internet, for you to peruse at will.
but making it measurably worse for vastly more people
can you really say that that technology is "improving life for humans"?
It isn't.
Like, there will one day be a technology invented that could indeed wipe us all out in 5 years. On a long enough timeline, it's a certainty that someone will come up with such a thing. And when it comes, there will be people such as yourself saying "no technology has ever wiped us out before, therefore this one won't either". And then it will wipe us out, and there will be no one left to say "well I guess this time was the exception".
I'm not saying all technology is good. I never said that.
I'm saying automating labor is good. All of my arguments have been specifically scoped to the automation of labor.
To spell it out so we don't keep going around in this circle: it's worth looking at indicators other than the past to judge a technology's benefit to the labor force.