Ahhh yes. In capitalism, if you create a machine that can replace say, 10 people, you don’t give them 1/10 of the work. You fire them and maybe hire someone to operate it.
Machines and human workers can coexist. They don’t have to replace them.
Edit: Of course they should replace them, but only after we get good living conditions for unemployed people, which are currently non-existent.
Yeah, we arent going to get our Jetsons future if we refuse to restructure our society towards not having to work instead of just fighting the tech because its taking our jobs away
Of course, the end goal (mind the word “end”) is to replace them. However, in this current situation, where many people are struggling to find a job, it’s not good.
They should replace workers and people should deserve to live without being workers, but it should also be painfully obvious that our current economic system won’t support this idea, and won’t until we do some pretty drastic things.
It’s not that we couldn’t build a post-scarcity society probably even right now given some pretty radical adjustment of resource allocations, we just don’t want to build one – “we” being the 0.01% that have such insane amounts of wealth that they’ve essentially taken over the whole economic system, largely thanks to eg. dumb fucks like Reagan and sociopathic fucks like Thatcher and the people who idolize them buying into the idea that they too can be that rich because the wealth will somehow magically trickle down.
That would be the mentality I’m talking about us needing to kill. Regardless, AI will help with this problem, in both it being inevitable that it will provide people with more free time (due to efficiencies or unemployment) - which is needed to be able to effectively revolt - and it will help address the issues of transforming our economic model, as the machines will have a much better way of distributing goods and services. Also capitalism needs workers to have money so that they can buy the products they produce, which should at some point necessitate a universal basic income, which will further help erode the work = money paradigm.
If you think this current brand of capitalism requires plebs to have money, I’m not sure how you explain the fact that when taking inflation into account wages have been either stagnant or actually going down ever since the 70’s / 80’s, the amount of wealth owned by the same plebs compared to the “financial ruling class” (mainly executives and such, and especially the banking sector thanks to deregulation) has shrunk dramatically, and cost of living keeps getting higher, while at the same time the compensation for the “financial ruling class” has grown at a frankly exponential rate.
Sufficiently advanced AI will, if anything, make it even more likely that that “ruling class” will realize they don’t need quite as many of us around because all we do us suck up their resources and complain how we haven’t eaten anything but cup noodles in a week and our teeth hurt.
If you have two charges q1 and q2, you can get the force between them F by multiplying them with the coulomb constant K (approximately 9 × 10^9) and then dividing that by the distance between them squared r^2.
q1 and q2 cannot be negative. Sometimes you'll not be given a charge, and instead the problem will tell you that you have a proton or electron, both of them have the same charge (1.6 × 10^-19 C), but electrons have a negative charge.
In this case yes, but if q1 was -20μC, q2 was 30μC, and r was 0.5m, then using -20μC as it is would make F equal to -21.6N which is just 21.6N of attraction force between the two charges.
But that if both are negative not one pos one neg like the previous commenter gave in their examples, so the true formula has an absolute value in the numerator: |q1Xq2|
Do you expect them to jeopardize their bonuses by spending money on human beings to support customers? Then you’ll probably want them to keep them employed for more than a few months so they can actually become good at their jobs and familiar with the products.
memes
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.