Is roboticisation of jobs ethical ?

[Provost Harrison]

It is capable of doing both. In reality I don't think people have really seen the benefit. Since automation we have seen productivity skyrocket but working lifestyle has barely changed, if not become more stressful.

[RGBVideo]

In reality I don't think people have really seen the benefit.

That could be true, depends on the country.

I don't really have anything to debate you with since we seem to agree all the time, but let me just ask you one more question:

Since automation we have seen productivity skyrocket but working lifestyle has barely changed, if not become more stressful.

So you'd be perfectly willing to change your current job and wage to ones with late-19th century coal miners which did 12+ hour shifts?

[Provost Harrison]

Of course not,I suppose in that respect it has made life a lot easier and safer, I'd just like to see a further cut in working hours for everyone or see the advantages be used in the developing world to give them a decent standard of living.

And when I mean about the lifestyle changes, I forgot to mention over the past few decades...

[Odin]

The loss of jobs due to technology is what shows capitalism's main flaw. Idealy, when productivity increases, people should have to work less. In capitalism, the opposite happens, people are working just as long, but there are less people working.

[Kuciwalker]

Re: Is roboticisation of jobs ethical ?

Why the hell not?

Is the plow ethical?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Odin
The loss of jobs due to technology is what shows capitalism's main flaw. Idealy, when productivity increases, people should have to work less. In capitalism, the opposite happens, people are working just as long, but there are less people working.

Because of course unemployment has shot WAY up since the industrial revolution... oh, wait.

[Provost Harrison]

Well it is harder to classify but even now there should be no reason for unemployment except for the convenience it affords industry in being able to threaten it's workers with 'someone else being able to do their work', even with high levels of automation. There is so much that needs doing on our planet that any extra productivity is a welcome bonus.

[Adagio]

For some reason I doubt prostetutes and the liking to fear loosing their jobs to robots

If the companies would just give their employees less time to work while having more employees I don't see a problem with this, though for some reason I doubt this will happen unless some laws to help this will be made

[Spiffor]

Roboticisation is an inherently good thing as long as the robots aren't intelligent enough to rebel against their human masters, or to evolve in such a fashion.

The huge difference between today and the late 18th century is technology. Thanks to technology, our life is more comfortable and healthy than ever in human history. There are only extremely few areas in the world that saw absolutely no net positive impact from technology: even the average African (in peaceful times) has access to more comfort than his pendant of a few centuries back.

Thanks to technology, there was less human genius wasted on the plow, and there was less human genius wasted on the machine-tool. Hopefully, there'll be soon less human genius wasted on operating the cashier.

However, while automation is inherently good in the long run, it does pose serious short-run problems. Unskilled workers, after having been laid off, rarely find better jobs, and must often settle for jobs where the conditions are actually much worse. And that's when they find a job at all. Automation can lead to terrible life conditions for a whole generation (like the early 19th century peasants forced to go to the city). That's why history has shown many skeptics against automation, like the Luddites.

The capitalists alone cannot contribute to solving the transition problem: their sole responsibility is to make profit, and they don't need to care of their fired employees to that effect. That's why a collective effort is needed to bring the unskilled in more skilled jobs. The State has to provide efficient education to all (and not only to the young generation), it has to financially help the fired ones while they're still in transition, and it has to protect those who are too old to learn a new job.

That's how you can have a humane economic transition, that doesn't sacrifice entire generations to productivity gains.

[St Leo]

I see mass robotization as a very good thing. The mass movement of humanity into intellectual tasks, and the creation of a vast leisure class are key to the future of socialism.

The difference between an AI and a human is that the AI isn't an animal. It has no need for our crude instincts of pain, fun, taboo, and sex. Expecting the robots to rise up as enslaved people would betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of the world.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by VJ
So you'd be perfectly willing to change your current job and wage to ones with late-19th century coal miners which did 12+ hour shifts?

The difference is that the capitalists had to be forced by the workers to let them work less hours. They didn't do it out of the goodness of their hearts.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Is roboticisation of jobs ethical ?

Yes.

[chequita guevara]

It is neither ethical nor unethical.

[Odin]

Originally posted by St Leo
I see mass robotization as a very good thing. The mass movement of humanity into intellectual tasks, and the creation of a vast leisure class are key to the future of socialism.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
The difference is that the capitalists had to be forced by the workers to let them work less hours. They didn't do it out of the goodness of their hearts.

Yeah, they did it out of concern for their bottom line. So?