Comment on A cartoonist's review of AI art, by Matthew Inman
A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 11 hours agoThe job argument is usually a stupid one.
The what? It’s the only one that objectively makes sense.
Comment on A cartoonist's review of AI art, by Matthew Inman
A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 11 hours agoThe job argument is usually a stupid one.
The what? It’s the only one that objectively makes sense.
Johanno@feddit.org 11 hours ago
Ok imagine this:
You are an construction worker. The job is hard but the pay is okay.
Now robots replace your job slowly. They are cheaper and more accurate.
You can now:
Complain about the robots stealing your job
Be happy that you don’t have to do the hard work anymore.
Many people will go for 1. But the actual issue is that the social security net isn’t existent or so weak that no job means no food.
That is not the fault of technology though.
Remember that when you vote and when politicians want to cut costs by reducing payments for the unemployed.
sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 hours ago
Option 2 is soulless.
Option 3. Destroy the capitalists owned robots and bring the robots under the control of the working class.
FishFace@lemmy.world 9 hours ago
Option 3 still ends up with robots and no-one doing the jobs that the robots replaced.
Johanno@feddit.org 8 hours ago
Option 3 would be a weird way of communism. Which still enforces my point. The reason why you fear for job safety is not the fault of technology.