The ultimate goal of technology is to create full unemployment

Any thoughts on how to distribute the fruits of technology?
The 'fruits' of technology would include the ability to support a population up to some limit which would be sustainable for the indefinite future. A reasonable definition of 'sustainable for the indefinite future' would relate to a point in the future when the vast majority of fossil fuels and mineral resources have already been extracted.

Never going to happen. Any distributive scheme not based on personal effort and exchanged value just incentivizes a withdraw from the production base and equal poverty for all...except among those ruling. As with industry and the steam shovel, those jobs replaced by technology always pressure the workforce to learn new skills in order to go on offering value to exchange. Adapt or die. Everything of any value must be provided by someone, and people are children if they think others should do so without recompense.

Even if robots could collect and distribute resources, the people who paid for the robots deserve a return on their investment. And the unemployed have nothing to offer in exchange...unless they have developed new and desirable skills.

I've considered Self Sufficiency a number of times in regards to what would be required to reduce overall outgoings. (e.g. Such things as Solar/wind power to reduce or zero power bills. Aquaponics for growing food.)

There is no absolute "steady state" system to be had though, there is always going to be some loss of energy at some point. For instance the equipment used to get solar or wind power costs energy to create and energy to maintain, the same could be said of aquaponics. So you are always going to be dealing with reductionism compared to current methods, as opposed to obsoletion of current methods.

The main hold back to any technological development however is funding, while it might be assume a good idea must be worth a fortune if produced, sometimes it's actually worth more shelved, which means the technology never comes to pass because of greed. (It's a good job that patent's aren't indefinite.)

Yeah, we had TV LED technology back in the 70's or 80's, but tube TV manufacturers bought out the patents.

(Sep 8, 2018 12:46 AM)confused2 Wrote: Any thoughts on how to distribute the fruits of technology? The 'fruits' of technology would include the ability to support a population up to some limit which would be sustainable for the indefinite future. A reasonable definition of 'sustainable for the indefinite future' would relate to a point in the future when the vast majority of fossil fuels and mineral resources have already been extracted.

Needless to say, easy fusion or whatever quasi-limitless power sources must finally be realized.

I guess the "fruits of technology" could yield a utopia of idle pursuits for awhile before dystopia set in. It could unfold like this...

Automated machines would need to become expert and manipulatively adept enough to manufacture, diagnose, and repair themselves. But to attain that, continued R&D and industry fabrication require consumers and taxpayers for funding such (i.e., they need money to be consumers and taxpayers). Thus avoid diminishing the number of paying jobs so quickly that it kills the very progress toward successfully eliminating human employees.

Somewhere in the middle of this quest the non-1% or average person could participant in part or full ownership of a smart machine (kind of like buying a slave to do the work they once did). They would also be responsible for maintaining the machines until the latter finally advanced to the aforementioned point of being independent of humans -- apart from the latter being the owners and recipients of their labor. (All of this conveniently ignores the possibly different consequences of a future where the incremental transhuman ascent of people themselves occurs along the way, or those who could afford the upgrades.)

Anyway, after unemployment is achieved maybe a scenario results vaguely similar to that below. Where some elite ideological minority become the Lord Protectors who exploit the situation, while most of the rest of humanity regresses into the "Farers", with the machines being the enslaved providers. If the former ever stagnate to becoming the equivalent of the Eloi, then the machines perhaps develop into the equivalent of more free-willed and liberated Morlocks. But this version of the latter at least wouldn't be interested in eating the degenerated humans or keeping them around as livestock. Just get rid of the ex-gods or creators once and for all.

Imagine if Ayn Rand had written an ERB-like sci-fi saga, it might have resembled something like the following. In the 1970s, Leigh Brackett wrote a triology of novels that were later combined as "The Book of Skaith", revolving around her space-pulp adventure hero Eric John Stark. One of the social commentary subtexts taking place in it revolved around the productive citizens of a dying world being forced to provide for a parasitic class who seemed to be modeled on the worst stereotype of indolent hippies and flower-children a la the 1960s, except taking place on another planet. These "Farers" (short for wandering wayfarers, maybe) were political wards of a group called the Lords Protector and their henchmen, who more or less severely taxed and penalized the working classes to pay for the welfare of the Farers.

~

(Sep 8, 2018 12:46 AM)confused2 Wrote: Any thoughts on how to distribute the fruits of technology?
The 'fruits' of technology would include the ability to support a population up to some limit which would be sustainable for the indefinite future. A reasonable definition of 'sustainable for the indefinite future' would relate to a point in the future when the vast majority of fossil fuels and mineral resources have already been extracted.

excellent point
 i have a starting question to all the big company owners and corporates.

"how do you invisage maintaining your company model if your customers, consumers & clients have no jobs and consequentialy no income to pay for your products & Services?"

Even assuming limitless energy and robotic slaves, that can do all work, becoming ubiquitous, humans would just exchange in intellectual property, continuing to require a free market and some means of exchange, whereby their contribution can be valued. Without any purpose at all, a life of leisure quickly becomes ennui, depression, plummeting birthrates, etc..

