It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A stunningly MAJOR change on the horizon.

page: 2
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 23 2012 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by SouthernForkway26
If we have robots doing our work than humans would find more time for social and recreation activities. No real need for me to go to school unless I want to learn how to build and fix the labor bots.

Just the act of going to school is not productive at all to society, in fact it consumes resources from society. Its the education from school that has value. Its value is also only worth the person's ability to effectively use it, usually at a workplace somewhere. But without the need for a job who would waste the time unless you just wanted to know something.

Money isn't given as a reward of a person's level of intelligence. It is given based on productivity. Theoretically a college graduate usually earns more money because they are able to do a skilled job that someone without the education could not.

I imagine most people would probably just chill and be social more with the free time we would all have. All of the necessities and common conveniences would be available for free such as food, shelter, phone, internet, etc. Only the robot owners would even have money (if there was more than one robot company) and it would be used for things that are forever limited like real estate or water.


I think the government would make sure you went to school. In order to maintain order in society, the government would make sure you have something to do to keep yourself busy. If no one went to school, then after a few generations, we might have these robots, but no one would know how to use them.

And education has more value than just its applicability to a specific field of work. Education builds people to become greater. Without education and without work, we would lose our humanity. I'm in school right now and what I'm learning here about industrial electronics isn't the only thing I'm learning here. I'm not just becoming a better technician, I'm becoming a better person.

An education definitely is productive to society, even if you never apply your knowledge in the field of your expertise. When A.I. hits the shelves, we will have a choice of becoming a society of lazy fools or a society of hyper-intellectual technological masters.

The thing is, with an education, and especially a hyper-education, as in this utopian scenario, what exists today won't be what exists tomorrow. People with educations are more creative. So, when our basic needs are automatically met, we will all have time to become engineers and create our own jobs through the new products we invent. With everyone getting a hyper-education, there will be new things all the time. People will work, its just that we will have a higher class of average worker. There will be no more arbitrary tasks.




posted on May, 23 2012 @ 08:46 PM
link   
reply to post by smithjustinb
 




I think the government would make sure you went to school. In order to maintain order in society, the government would make sure you have something to do to keep yourself busy. If no one went to school, then after a few generations, we might have these robots, but no one would know how to use them.


Sure a certain level of education would be required, but how much? I think that society will dictate how we spend our time rather than the government. Our priorities would change once the high priority of having to work to pay for everything is gone. This is what would lead me more to things like spirituality, liberal arts, and many other social activities rather than going to school.



And education has more value than just its applicability to a specific field of work. Education builds people to become greater. Without education and without work, we would lose our humanity. I'm in school right now and what I'm learning here about industrial electronics isn't the only thing I'm learning here. I'm not just becoming a better technician, I'm becoming a better person. An education definitely is productive to society, even if you never apply your knowledge in the field of your expertise. When A.I. hits the shelves, we will have a choice of becoming a society of lazy fools or a society of hyper-intellectual technological masters.

I agree that there are other valuable things to learn at school other than something from a book or classroom. I will even argue that this knowledge can be more useful than than the technical knowledge. But for a person to be productive in society they have to contribute something to society. A co-worker of mine has only a high school education and over the 10 years that he has learned and worked in construction he has helped with approximately 15 new houses. He has made a valuable contribution to society by helping create a home and shelter for 15 families for at least the next 150 years. One of his friends earned a civil engineering degree from a party school and is a car salesman earning more than 3x as much. He uses his education every day but his position has little real contribution to society imo. Another friend of his has a PhD in marine biology and she is jobless, literally just consuming the earth's resources. Spending years in school to become a super-genius might allow you to live a more fulfilling life, but that itself isn't a contribution to society and has no value to anybody but you.



The thing is, with an education, and especially a hyper-education, as in this utopian scenario, what exists today won't be what exists tomorrow. People with educations are more creative. So, when our basic needs are automatically met, we will all have time to become engineers and create our own jobs through the new products we invent. With everyone getting a hyper-education, there will be new things all the time. People will work, its just that we will have a higher class of average worker. There will be no more arbitrary tasks.

