Why shouldn’t artists have to find other work if their primary work is unnecessary? Not saying AI is good enough to replace them yet, but when it is, why shouldn’t it? Free people’s time for more worthwhile endeavours, no point being payed to do something that can be automated - besides for niche circumstances, such as artisans. But most artists today are employed doing soul-breaking tasks like graphic design for ads, and if AI can free people from that, I’d be all for it. Why wouldn’t you?
I agree with you, 100%. I absolutely would, just not without compensation. I’m a big ol’ dirty lefty. I believe if we lose jobs to increased efficiency or automation, all society should benefit, not just the rich, and those who have lost those jobs shouldn’t just be kicked to the curb as they so commonly are.
Can’t disagree there! I do wonder how you think such a society might arise though. How do we get from how we are now to a fair society where everyone benefits equally from advances in automation?
Standard lefty fare: get rid of the surprisingly small group of people who ensure we don’t benefit equally so they can skim increasingly large amounts off the top of our very existence while providing little benefit themselves. What that looks like is pretty contextual. I’d prefer a non-violent, gradual transition of power, but telling a bunch of entitled sociopaths they don’t get to leech off the world because they popped out of the right crotch historically hasn’t been an easy or friendly process. They get real pissy.
Incrementally, people can band together and just oust their economic and cultural oppressors. A fun, somewhat related example is ROC USA, a non-profit that helps residents of manufactured home parks collectively purchase the land they previously rented. More generically, workers cooperatives are democratically controlled, worker owned businesses, so anything that benefits the cooperative benefits the workers. If someone’s job is made irrelevant, they’re moved to another position and the increased efficiency/income benefits all workers, not a parasite class that is paid simply for buying an imaginary portion of the company. Workers co-ops are more common in Europe.
So basically, we change how we do everything and either wrest power from the hands of the few or start doing our own thing that economically stonewalls them. I’ve always wanted to start a non-profit grocery store!
Why shouldn’t artists have to find other work if their primary work is unnecessary? Not saying AI is good enough to replace them yet, but when it is, why shouldn’t it? Free people’s time for more worthwhile endeavours, no point being payed to do something that can be automated - besides for niche circumstances, such as artisans. But most artists today are employed doing soul-breaking tasks like graphic design for ads, and if AI can free people from that, I’d be all for it. Why wouldn’t you?
I agree with you, 100%. I absolutely would, just not without compensation. I’m a big ol’ dirty lefty. I believe if we lose jobs to increased efficiency or automation, all society should benefit, not just the rich, and those who have lost those jobs shouldn’t just be kicked to the curb as they so commonly are.
Can’t disagree there! I do wonder how you think such a society might arise though. How do we get from how we are now to a fair society where everyone benefits equally from advances in automation?
Standard lefty fare: get rid of the surprisingly small group of people who ensure we don’t benefit equally so they can skim increasingly large amounts off the top of our very existence while providing little benefit themselves. What that looks like is pretty contextual. I’d prefer a non-violent, gradual transition of power, but telling a bunch of entitled sociopaths they don’t get to leech off the world because they popped out of the right crotch historically hasn’t been an easy or friendly process. They get real pissy.
Incrementally, people can band together and just oust their economic and cultural oppressors. A fun, somewhat related example is ROC USA, a non-profit that helps residents of manufactured home parks collectively purchase the land they previously rented. More generically, workers cooperatives are democratically controlled, worker owned businesses, so anything that benefits the cooperative benefits the workers. If someone’s job is made irrelevant, they’re moved to another position and the increased efficiency/income benefits all workers, not a parasite class that is paid simply for buying an imaginary portion of the company. Workers co-ops are more common in Europe.
So basically, we change how we do everything and either wrest power from the hands of the few or start doing our own thing that economically stonewalls them. I’ve always wanted to start a non-profit grocery store!