Support NeoGAF

[Croatoan]

very scary, in a pessimist by nature unfortunately, and this has been keeping me up at night ever since I first read about it. what I hope is that we manage to pull off rapid mobilization on a global scale, ala WW2 - and the sociological predictions mentioned don't pan out. I know the climate doesn't work like that, it's a long term challenge that we have failed for decades - but it's clear our species does not deal well with problems of that nature. but we can achieve remarkable things when the spectre of our mortality is hanging over us. so thats what keeps me going.

solidarity to all, especially those with anxiety and catastrophising thought processes. I hope nobody is triggered/has their day affected by this thread or my post.

Anecdotally, I think most millennials and Gen X believe in global warming but I would have to see data to be sure. The boomers are the ones that are still fucking us over. The sooner we can replace all boomers in office the better. They are the most resistant to change, on both sides of the political spectrum.

Once power shifts shit will start to happen rapidly. Unfortunately its probably already to late for 50% of the planet. Winning the birth lottery will be the golden ticket for the next generation.

 

[Geist-]

I think his assumption was that the rich people would use the "robots" to kill anyone that got out of line. The poor would be out gunned and have no food. That is the main difference between his belief and what has happened historically.

Imagine a judge dredd scenario with walled cities. Only they are policed by giant armies of nearly impossible to kill robots.

We're talking about automation here, not magic anime robots. Military hardware is cheap, and walled cities are stationary. Do you think rich people will suddenly band together to form a single planetary government? No, what's more likely is "enemy" countries suddenly supplying the pissed off 70% with tanks, planes, and artillery. Who knows, maybe invincible robots too.

Fuck, get them pissed off enough and I wouldn't be surprised if these walled cities get nuked.

Also, what's up with this "rich people are evil!" narrative going on in this thread? Ya, some rich people are assholes, but some of every group of people are assholes. That doesn't mean they all see poor people as subhuman or that they want the majority of the world to die.

Anyway, ya, automation is coming, and it's probably going to be a painful transition. For rich people too. Doctors and Lawyers will probably be some of the first jobs to be replaced with computers, right after the transportation industry. No jobs are safe besides maybe programmers(but probably replaced by self-coding AI).

We should just hope that once new generations take political power, they'll be more open to safety net expansions. Making sure no one gets too desperate to do something drastic is something everyone, especially rich people, should want.

 

[Keasar]

Also, what's up with this "rich people are evil!" narrative going on in this thread? Ya, some rich people are assholes, but some of every group of people are assholes. That doesn't mean they all see poor people as subhuman or that they want the majority of the world to die.

I have a dislike of wealthy people by default as by comparison against a non-wealthy, a evil rich person has the capacity and means of causing much greater harm to people than non-wealthy does. Individuals like Rupert Murdoch or the Koch brothers are a much greater threat to humanity than one asshole in a backyard lighting fires to squirrels, people with an agenda and a ton of money to back that agenda up to influence countries into absolute shit.

It is on a "until proven otherwise" basis.

 

[Kintor]

This is certainly a fascinating topic and I don't say that to sound cold or callous; the implications for the future, should all this come to pass, requires a clear head to comprehend it. I mean: large parts of the planet becoming uninhabitable, the collapse of Western civilisation, the eventual death of billions. It's enough to drive anyone mad - the thought that these are the last good years any of us will ever see - as the world is consumed by a multitude of disasters both environmental and manmade.

Still, I don't think the world's elite (as they currently stand) will emerge unscathed while the rest of the plant dies off. Because if history has shown anything it's that the complacency of a current elite surely ensures their own downfall. To that I must say, it's not so much that today's elite are corrupt or immoral (although strong arguments can be made for both accusations) the real issue is that they are grossly incompetent, lacking in the vision and willpower needed to dynamically adapt to changing power structures.

So, while I think that the downfall of the elite is a certainty in this grim scenario I don't put stock in any utopian revolutions popping up in the aftermath. There will always be an elite, it's just a question of who gets to be the new elite that rules over the shattered remains of civilisation in a vastly diminished world. To that end, power will belong to the faction that’s best able to mitigate the damage of global warming at the expense of their rivals. Increase automation is part of that solution, but the key to victory will require more dramatic innovations.

Anecdotally, I think most millennials and Gen X believe in global warming but I would have to see data to be sure. The boomers are the ones that are still fucking us over. The sooner we can replace all boomers in office the better. They are the most resistant to change, on both sides of the political spectrum.

Once power shifts shit will start to happen rapidly. Unfortunately its probably already to late for 50% of the planet. Winning the birth lottery will be the golden ticket for the next generation.

It really does make me wonder how history will judge the Baby Boomers. All that power, the opportunity to safeguard the planet for future generations and instead they end up stymying their children and grandchildren at every turn. Personally, I think that phrase 'Baby Boomer' will become something akin to a slur, the name of a faceless evil that children will blame for any problem that began before they were born. But such mirthful thoughts are hardly consolation when we will still have the Baby Boomer's mess to clean-up as best we can.

 

[Geist-]

I have a dislike of wealthy people by default as by comparison against a non-wealthy, a evil rich person has the capacity and means of causing much greater harm to people than non-wealthy does. Individuals like Rupert Murdoch or the Koch brothers are a much greater threat to humanity than one asshole in a backyard lighting fires to squirrels, people with an agenda and a ton of money to back that agenda up to influence countries into absolute shit.

