Just for the record:
So employment has been increasing and real compensation has been increasing despite radical technological change. So much for ravomoron’s “explanation of the facts.”
Working conditions have improved because of regulations, overtime pay, the minimum wage and education subsidies
No, see…because feudal times have to do with what era people live in, not how the economy functions. And again, economies ARE. It isn’t a case of “Oh, look! We’ve invented the axle! We have to rewrite all the fundamentals of economics because they no longer apply! WE ARE LIVING IN A BRAVE NEW WORLD!”
Plus…I don’t even get what your picture is saying. I’m gonna go ahead and interpret it as “If we couldn’t buy and sell things and purchase the things we work for, we would be dead!”
Best sarcasm I’ve read all day.
Sorry from bringing up real world evidence and and then finding theories that explain it and make further predictions, I forgot that praxeology does the reverse…
There’s a word for theories that can’t be falsified by evidence - “superstition.”
(Okay, so let’s analyze this. Praxeology–which is the study of human action and conduct, as defined by Merriam-Webster–is the reverse of those things? So a praxeological study does NOT bring up real-world evidence, such as “he bought it, therefore he must have wanted it”? And praxeology produces no theories, such as “human beings act with purpose”? And that theory can’t be used to make further predictions, such as “a person will take action X, because it satisfies want A”? Okay. I’m sold. Hey, do you know why you can’t falsify praxeological statements? Because you can’t read people’s minds and know their motivations. You have to ask them, and even then you can’t tell if they’re lying. So you…get this…STUDY…the outcomes of their behavior and assume a motivational factor. Can you conceive of any action taken that does not have purpose? This isn’t like trying to falsify the existence of a god, you know. We’re talking about falsifying something that we actually CAN’T conceive of an alternative to. Even deciding to take no action is a purposive action. I could deny your existence, and you could come knocking on my door, and I could then claim that you aren’t the non-existing entity writing poorly-rationalized quips on a forum, and how will you falsify this? No matter what you do, I can deny it. By your logic, you are superstition.)
“Praxeological statements cannot be subjected to any empirical assessment whether it is falsificationist or verificationist.”
- Murray Rothbard
(See above.)
“Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding.”
- Martin Luther
(See: thinly veiled socialist propoganda.)
“the Pope is preserved from even the possibility of error”
(You can’t falsify that the pope makes errors. Just thought I’d point that out.)
(anyone else see a trend here?)
edit - this graph’s title is a little misleading - what the blue line shows is men WITH jobs.
(Yeah, I can kinda guess that 95% of people weren’t unemployed in '48. And yes, there is a trend. It’s a graph. The problem with you throwing this graph out here and saying “Technology causes unemployment” is that…lo and behold…you could correlate it with anything that happened over that period. Or for a period a hundred years before which set circumstances in motion. Or it could be because of future concerns people have. I have an idea. Why don’t you go and try to make a graph that shows unemployment as a result of technology? And, like a real scientist, you could also graph how many of those people lost jobs and then gained employment elsewhere. Because, you see, I’m going to be brash enough to claim that this graph demonstrates the effect the…I don’t know…US Postal Service has had on the economy. Prove me wrong. IT’S SO OBVIOUS! MAIL DELIVER HAS CAUSED ALL THESE LAYOFFS! THIS GRAPH CLEARLY SHOWS THIS! ALSO, WHO LET WOMEN ENTER THE WORK FORCE? THEY ARE STEALING ALL OUR JOBS! DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW MANY WOMEN THERE ARE? IF WE LET THEM TAKE OUR JOBS, THIS COUNTRY WILL FALL!!! That’s your logic put to…no, I can’t really say that’s any more extreme than “robots will end us”.)
Tell you what. Let’s just do this for the rest of the year. You say something ridiculous, and this time I’LL type “graph” into Google Images, click randomly, and say that the graph says I’m right.
You know, I wonder if there’s a graph that shows a percentage of Austrians who were right about the recession versus Everyone Else…
This looks like a new super cheap cap to me. It has the potential to increase acceptance of car-sharing and public transport while decreasing car jams. I am curious to see by how much such an invention can increase the fuel efficiency of the overall transport system
the first post assumes that computers will even be able to match human intelligence; Moore’s law, in practice, is intereting, but it’s also finite; come 2015-2017, we’re going to run itno some serious issues, mainly beause of quantum tunneling. This can be worked around by using exotic materials and super-cooling, but it’s still quickly approaching the point where processors will have to go three-dimensional or we’ll have to focus more on software than hardware (which, well, would be nice, I admit). In either event, we’re just now beginning to understand and theorize about some functionings of the brain, while the “mind” is still an almost total mystery.
Call me a dualist, maniac, denier or what have you, but I don’t think computers will ever approach a level of intelligence even remotely similar to humans–automation may increase one-thousand fold in the next 10 years, but the human mind, IMHO at least, will still be unrivaled and untouched–there will always be something new for us to think of, research, invent, or work towards to improve our own working conditions.
All this new fangled device will do is make transportation safer, cheaper, faster, more efficient, and products cheaper as well (imagine not having to pay that UPS guy is bloated $100K union salary! the price of shipping would fall through the floor); not only that, but someone will have to help make the devices, program it, install it, test it, provide tech support for when it’s not functioning well, etc; it’ll just be different jobs in different sectors; meanwhile, everyone will enjoy a much higher standard of living with this device.
Bring about the automation revolution; it’s long overdue.
In a computer hardware and software are seperated. This is not the case for the brain where neurons can grow or retreat according to their usage. So Fox is right, it is not a wise idea to equate computational power with human intelligence.
it’s also not ready anytime soon, nor is the initial design meant to replace drivers so much as aid them:
granted, all of that will change, in time, and once the device is out as a safety feature, eventually it’ll be advanced enough to be a “driverless feature”, but for now? Nope.