In this scenario I see just a few super-talented people working, most likely building the newest model of robot that produces the newest great idea from another super-talented person. Everybody else would just chill with their new amazing gadget they got for free because robots mined raw material and assembled the parts and sent them to everybody. Real true wealth is either a physical thing of value created with labor or a limited resource. If we all have essentially unlimited free labor we would all have infinite wealth.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by SouthernForkway26
reply to post by smithjustinb
 


Sure a certain level of education would be required, but how much? I think that society will dictate how we spend our time rather than the government. Our priorities would change once the high priority of having to work to pay for everything is gone. This is what would lead me more to things like spirituality, liberal arts, and many other social activities rather than going to school.


I'm going to have to disagree. The government really dictates how we spend our time, even now, because they control the markets, because they make the currency. I don't believe that will change just because of the invention of A.I. Even though everyone on Earth will be aware that we have unlimited resources, the government won't stop pushing us forward. The government won't let us become ignorant. I'm thankful for that. The beautiful thing about this is, that if the government does start paying us for school, we will move forward, intellectually and creatively, at unimaginable speed. It is definitely in our best interests.



I agree that there are other valuable things to learn at school other than something from a book or classroom. I will even argue that this knowledge can be more useful than than the technical knowledge. But for a person to be productive in society they have to contribute something to society. A co-worker of mine has only a high school education and over the 10 years that he has learned and worked in construction he has helped with approximately 15 new houses. He has made a valuable contribution to society by helping create a home and shelter for 15 families for at least the next 150 years. One of his friends earned a civil engineering degree from a party school and is a car salesman earning more than 3x as much. He uses his education every day but his position has little real contribution to society imo. Another friend of his has a PhD in marine biology and she is jobless, literally just consuming the earth's resources. Spending years in school to become a super-genius might allow you to live a more fulfilling life, but that itself isn't a contribution to society and has no value to anybody but you.


I agree with you here. If we have all this knowledge, and don't put it to use, it only serves us individually. I have two things to say about that. One thing is that it is the individuals that make up society. So, when every individual has a hyper-education, society will also be indirectly greater. The second thing is that with all this knowledge everyone is gaining, people will come forward, at fast rates, with new ideas. These new ideas will create jobs. So its not like workers become completely obsolete. There will always be something to do, and probably everyone, unofficially, will have something to do. Its just that mainstream laborers will be in very low demand, so the government won't be able to sustain the economy because there won't be enough consumers because no one will have jobs. They will have to find something else that people can do to get money. I see school as the most probable and practical solution.



In this scenario I see just a few super-talented people working, most likely building the newest model of robot that produces the newest great idea from another super-talented person. Everybody else would just chill with their new amazing gadget they got for free because robots mined raw material and assembled the parts and sent them to everybody. Real true wealth is either a physical thing of value created with labor or a limited resource. If we all have essentially unlimited free labor we would all have infinite wealth.


You are right. We would have unlimited available wealth. But just because its there, doesn't mean society will agree that you are entitled to it. The old way of earning your keep and earning your place in society won't change. The only thing that will change is how you earn your credentials. I think it is an infinitely better way forward.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by smithjustinb
 

You know, I find myself roughly in agreement.

Didn't think I'd say that, since I usually have lots to say.

I usually have a long list of disagreements to post about and make the thread bloated.

Your logic nearly irrefutable.

The value of (repetitive) physical labor is going down - check. (machines)
The value of (repetitive) mental labor is going down - check (ai, computers)
The value of discovery is going up - check (school, r&d, exploration, etc)

Repetitive labor increasingly valueless.

If it's not repetitive then it's more dynamic, but not necessarily new.

It's discovery that brings new things. That's why we need educated people.

Without learning new things, we could quickly de-evolve or be killed off by the unexpected.

But this is a long long long road. Increasingly valueless does not mean valueless.

So repetitive labor still has importance and will probably forever, just increasingly less.

So we will slowly but surely become a society dominated by education and discovery.

Everything is labor, technically: breathing, going to the bathroom, etc. But not all labor has equal value. Thus, we have a kind of class-based society where people do different labors.

