Robots, the new slavery?
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Yes, and one of the first use of robots, as we see today, is in the sex industry, where relationships are by mature much closer with man, and such feelings more likely to arise.
First military then you're probably right about the sex aspect. God help us!
Someone's therapist knows all about you!
-
You on Santa's hit list eh?
Someone's therapist knows all about you!
-
Yes, that is what I said. Redundant completely. Did you not understand?
-
Saw this on TV recently on a program about robots: [^] I can envision a future where robots do almost all the manual work, and crucially, they are payed a wage and taxed at 100% on it. ie, the company employing them pays, at a reduced rate, the commensurate wage a person would have received, direct to the government as tax. Of course this payment has to reflect the costs of the robot to the company but given the robot works a 3 shift day its productivity is much higher than a human's, so this revenue is substantial. This revenue is then paid out to the public at a fixed amount per month per person, regardless of whether they work or not. Products produced by robots are much cheaper, allowing for greater consumption. Many people would therefore lead a life of leisure, maintained by the state. Others who either enjoy work, want to earn more money, or cant be replaced by robots, such as professionals, ie us lot, doctors, lawyers etc continue as before, but perhaps with reduced hours. An interesting side effect is that cheap labour in the third world, which increasingly becomes less cheap as more and more companies try to exploit it, is undercut, and the labour floods back to the advanced countries that can best implement robotics. So we all effectively live like a plantation owner of the past, off the backs of the labour of slaves, just metal in this case, and free of the moral implications. Not a bad lifestyle. When do we start! :)
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Not a bad lifestyle. When do we start! :)
You will do no such thing! The tinmen will have captains who defend their rights[^].
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
-
The term does not exist in a vacuum, especially when the literal definition is tied explicitly to a practice. Someone is not dubbed a "Murderer" because they made coffee this morning; it's because they murdered someone.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli
But a robot is no more related to plantation ownership than coffee is to murder.
-
But a robot is no more related to plantation ownership than coffee is to murder.
And there we shall agree to disagree.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli
-
Saw this on TV recently on a program about robots: [^] I can envision a future where robots do almost all the manual work, and crucially, they are payed a wage and taxed at 100% on it. ie, the company employing them pays, at a reduced rate, the commensurate wage a person would have received, direct to the government as tax. Of course this payment has to reflect the costs of the robot to the company but given the robot works a 3 shift day its productivity is much higher than a human's, so this revenue is substantial. This revenue is then paid out to the public at a fixed amount per month per person, regardless of whether they work or not. Products produced by robots are much cheaper, allowing for greater consumption. Many people would therefore lead a life of leisure, maintained by the state. Others who either enjoy work, want to earn more money, or cant be replaced by robots, such as professionals, ie us lot, doctors, lawyers etc continue as before, but perhaps with reduced hours. An interesting side effect is that cheap labour in the third world, which increasingly becomes less cheap as more and more companies try to exploit it, is undercut, and the labour floods back to the advanced countries that can best implement robotics. So we all effectively live like a plantation owner of the past, off the backs of the labour of slaves, just metal in this case, and free of the moral implications. Not a bad lifestyle. When do we start! :)
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Not a bad lifestyle. When do we start!
We?? I don't know. I think I'll be living a life of leisure. So you go on build the robots and start sending checks via the government. Cheerio. T.
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Yes, and one of the first use of robots, as we see today, is in the sex industry, where relationships are by mature much closer with man, and such feelings more likely to arise.
First military then you're probably right about the sex aspect. God help us!
Someone's therapist knows all about you!
I think sex robots are getting there first. sex robots - Google Search[^]
-
They would have to be, and can be, on the income generated by the robots.
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Not a bad lifestyle. When do we start!
We?? I don't know. I think I'll be living a life of leisure. So you go on build the robots and start sending checks via the government. Cheerio. T.
Those who do work will get paid of course, in addition to the basic maintenance cash every one gets.
-
And there we shall agree to disagree.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli
WTF are you on? HOw is a robot actually like slavery? Do you actually think machines have rights, have feelings?
-
They would have to be, and can be, on the income generated by the robots.
-
Depends on how much it is taxed. You did read what I wrote didnt you?
-
I think sex robots are getting there first. sex robots - Google Search[^]
Damn militant sex robots
Someone's therapist knows all about you!
-
Depends on how much it is taxed. You did read what I wrote didnt you?
