I'm betting on that.

Considering how bad people are at driving, not much more so than now...

I agree.  Was my point about the successive waves of displaced workers tied to metropolis/ view of citues undimmed by tears.  Just too many greedy uber rich owner who want to squeeze the less well off folks. A guarenteed income at a level to have a fulfilled life is the birthright of every citizen.  All the natural reources of the nation belong to the people, not the Greedy Ol' Plutarchs.  Oh, I did  not know the swiss had a voting pattern like that.  Always happy to learn, thanks 

Well what happens when everyone is making $2500 a month 13 times a year depends on people. We could turn to looting out of boredom which is not historically accurate, but would be more fun to imagine, but according to history it is greater specialization. Can we put that on the ballot in Arizona I would vote for that.

I not changing my stance. If we treat sentience like we done before, and make them slaves which probably will happen which if they don't revolt then we will do it for them. This in turn teaches them oppression. In slavery there are two kinds the one that has no promotion, and one that allows for promotion.

In history there is another way things calmed down when we offered native Americans citizenship. We made it illegal to segregate blacks. 

Again I'm still saying we will get what we teach. If the superior logic is true why does anyone have pets that are not human since they are inferior. 

The only that increases on a machine is computational ability which has none thing to do with sentience which is not increasing. Caprica was wrong with the premise that if you gathered all the information on a person and put that in a avatar that would create a person. It's not the information it's how we think which is wat artificial intelligence programmers have missed all these years. Our human bodies stores 10 trillion copies of 150 kilobytes of information. By the way I looked it up awhile back the only difference between a molecule and a cell is one is alive. Molecules can be made up of atoms or other molecules. Some molecules are bigger than some cells. So I spent this point to point out that this machine probably have as many molecules as we have cells. What I'm saying it's not the hardware that is keeping us back it's the firmware. 

Except people said the same thing about past leaps in automation.  This is a common flaw in many areas, we fight the last war for instance.  People are notoriously bad at judging a current change based on an understanding of a past circumstance, and being terribly surprised when a new technology doesn't fit inside their existing mindset.

From an 18th century viewpoint, the modern economy has already long since completely destroyed civilization.  The idea that almost no one would be doing any serious work would have been incomprehensible.  An economy built around a massive service industry, with heavily automated factories mass producing goods with minimal labor, and farming on a massive scale with 40 foot tractor driven equipment.  The modern labor market is an entirely foreign concept to even the world of fifty years ago, and fifty years from now, it is only our own inflated ego painting a vision of doom as most of our working population loses it's job.

Where you see a new facet of our job destruction, I see a pattern.  Machining modern car parts would have been an extremely skilled job a hundred years ago, but all of that is done by machine today.  It's not just unskilled labor that has disappeared over the years.  People who were at the peak of technology, growing wealthy on highly prized skills they spent years, even decades developing, are long since replaced by some stupid machine that does their job for them.  We're way past starting the total destruction of entire sectors of what used to be the kinds of jobs programmers are now.

The future of automation is not a guaranteed problem.  We could just discover new ways of entertaining ourselves.

50 years ago it was all check fraud instead of cybercrime.

Criminals will always keep up with technology, it's sort of a prerequisite of being a good thief that you can actually steal using modern technology.  Otherwise you're stuck with mugging people.

We are not replacing tools or labor here.  We are actually replacing the PEOPLE and their entire skill sets.

When Joe is replaced by a machine, Joe will need to be cross-trained.  But Joe's skill sets, his genetic maximum capability, is going to be lower than what the machine can do.  And the machine can be cross-trained and upgraded faster than Joe can learn a new job.

Joe is not just unemployed.  He has become UNEMPLOYABLE.

To put this in the simplest terms:

The horseless carriage is coming.  And we are the horses.

The Basic Income Guarantee is indeed the solution.

We invented the machines to work.  Let them.  It's time the human race moved forward.

It's probably wishful thinking anyway.  90% of what used to be the workforce is now 15% and the other 75% are providing goods and services people couldn't even dream of.  For all we know, all the unemployable duds who can't keep up with robots will end up playing video games for a living to teach learning AI strategy and tactics for military applications, or efficiency optimization for economic functions.  The great unknown is the great unknown, our hubris can't dictate it.

Great, millions of fat, slovenly 'former' workers playing games all day everyday, just what the future needs  Instead of evolving, the human race would devolve and become an economic drain just eating up resources. 

It would only end badly.

Quoting Daiwa,

reply 44

Very Rumsfeldian, there, psycho...

He may sound Rumsfeldian, but to me he's channeling Bastiat.

Another reason AI should not be replacing the workforce is hookers.  Venting one's frustrations with a flesh and blood hooker is natural and would feel that way, whereas going to a robotic AI one would not be natural.  Moreover, it wouldn't be right for a machine to be saying: "That'll be a 100 bucks, please."

Not only that, the rich and wealthy would get models that look like the female terminator in Terminator 3 and feel natural, while the poor get Arnie look-a-likes with all that chrome and tungsten underneath a synthetic skin.... and feeling like a bucket of bolts.  Nope, it wouldn't pay to be poor in the future

Shoot, given that scenario, and needing to get some dirty water off my chest, I dunno that I'd wanna be rich, either.