This has mostly always been true too. I mean, physical labor was made easier with tools and methods, not just machines. And mental labor was made more robust with the advent of advanced mathematics. It did not suddenly happen as the result of calculators. So all of this is not new, but it has certainly sped up. However, if you believe what Ray Kurzweil says then you understand that progress has always been mostly exponential. So the rate of change is increasing...

All of this progression happens while our body seems to remain unchanged. In the span of 200 years, we have developed immense machines that do the work of thousands of men and supercomputers that can perform operations that would have required all the worlds scientists a thousand years to compute by hand! But our body has not changed much at all. The value of our physical labor is indeed going down dramatically. And if our intelligence similarly remains unchanged, it too will be pushed aside as computers and AI increasingly replace it in numerous roles. In order to compensate and adapt we will push ourselves to be educated to compete and increase our value by comparison. The goal, as it were, to do things that machines nor computers can replicate on their own.

But dear reader, do not overlook that if you fail to meet the expectations of this more mental market, what shall you do but languish in cold dark rooms, pleading for crumbs from those more able? Your strong body cannot beat the machine. Your slower more lacking brain barely has an edge at all over a computerized piece of code. Worse, your insufficient will to learn ensures you stay below your peers.

So please remember that this will not eliminate poverty or even unemployment (if school is considered employment and failing students are the unemployed). It won't be a utopia.
edit on 24-5-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by smithjustinb
 





And it is widely acknowledged that if you aren't working, and you're not going to school, you're not serving a purpose.


There are two major problems with this statement (the scope of the "wide acknowledgement" being a minor one).

First, if there is a purpose to anyone's life, it's not, and cannot be, defined by human parameters, especially not in utilitary terms.

Second, the implication seems to be that a being has to serve a purpose in order to merit survival on this Earth, on which it/she/he has been born without asking for it.
Is that so?
Not in my opinion.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 02:21 PM
link   
I just love this video because there're a lot of people who don't even know this is possible:
And the list of things people don't know about is staggering.

Here's another video about this same topic (controlling something with your mind):
www.newscientist.com ...

This video is covers the same man (and in fact might be the same source video):
Listen to that man when he says "This is huge."

It's all happening underneath their nose.
edit on 24-5-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 02:29 PM
link   
If our technology gets that advanced, we will also probably have technology advanced enough to integrate computers with our brains and therefor download all the knowledge we need. School will be useless in the world you invision as well.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by smithjustinb
Throughout history, man has developed a system of going to work and getting paid. But with the emergence of new technology, the need for human work is going down the drain. One thing we're not going to do, as humans, is lose a purpose for existing. The new way of distribution of wealth will be wealth distributed to those who go to school.


Interesting, but..

1. The history of man is one of migration and innovation. We started in the middle east and we wound up all over the globe, thanks to advancing technology.

2. This will never stop. This constant to migrate is what established space exploration. The Earth is not humanity's eternal home.

3. When we colonize other planets, the need for engineering and human surveying will be required, again. The science of the planet, like the Earth, will be charted, described, and broken down into its constituent elements, and then distributed through markets like here on Earth.

4. There is no absolute zero where suddenly everyone will lay down their instruments to pick up paintbrushes.

The difference between now and then is a question thermodynamics, not art.
edit on 24-5-2012 by imherejusttoread because: -migrate +migration

edit on 24-5-2012 by imherejusttoread because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by smithjustinb
 


I like your idea OP, my only question is why would we still need money? Why would we need to work?



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bodhi7
If our technology gets that advanced, we will also probably have technology advanced enough to integrate computers with our brains and therefor download all the knowledge we need. School will be useless in the world you invision as well.