I read it, and dismiss it as wishfull thinking. How much is a steam-engine taxed? The automation already endangered many profession. How much is a spread-sheet taxed? It won't happen; our production has climbed, and so have profits. Don't expect a break soon.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
I read it, and dismiss it as wishfull thinking. How much is a steam-engine taxed? The automation already endangered many profession. How much is a spread-sheet taxed? It won't happen; our production has climbed, and so have profits. Don't expect a break soon.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
If we are going to automate, and we will, because we have started already, then in order to halt a revoloution by the staving unemployed masses they will have to be paid, the revenue for whichi will come from taxing the robots as if they were workers So, worker 1 gets 100 euros a day, and pays 30 in tax to the govt. A robot, works three shifts, and gets 100 euros a day. 30 goes to the govt, 70 to the employer (he actually just keeps the robots wages), This pays for the robots. The robot is producing 3 times as many goods though, so their price falls, thus making it cheaper for the ex worker to live on the 30 euros of tax the govt now gives him to sit around and do nothing.
-
Saw this on TV recently on a program about robots: [^] I can envision a future where robots do almost all the manual work, and crucially, they are payed a wage and taxed at 100% on it. ie, the company employing them pays, at a reduced rate, the commensurate wage a person would have received, direct to the government as tax. Of course this payment has to reflect the costs of the robot to the company but given the robot works a 3 shift day its productivity is much higher than a human's, so this revenue is substantial. This revenue is then paid out to the public at a fixed amount per month per person, regardless of whether they work or not. Products produced by robots are much cheaper, allowing for greater consumption. Many people would therefore lead a life of leisure, maintained by the state. Others who either enjoy work, want to earn more money, or cant be replaced by robots, such as professionals, ie us lot, doctors, lawyers etc continue as before, but perhaps with reduced hours. An interesting side effect is that cheap labour in the third world, which increasingly becomes less cheap as more and more companies try to exploit it, is undercut, and the labour floods back to the advanced countries that can best implement robotics. So we all effectively live like a plantation owner of the past, off the backs of the labour of slaves, just metal in this case, and free of the moral implications. Not a bad lifestyle. When do we start! :)
Munchies_Matt wrote:
I can envision a future where robots do almost all the manual work, and crucially, they are payed a wage and taxed at 100% on it. ie, the company employing them pays, at a reduced rate, the commensurate wage a person would have received, direct to the government as tax.
Then you will be paying tax every time you use a computer to do any manual work - like accounting. You will be paying chauffeur fees for self-driving cars. You will not receive any reduction in price for efficiencies derived from automation (cheaper food, cheaper production of vehicles, etc). In effect, you will have to get a job, because we all know the government won't pass that tax back to you - unless you plan on living on welfare.
-
If we are going to automate, and we will, because we have started already, then in order to halt a revoloution by the staving unemployed masses they will have to be paid, the revenue for whichi will come from taxing the robots as if they were workers So, worker 1 gets 100 euros a day, and pays 30 in tax to the govt. A robot, works three shifts, and gets 100 euros a day. 30 goes to the govt, 70 to the employer (he actually just keeps the robots wages), This pays for the robots. The robot is producing 3 times as many goods though, so their price falls, thus making it cheaper for the ex worker to live on the 30 euros of tax the govt now gives him to sit around and do nothing.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
in order to halt a revoloution by the staving unemployed masses they will have to be paid
Suddenly you sound like a communist. The unemployed masses may learn a new trade, and try to become productive members again. Non-productive members are not required on the planet.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
You on Santa's hit list eh?
Someone's therapist knows all about you!
-
Saw this on TV recently on a program about robots: [^] I can envision a future where robots do almost all the manual work, and crucially, they are payed a wage and taxed at 100% on it. ie, the company employing them pays, at a reduced rate, the commensurate wage a person would have received, direct to the government as tax. Of course this payment has to reflect the costs of the robot to the company but given the robot works a 3 shift day its productivity is much higher than a human's, so this revenue is substantial. This revenue is then paid out to the public at a fixed amount per month per person, regardless of whether they work or not. Products produced by robots are much cheaper, allowing for greater consumption. Many people would therefore lead a life of leisure, maintained by the state. Others who either enjoy work, want to earn more money, or cant be replaced by robots, such as professionals, ie us lot, doctors, lawyers etc continue as before, but perhaps with reduced hours. An interesting side effect is that cheap labour in the third world, which increasingly becomes less cheap as more and more companies try to exploit it, is undercut, and the labour floods back to the advanced countries that can best implement robotics. So we all effectively live like a plantation owner of the past, off the backs of the labour of slaves, just metal in this case, and free of the moral implications. Not a bad lifestyle. When do we start! :)
Explain to me how come MicroSoft isn't already required to do this for every license of Word which put thousands of secretaries out of work? All a robot does is enhance productivity. Do we tax everything that enhances productivity?
I'm pretty sure I would not like to live in a world in which I would never be offended. I am absolutely certain I don't want to live in a world in which you would never be offended. Freedom doesn't mean the absence of things you don't like. Dave
