Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Depends on the robot really. Robots that help the elderly manage their dementia and loneliness? Great. Robots that help wheelchair bound people navigate? Great. Robots that help clean up nuclear disasters? Great.

What would not be great is if we just allow a handful of people to own all the robots in the world (and their output), just as we allow a handful of people to own all the capital producing equipment in the world. Then we're just where we are today, but even worse off. This is actually my nightmare, and partly why I don't do much robotics anymore these days...

Remember, people only need jobs because we as a society have decided if they don't have jobs, we will allow them to go hungry and suffer exposure of the elements due to homelessness. This is perhaps necessary when there's so much work to be done you want people working instead of idle and comfortable. But if the robots can do all the work, then why do people need jobs? Only if the benefits of that work accrue to a handful of people rather that society as a whole.



If robots are expensive at first, some people will have them first. This is a basic law of economy (scarcity).

It is interesting about peoplr must havr jobs or not. If you do not provide value and someone has to pay those costs with their work, is that fair? Even if we have robots: who maintains them, manufacture, program the AI?

You want tha some people work doing that and the rest enjoy a life as good as the ones who work hard and people who benefit from them just be privileged?

Something does not match well here.

You do your contribution and find a place in society. If your contribution is not great, I do not find a reason to be in exactlythe same position as others. Yes you have the right to live and so on. But do not expect a Ferrari at your door and a luxury life.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: