Comments on: Automation, Subordination, and the Future of Employment

By: Dan Campbell

Dan Campbell — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 17:58:00 +0000

Phil,

Can you mention to Stephen the book

Pardon the Disruption: The Future You Never Saw Coming.

It was mentioned in a review of Michio’s book, The Future of the Mind.

The second part of Pardon the Disruption is about the changes, past and present, to the economy, because of technology.

The first part of the book, is about the changes to our legal system – so perhaps Stephen might be interested in browsing through it. 2 of the authors are lawyers; the other is an economist.

By: Kirk Parker

Kirk Parker — Mon, 04 Nov 2013 08:43:00 +0000

I think there's a few words that got omitted during editing. Here, let me FIFY: "as defined by the (we hope, against all experience) benevolent state." Seriously, what hope have we for that???

By: PhilBowermaster

PhilBowermaster — Fri, 20 Sep 2013 22:54:00 +0000

Finally, a sensible idea!

By: Pettifogger

Pettifogger — Fri, 20 Sep 2013 22:03:00 +0000

Machines taking over non-creative work will free those with creative capability to pursue meaningful careers. I don’t know what will happen to those of us who are creative. I do expect to see greater value placed an handcrafted goods.

By: AD_Rtr_OS

AD_Rtr_OS — Fri, 20 Sep 2013 21:39:00 +0000

As per W. Churchill, the one thing that Socialism assures is the common sharing of misery.

By: David Govett

David Govett — Fri, 20 Sep 2013 21:11:00 +0000

Perhaps we humans could get jobs in bars where robots went to relax after work.

By: Andrew Barras

Andrew Barras — Fri, 20 Sep 2013 20:56:00 +0000

Great post. I just wrote about this on my blog http://educationstormfront.wordpress.com/2013/09/20/education-in-the-age-of-abundance/ and linked back here. Basically the problem you are describing starts in public education where the emphasis is on conformity and standardization. This is the opposite of the sorts of skills you need in a post industrial age economy. Pre-K children are usually very creative and non conformist. Schools take that away from them. (see: Sir Ken Robinson)

By: Phil Bowermaster

Phil Bowermaster — Tue, 10 Sep 2013 19:20:46 +0000

Understanding the models we have would be a great step forward. The problem is that people approach these ideas not as models for how to do something, but rather ideologies that separate the good people on the planet from the bad ones. Instead of brand new models maybe we just look for interesting hybrids, a la Martin Ford (above) or my own favorite. We go socialist just long enough to give everybody their own replicator and their own Mr. Fusion (see Stephen's comment.) After that…it really doesn't matter!

By: Will Brown

Will Brown — Sun, 08 Sep 2013 20:23:26 +0000

I was in the Navy, F-bombs are just punctuation of a sort.

That said (and tongue now back in its usual place), I think Mr. Church is overlooking the role subordination plays in the more universal human experience of the effect incentives have on behavior. I suspect that subordination of others is more a by-product of insufficiently structured and engineered incentive processes within the workplace (in this example the industrial workplace), but I think it likely this truly is a universal human attribute that correlates fairly directly to the degree of human involvement in the process that subordination occurs in.

Since automation is a completely design-driven process (necessarily discounting any form of intuitive aspect to learning/achieving performance metrics), it seems likely – arguably necessary – that all incentives that effect a process be fully taken into account during the design of that process (and I do mean "all"; from the individual who creates the process, to the investors, to the competitors for alternate usage of the same resources, right down to the customer who utilizes the produced item). This isn't really possible when human beings are an intrinsic part of an operation, but can't be discounted because humans are less/not directly performing the operations of the process either.

Instead of a "new economic model", maybe an X-Prize to more fully/better understand our existing economic model(s) boundaries and functions would be a better starting point. I mean, as long as we're designing the future of work, maybe a better understanding of what that entails might be useful.

By: Stephen Gordon

Stephen Gordon — Sat, 07 Sep 2013 11:49:18 +0000

"What would the prize be?" Hmmm… a Mr. Fusion and a 3D printer I guess.

By: Phil Bowermaster

Phil Bowermaster — Fri, 06 Sep 2013 21:04:41 +0000

Good call, Alvis. In fact, since "social" is a popular buzzword, maybe we do a little rebranding of the S-word. MOSE (multiplayer open social economy) There are lots of possibilities!

By: Alvis Brigis

Alvis Brigis — Fri, 06 Sep 2013 20:48:20 +0000

Perhaps the S-word should stand for social media. Low-pay prosumerism could fill in the gap, though it has a long way to come. My thoughts on that theory: http://www.fastcoexist.com/1681839/the-world-needs-18-billion-jobs-but-what-if-they-already-exist.