Gaining knowledge isn't the goal of education, USING knowledge is the goal of education



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 10:39 PM
link   
Yeah, I can see it changing. There will be little need of humans as workers so we will become increasingly disposable. Medicine will not help the sick or old and the lifespan will again drop to the useful age of fifty five. No retirement to worry about because fifty five will be under the retirement age. A select few will have lifespans of two hundred years and they will be the big business owners. This will be good for the earth though, it will recover. No need to mine anymore and no need to drill for oil. Five hundred million people max will inhabit the earth.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 10:51 PM
link   
Man populates earth, man creates bio electric life forms, electric life forms serves man, man depopulates itself, bio life forms take over man, bio life inhabit earth, bio life infected and dies out, earth cleanses itself, new lifeforms evolves and another cycle begins.
I somehow do not think i will see the MAJOR change on the horizon because the horizon is sooooo far away.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 07:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by AdAstra
reply to post by smithjustinb
 





And it is widely acknowledged that if you aren't working, and you're not going to school, you're not serving a purpose.


There are two major problems with this statement (the scope of the "wide acknowledgement" being a minor one).

First, if there is a purpose to anyone's life, it's not, and cannot be, defined by human parameters, especially not in utilitary terms.


You think work, as our purpose, is a human designation? All animals work, and those that don't are having their lives hand-fed to them by those who do. All animals learn too. And all that learning and working is designed to do one thing- propogate our survival, not just as individual species, but in the case of human potential, survival of the whole planet.


Second, the implication seems to be that a being has to serve a purpose in order to merit survival on this Earth, on which it/she/he has been born without asking for it.
Is that so?
Not in my opinion.


The purpose of life is to live- to survive. If it weren't that way, then everything we do wouldn't be based around that.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 07:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by imherejusttoread

Originally posted by smithjustinb
Throughout history, man has developed a system of going to work and getting paid. But with the emergence of new technology, the need for human work is going down the drain. One thing we're not going to do, as humans, is lose a purpose for existing. The new way of distribution of wealth will be wealth distributed to those who go to school.


Interesting, but..

1. The history of man is one of migration and innovation. We started in the middle east and we wound up all over the globe, thanks to advancing technology.

2. This will never stop. This constant to migrate is what established space exploration. The Earth is not humanity's eternal home.


I agree with you, except survival is the constant and motivates us to migrate.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 07:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cecilofs
reply to post by smithjustinb
 


I like your idea OP, my only question is why would we still need money? Why would we need to work?



Society wants us to earn our keep and it doesn't believe in laziness. We would need money, because it is a motivator to continue humanity's progression. The government won't allow you to sit on your ass all day. Just because technology advances to the point where this becomes practical doesn't mean there won't still be a need for workers. There will always be a need for workers. There will just be a point where there isn't a need for enough of them to sustain the economy. We'll never see the end to currency, and if we do, it'll be socialism. We'll also never see the end of work.



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 02:28 AM
link   
reply to post by smithjustinb
 


My friend,
You have been reading too many Scifi books. I'll bet you see a future where humans live in zoos and robots pay to see the humans.....Chill



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 02:41 AM
link   
Any society where government distributes the wealth sounds like hell to me... I do see a leap forward coming however needless to say I do not see it playing out the way you do.



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye
Any society where government distributes the wealth sounds like hell to me... I do see a leap forward coming however needless to say I do not see it playing out the way you do.


I'm not saying the government is going to distribute the wealth. I'm just saying the government will and does control it. They make money. They decide what you have to do to get it.



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 10:23 PM
link   
reply to post by smithjustinb
 


Who will fund the schools, and will it be a version of Prussian Education?
You know the Govt screws up royally in the education department, right?

edit on 26-5-2012 by rainbowbear because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by jonnywhite
reply to post by smithjustinb
 


All of this progression happens while our body seems to remain unchanged.



Hmmm, have our bodies really remained unchanged? Perhaps the decrease in physical acitvity and the increase in obesity is the evolutionary direction we are destined for. A while back I saw a cartoon (cant remember the artist) that depicted the future human as a huge blob with minimized arms and legs but huge eyes that really couldn't move much anymore. They just remained in darkened rooms looking at computer monitors with remote controls.

In addition, I just can't see how the change over from paying an arm and a leg to go to school to being paid to go will occur. And --- the reason that school was the most fun time for most people is because that is what they did when they were young. Almost anything is more fun when remembered fondly and nostalgically as we age. I can almost guarantee that school would not be so 'fun' during old age!
edit on 26/5/12 by AidanK because: (no reason given)



new topics




 
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join