Comment on Sam Altman Says If Jobs Gets Wiped Out, Maybe They Weren’t Even “Real Work” to Start With
TheFogan@programming.dev 6 days ago
You know what, he actually wouldn’t be horrificly wrong if he were actually pushing for something there. Lets say hypothetically our jobs, aren’t real work, and it’s no big deal that they are replaced… the actual intents of progression of technology… was originally that when the ratio of work needed to be done and people shifts… we’d work less for more pay etc… but no we just capitalism it and say “labor is in high supply, so we need to cut it’s price until people can find use for it”.
ZoteTheMighty@lemmy.zip 6 days ago
I feel like he’s really onto something about real work, but he’s missing the point of society. The purpose of our economy is to employ everyone, thus minimizing the negative societal effects of supporting unemployed people, and enabling people to improve their lives. If you optimize a society to produce more GDP by firing people, you’re subtracting value, not adding it.
squaresinger@lemmy.world 6 days ago
I think you are a step further down in the a/b problem tree.
The purpose of society is that everyone can have a safe, stable and good life. In our current setup this requires that most people are employed. But that’s not a given.
Think of a hypothetical society where AI/robots do all the work. There would be no need to employ everyone to do work to support unemployed people.
We are slowly getting to that direction, but the problem here is that our capitalist society isn’t fit for that setup. In our capitalist setup, removing the need for work means making people unemployed, who then “need to be supported” while the rich who own/employ robots/AI benefit without putting in any work at all.