I'm not saying there's no need for a solution. I'm asking why it needs to be connected to a legislated bottleneck of commerce.

Ok, so we agree on the social safety nets.

The government can do a few things. E.g. They could regulate in a way that allows trucking unemployment to be manageable, or they could tax the beneficiaries of greater profits from robots and provide UBI-like payments. I'm open to discussion on both.

Ahh, see my post right above this one ^^^.

Because if you don't commerce will cease to exist. Our economic model will literally collapse upon itself. Most likely reverting to fiefdoms.

Here is a good read.

https://www.amazon.com/How-Will-Capi.../dp/178478401X

It seems like everyone working less is a better solution socially than fewer and fewer people doing all the work and everyone else on the dole. I don't know how to make that happen, but a longer period of publicly provided education and then retirement would do something along those lines. More broadly requiring overtime pay and paying after fewer hours might move things in that direction as well.

12 week mandatory paid vacation across 75% or more of jobs

Obviously, the less a position requires innovation, the more likely it should have that requirement. And other similar criteria

That's the thing about automation. Fewer and fewer people will be required to do all of the work. At that point labor becomes of very little value, while energy skyrockets in value. It becomes an issue of 'we have all of these machines to do our work very efficiently, but how do we power them?' Which is why I believe fusion tech will be very important in the future. Even more fission reactors will be crucial until we can get there.

Trucking regs and employee protection has been separate from all the other low skill jobs, and some of the reasons are actually legitimate

I don't think making that industry bear full responsibility for lost wages is really anywhere near the closest to the most optimal solution for the country/world.

I'm totally in favor of fully making up for the lost wages in a different way, though.

It'll be like that Rick and Morty episode, where everybody will pedal stationary bikes and get paid for the energy mined from that activity

C'mon now Max Theory, we both know it isn't physically possible for you to be a hobbyist to the level I was referring to in "a lot of fields". Just not enough hours man

I have been fortunate to meet a number of sharp people in ml/dnn in both research and industry, in addition to the same in robotic manufacturing. I will likely be at Automate 2017 just to meet up with some associates and friends.

I am not sure what this "proprietary research" you are referring to, as so much is publicly published these days from the major corporations. I read around 20 research papers a week, sometimes more around the major conferences.

By hobbyist I meant dedicating a large portion of my time for the greater part of two years now and plans to continue going forward, as I wish to work under Schmidhuber or Hassabis.

There are a lot of levers available and government could take a very thoughtful approach of adjustments and study. The problem is though that the intent of the people who have influence over these policies isn't necessarily in service of long term stability and the general welfare.

I hope none of the ******s discussing AI are the one that will make it happen cause they lack the social intelligence to recognize they are posting 100 of posts in the wrong thread.

magnificient derail.

that just sounds like slavery with extra steps

You guys understand that productivity growth is currently running below historical norms, correct? There's lots of cool AI research going on, but talk of robots replacing humans is just bear-future scifi at this point. Once the robots actually show up, everything will be fine.

Play-doh manufacturing returning to the US.

Trump is winning!

peace among worlds for all trump supporters imo.

Definitely LC time, but both of those are academics. Good luck. It's not the industry.

I tried to look up productivity statistics, but the Bureau of Labor Statistics is down.

https://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-...us-economy.htm

When it comes back up I expect it to say something about Trump making America great again.

I'd respond to this now, but it's a tangent, and I feel like you left me hanging on a similar topic where you pointed out that hours worked per person has decreased, but I replied that it hasn't because it should account for all people not just employed people and that adding women to the workforce in the last 40 years has dwarfed any decreases per person with a job. The general point being that people in general are working harder for less and that's especially true of the middle class.

So what do you guys think the chances are that we actually expand the welfare state to the point where it would provide a decent standard of living for all the people automated out of jobs? The way I see it going now, is that more and more people are put into situations like the current 50-65 year old, white, no college demographic that is killing themselves in record numbers through drugs and alcohol. Like, the increased drug/alcohol abuse was something that started and went on for years before anyone noticed, so I just don't see people ever feeling like there is an urgent need to expand the welfare state.

I don't necessarily think we'll need UBI, just an expansion in the size and scope of programs that already exist. Which would be easy to do and wouldn't necessarily cost all that much. Which makes all of this so maddening. We know that there's a problem coming, we know the solution, we know it will be extremely beneficial and not all that expensive, but there's like no real chance of it actually being implemented.

I think you way under estimate the incentive to do this and the resources devoted to it.

There are people who want to expand education and training, medical care, unemployment support, medical and family leave, support for the homeless and the mentally ill. And there are people who don't who just won bigly.

I don't know what to tell you other than Charles Koch paid Rush Limbaugh to tell Inso0 that liberals are a bunch of pansies and Inso0 don't want to be no pansy, so he voted for Trump.