The Rejected RealmsBoard

hello comrades

Aandruzognivia wrote:

The question is: Will this be good for humanity?
corporations shouldn't be given power at all.

The government will have all the power then and things will become even more horrible. I believe that corporations are better than a despotic government. The government will use technological advancement for ill.

Aandruzognivia wrote:

Depending on how the government receives power. Theoretically, a democratic government with complete control of automation would be all-powerful. So how would we divide the power of automation? I don't just want a debate, but a solution as well.

My belief is that there can be no reconciliation between humans and post-industrial technology so we must return to life before the industrial revolution or continue to suffer and bring about our own demise with our own inventions.

Aandruzognivia wrote:

I'm not gonna tell you that that is a terrible idea, I'm no-one for that. I will tell you that that is not the idea for me.

I definitely do not want to live for less than 50 years, or give up my current technology. If there's a problem, there must be a logical solution. It may not be perfect, but there's a solution. Probably. Maybe.

maybe don't count on it

Humans, according to evolution, are apes that use technology, it doesn't look right to see a human in that context using a PC or reading through paper work to file taxes. In evolutionary contexts, this should never have happened. This website, our conversation and our very existence should never have occured.

Outboundstagnate wrote:

Humans, according to evolution, are apes that use technology, it doesn't look right to see a human in that context using a PC or reading through paper work to file taxes. In evolutionary contexts, this should never have happened.

Evolution is a human idea developed from an observed cause of nature. However we try to classify something, there's always that one thing to stray from the definition we provided its general class. Nature is not something to be classified, but observed. This happened.

Yahaba wrote:

Then how tf we gonna classify stuff then? Call some random water-bacteria on Mars "squiggly water being" or somethin'?

We can try, but there's always something that strays from the definition we give it.

Rca occupation wrote:

That doesn’t make sense.

We get it.

Rca occupation wrote:

How does automation make more jobs? It takes them away.

Had you read the conversation that had not-too-recently ensued, you would have your answer.

Aandruzognivia wrote:

We can try, but there's always something that strays from the definition we give it.

Then give it another definition or make one up

More automation 100% does creat more human jobs. Take for example the automatic teller machine, ATM for short. People were scared that the ATM would take jobs away from bank tellers. Which it did. But, not really. Because while the ATM did take teller jobs away per branch location, it was a key reason behind why Branch location for banks exploded exponentially. Which created more bank teller jobs.

And that’s not to mention the jobs created to engineer these ATMs, create the software, security, the people who install them, the technicians who service them, and the people who fill them with money.

Rca occupation wrote:

Those can’t be considered jobs. That’s just sitting on your bum in front of computer and getting payed for it.

Then explain nuclear reactor operator and engineer

Yahaba wrote:

Then explain nuclear reactor operator and engineer

If you get exercise from it, then it’s a job.

Rca occupation wrote:

If you get exercise from it, then it’s a job.

Yeah but um they're mostly sitting on their bums all day making sure the reactor doesn't go ka-boom so no, by your logic, they're not jobs. As Aand said, a job is an occupation to perform an assigned task, I'm afraid you're getting the scientific definition of work mixed up with our social definition of work.