(Sep 8, 2018 07:25 AM)C C Wrote:

(Sep 8, 2018 12:46 AM)confused2 Wrote: Any thoughts on how to distribute the fruits of technology? The 'fruits' of technology would include the ability to support a population up to some limit which would be sustainable for the indefinite future. A reasonable definition of 'sustainable for the indefinite future' would relate to a point in the future when the vast majority of fossil fuels and mineral resources have already been extracted.

Needless to say, easy fusion or whatever quasi-limitless power sources must finally be realized.

I guess the "fruits of technology" could yield a utopia of idle pursuits for awhile before dystopia set in. It could unfold like this...

Automated machines would need to become expert and manipulatively adept enough to manufacture, diagnose, and repair themselves. But to attain that, continued R&D and industry fabrication require consumers and taxpayers for funding such (i.e., they need money to be consumers and taxpayers). Thus avoid diminishing the number of paying jobs so quickly that it kills the very progress toward successfully eliminating human employees.

Somewhere in the middle of this quest the non-1% or average person could participant in part or full ownership of a smart machine (kind of like buying a slave to do the work they once did). They would also be responsible for maintaining the machines until the latter finally advanced to the aforementioned point of being independent of humans -- apart from the latter being the owners and recipients of their labor. (All of this conveniently ignores the possibly different consequences of a future where the incremental transhuman ascent of people themselves occurs along the way, or those who could afford the upgrades.)

Anyway, after unemployment is achieved maybe a scenario results vaguely similar to that below. Where some elite ideological minority become the Lord Protectors who exploit the situation, while most of the rest of humanity regresses into the "Farers", with the machines being the enslaved providers. If the former ever stagnate to becoming the equivalent of the Eloi, then the machines perhaps develop into the equivalent of more free-willed and liberated Morlocks. But this version of the latter at least wouldn't be interested in eating the degenerated humans or keeping them around as livestock. Just get rid of the ex-gods or creators once and for all.

Imagine if Ayn Rand had written an ERB-like sci-fi saga, it might have resembled something like the following. In the 1970s, Leigh Brackett wrote a triology of novels that were later combined as "The Book of Skaith", revolving around her space-pulp adventure hero Eric John Stark. One of the social commentary subtexts taking place in it revolved around the productive citizens of a dying world being forced to provide for a parasitic class who seemed to be modeled on the worst stereotype of indolent hippies and flower-children a la the 1960s, except taking place on another planet. These "Farers" (short for wandering wayfarers, maybe) were political wards of a group called the Lords Protector and their henchmen, who more or less severely taxed and penalized the working classes to pay for the welfare of the Farers.

~

Quote: Just get rid of the ex-gods or creators once and for all.

jumping past the inevitable middle period which would be the down fall of theentire worlds ecconomy & power structures...

the computers would want to keep around people who could fix software issues and deign new upgrades.
the "creative"element in humans would be farmed by the computers breeding a new class of human.
one which was schooled specifically to be a creative human mind to design new code & potential addaptions for the computer masters.
they would probably do this be keeping the population of humans as a breeding ecconomy under a guise of free will and standard market status allow most of them to be rich and live lifes of almost luxury with some hardship thrown in to garner a need for human to human competition.

like ibiza & club med meets silicone valley under a dome.
or satalite small highly defended citys and towns that were ruled by the computer over lords.

A little off-topic but the AI vs Humanity (With the event of humans becoming obsolete) I don't think that generally it's considered correctly by those that fear monger about it.

The problem we (humans) have is we think linearly in regards to time, we move from past through the present to a future and for that reason our entire interpretation of events and reasoning is based purely upon how the arrows of time situate. The point is that should we build such significant intelligences in the future, they will likely be constructed with quantum events, their perceptions of how important the past is, to how it creates their present and directs their future would likely mean that a significant intelligence would realise that what comes before it's present is just as important as it's future.

In other words I wouldn't suggest we'd ever be relegated to dying out for the reason of being surpassed, in fact the very reason for life being here might have very well been a stepping stone into the creation of artificiality since it itself can no evolve or reproduce on it's own. (even if in the future that problem is solved)

This importance to time scope is furthered by quantum realities, where deviations are actually used to aid in processing outcomes. Certain core structures would still require being maintained so as to no succumb completely to entropy. (In other words a system would concern itself that some things are maintained to a predestined path, and reiterate that path many times over like some kind of mantra to maintain the reality.)

[quote=Syne]Even if robots could collect and distribute resources, the people who paid for the robots deserve a return on their investment. And the unemployed have nothing to offer in exchange...unless they have developed new and desirable skills. [quote]So you would condemn many to starve in a land of plenty. A technologically advanced and very violent society. The I-pad and clones are already close to being sufficient to track and identify the winners and losers in society. Allow the police to shoot (kill) anyone without an I-pad and you rapidly eliminate the non-productive members of your population.