• daddycool@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    It has always been like that. We invent machines to help us be more productive. Not to work less, but to produce more. Or the same, but with less people. And every time people protest because they are losing their jobs. Time passes, new types of jobs pop up. Rinse and repeat.

    That being said. I’m not particularly on board with A.I. Sure, it can do some really impressive things, but at the same time I think it’s been hyped way above its limits, and I’m not a fan of its environmental footprint. I just don’t think the result is worth price. But I guess only time will tell.

    • saimen@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      It’s because of our economic system being build upon people having to work to get money to live while at the same time naturally “the system” is trying to be more and more efficient so less and less work is needed. It’s an inherent problem which becomes more obvious with AI. Imagine a world where robots are doing all the work. Wouldn’t it be great? No one has to work anymore. I think it would be possible but only with a radical systemic change how our societies work. Also, I don’t think we are even close to be there, but that would be the goal, wouldn’t it?

      • abigscaryhobo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        It’s the problem with how companies operate. As a whole we should be working towards utopia. But there’s no desire to pay into social programs, only to extract money from other (usually non-billionaire) people, and avoid paying them so that extracted money stays in their hands. It’s the “No Take, Only Throw” dog meme but “No wages, only spend.”