It is on a "until proven otherwise" basis.

Right, I would agree with you if the narrative being pushed was rich people can disproportionately cause harm to the world. But the narrative in this thread is that all rich people are assholes and would join together to oppress poor people. Which is just delusional, and sounds like the teenage philosophy of someone who read Hunger Games just a few times too many.

 

[curls]

The monetary system is already creaking at the seams. I just don't see it being sustainable anymore.

Too bad the politicians and the numerous policy institutes have no real vision for this new frontier.

 

[Alucrid]

i can finally live on the dole?

 

[Alexlf]

I'm used to slaughtering and butchering animals and I can work in conditions the average first-world person would find uncomfortable, let alone the rich. I also have friends who are hunters and own guns. The rich tend to live where other rich people live, they're very easy to find and their meat will be very tender and juicy.

You assume the rich don't also have guns, and that they aren't bigger and more plentiful than what you and your friends have.

 

[Tobor]

"Charles" sounds like a prepper. Does he have a bug out bag? Is he ready for SHTF?

 

[Giant Panda]

That scenario seems a bit outlandish. Just a bit.

More likely is that humanity will muddle through, like we do with most of our problems. There will be some warming, but we'll eventually get our shit together and the worst case scenarios won't come to pass. We'll also use technology to adjust to the warming that does occur.

 

[MrChom]

There's a special place in the "Horribly wrong" side of the history books for Malthus and his ilk.

Every time we come close to wiping ourselves out, or underfeeding, or....well....catastrophe level stuff the necessity becomes real and people CHANGE things.

It's not going to be easy, and people will die as a result of all of this, and I doubt any "futurologist" (read: overpaid talker of rubbish) will make correct predictions, but things like GM crops, better building materials, carbon capture, green technologies and such are going to affect the way the future is going to be.

Will we see mass unemployment? Maybe. I mean we've seen automation start to kill industries before only for new industries to rise around them who need people first and automata second, or specialised industries that keep people for a "hand-made" aspect.

Will the rich hive themselves off? Absolutely. And in time (as before) they'll either have to learn to share, or perish...inequality breeds violence on a scale you don't want to talk about.

In the end humans survive because on one end we're mostly pretty stubborn about not dying, and as well as that whenever tragedy starts someone somewhere else usually notices and tries to make it a cause we need to fix. We may always end up with the same overall AMOUNT of problems, but we can usually address one at a time if we put our minds to it.

 

[andythinkpad]

That's bullshit. Raising temperature will make food growing easier.

Although I agree with you the raising sea level will kill a lot of people near the equator.

 

[Shake Appeal]

That's why it's called 'climate change' now ...that way it catches every weather pattern and is an even better scapegoat

Not sure where to start with this.

That's bullshit. Raising temperature will make food growing easier.

In some places, yes! In most places, including some of the most vital arable land in the world (and in states like California), no, no, it won't.

 

[sphagnum]

Sounds like it would be a good idea to take away control of the automated workforce from private interests and run it for the good of the collective.

On a more serious note, I was having a debate with my dad about politics yesterday and I guess he had just never thought of automation before, because as I was explaining to him how many jobs are going to be wiped out and how many people will suffer if we don't institute basic income of some sort at minimum I could see the dawning horror in his eyes. His economic worldview is trickle down Reaganomics, so he typically believes that what's good for the rich is good for everyone else.

 

[z1ggy]

I can see huge taxes on machines, basic income for everyone (here in Argentina most kids have one) and closed economies across the globe.

I'll predict automation will end economic globalization.

Also i think in the near future we will provide energy and food from our homes. So that could help a bit.

 

[Dr. Benton Quest]

Where is darkace? I would have expected him to be spouting Friedman 'bootstrap' nonsense by now.


If automation helps end the exploitation of workers across the globe then I welcome it. Rip off the band aid and let's get to work.

 

[Foffy]

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-manufacturing-jobs-lost-20160811-snap-story.html

B-but they will always be jobs because special snowflake people something something past is the future blah blah.

 

[AstroNut325]

That's why it's called 'climate change' now ...that way it catches every weather pattern and is an even better scapegoat

So I presume you've written off the ride in average global temperatures and oceans?

 

[Sunster]

If the oceans acidify to the point of not supporting life anymore I don't think any human will be able to live comfortably on the planet. It seems like we are approaching that mark faster and faster.

How fast does it need to go to be on the news daily?

 

[pr0cs]

So I presume you've written off the ride in average global temperatures and oceans?

From how long ago? 20 years or 2000 years or 2000000 years. It kinda matters

 

[Blatz]

Personally, I think the Climate Crisis hits before "Automation" is mature enough to do anything of substance.

 

[Blatz]

That's why it's called 'climate change' now ...that way it catches every weather pattern and is an even better scapegoat

It's because Republican Political Consultant Frank Luntz convinced George W. Bush to call Global Warming Climate change instead because it sounded less alarmist.

"It’s time for us to start talking about “climate change” instead of global warming and “conservation” instead of preservation…“Climate change” is less frightening than “global warming”…While global warming has catastrophic connotations attached to it, climate change suggests a more controllable and less emotional challenge".

Source: Republican Political Consultant Frank Luntz, 2003

 

[Bit-Bit]

I see climate change deniers have started in on this thread.

I can't.