6 ms·

Ask HN: Will automation generate social massive protests?

59 points by Mister_Y 10y ago

Like it happened with the industrial revolution when the luddit movement tried to stop it and how can we face it nowadays with the next automation revolution

SYA_SP 10y ago
Although it can definitely happen something similar, this time robots could come for jobs in which you need studies to be good at, so that tells us that it can get really nasty. But to be honest I just think we should reduce the working hours when that happen!
cixin 10y ago
I doubt protests will be prompted by automation explicitly. Take Britain as an example, it used to be the largest manufacturer in the world [1]. Now less than 13% of its economy is based on manufacturing. This hasn't cause massive protests at the level I think your proposing. The question therefore is if automation is likely to have knock-on effects, resulting in widespread poverty. This might well result in popular unrest. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_in_the_United_...
yummyfajitas 10y ago
The modern luddite movement is already here. A few days ago I was unable to get an Uber out of Hyderabad airport because of a "strike". "Strike" might be the euphemism of the year - it refers to angry taxi drivers/autowales striking Uber drivers who continue to drive. This is not an isolated experience, many other countries (Columbia, France, Brazil) have the same problem with violent angry mobs trying to shut down automated competition. Politicians mostly side with the luddites; here in Maharashtra, Shiv Sena (racist party of Maharashtra, for those unfamiliar) is strongly opposed to Uber. French politicians similarly surrendered to the terrorists.
- tushar-r 10y ago
  >A few days ago I was unable to get an Uber out of Hyderabad airport because of a "strike". "Strike" might be the euphemism of the year - it refers to angry taxi drivers/autowales striking Uber drivers who continue to drive. Nope. The Uber and Ola drivers are themselves striking against the two companies. "The drivers have also demanded that no new cabs be licensed until existing drivers are guaranteed a minimum of daily bookings. "The managements should give us at least 12 guaranteed bookings during peak hours for the first five years of each cab,” the association said in an earlier statement."" [0] [0] http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/ground-report-hyderabads-ola-and-uber-drivers-hit-streets-anger-earnings-drop-55170 http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/ground-report-hyderabad...
  - yummyfajitas 10y ago
    I was told by the person I was visiting in Hyderabad that those who didn't go along with the strike were attacked. However I cannot find independent corroboration of this via Google (then again I don't speak or read Telugu). So I may be mistaken on this and I concede that the anecdote may be badly chosen. That said, in other cities the luddites have become violent: http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/mumbai/mumbai-taxi-drivers-protest-against-ola-uber-cabs-2867789/ http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/mumbai/mumbai-taxi-d... https://www.google.co.in/amp/www.hindustantimes.com/india/uber-cars-smashed-by-protesters-in-mumbai-and-pune/story-wRijJcNjPecM0IDXGKARaK_amp.html?client=ms-android-google https://www.google.co.in/amp/www.hindustantimes.com/india/ub... https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jun/26/uber-backlash-taxi-drivers-protests-paris-global-revolt https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jun/26/uber-back...
    - deadbunny 10y ago
      Violence an intimidation towards "scabs" has a long history.
    - tushar-r 10y ago
      >I was told by the person I was visiting in Hyderabad that those who didn't go along with the strike were attacked. That is common in any strike in India. Previously, when auto drivers went on strike for any reason, if one of them broke the strike, they would be beaten up.
- chinathrow 10y ago
  > French politicians similarly surrendered to the terrorists. How do you feel calling someone striking a terrorist?
  - yummyfajitas 10y ago
    Why are my feelings relevant? If you must know the answer, I feel like a person who's read a dictionary and knows that terrorists are people who use violence and intimidation to achieve their political goals.
    - chinathrow 10y ago
      I assume you're from the U.S. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/2656f https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/2656f "(2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;" Rough words for a few Uber drives in France.
      - yummyfajitas 10y ago
        I know it's confusing when white people are called "terrorist", but the definition clearly fits. If it helps you to understand, think about the Pune/Bombay examples I linked to above (where the perpetrators and victims are all brown).
      - rocqua 10y ago
        I believe the strikers, not the uber taxi drivers, are the ones that are called 'terrorists' here.
    - marcosdumay 10y ago
      Any army that ever participated in a war fit this. I think there some "terror" missing from this definition. Anyway, it is a word that should just not be used today. There is no context where it clarifies anything anymore. The GP is correct in distrusting people that use it, and I add that some loss of trust should be automatic.
alphonsegaston 10y ago
Yes, but if we continue down our current path, they will not be directed at automation itself. Instead, advanced propaganda and bot networks will organize discontent against whichever targets allow the protesters to feel temporarily empowered, but that pose no actual threat to entrenched powers. The Russians are far further down this road than the US. Go read about how Surkov simultaneously creates Neo-Nazi movements, gives money to anti-Putin protestors, and props up the Russian Orthodox Church. https://www.amazon.com/Nothing-True-Everything-Possible-Surreal/dp/1610396006 https://www.amazon.com/Nothing-True-Everything-Possible-Surr...
- alistproducer2 10y ago
  Hypernormalisation is an awesome documentary that actually covers this subject. If you've got a couple hours to kill I highly recommend it. It can be watched on youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fny99f8amM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fny99f8amM
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- fsloth 10y ago
  Automated stochastically generated fads and hate campaigns as political camouflage - Oh my. In the future it's not rogue internet devices which will cause only trouble - it's fallible individuals who will create critical mass for social proof for any random idea. Soon we can buy actual online cults as easily as stolen credit card numbers :). But I suppose this is already happening at a nation state scale, but only in the mechanical turk sense of automation. Who will be the first automated propaganda unicorn ...
- chatmasta 10y ago
  Open source sockpuppet software seems like an inevitable equalizer in the propaganda field.
rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
Stephen Hawking made a great point last year when he wrote that automation/robots aren't the problem, capitalism is the problem. Most of the world takes for granted a system that allocates resources and the results of production in a way that encourages the highest profits with the least costs. Since humans are the highest cost, they are the biggest target for automation. We have a golden opportunity to create a better, more equitable way of living now and in the future. Let's not let this moment go to waste. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5616c20ce4b0dbb8000d9f15 http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5616c20ce4b0dbb8000d9f15
- mvitorino 10y ago
  95% of people used to work in agriculture and now less than 5% do in most modern countries and also, as a result, there is a lot more food to go around. Automation has been around for a while now. It's not a new problem and hasn't caused society to collapse yet. As to alternatives to Capitalism, Communism was one that promised a more "equitable" way of living...
  - JoeAltmaier 10y ago
    It's more inefficient than Capitalism, which is its Achilles heel. Socialism works when there is 'free' production to fuel it. Like in the Netherlands. It fails when the money stops pumping in, like Venezuela. Automation may provide the free input that makes a more humane (more Socialist) system work for everybody?
    - mvitorino 10y ago
      There is no such thing as free production because resources are not unlimited.
      - JoeAltmaier 10y ago
        Oil out of the ground is the nearest thing then. Once its automated, it has negligible marginal human cost. Or, did that mean something about 'poor planet we're exhausting its resources'? Then never mind.
diego_moita 10y ago
No, automation is not new anymore and unions are declining. Besides, domestic appliances and cellphones changed the way people look at machines and technology. It is easier to demonize immigrants and globalization. That is already the main target of anger.
- Pica_soO 10y ago
  If you demonize globalization, the result is local automated recycling and production. Thus this actually increases as in decentralizes automation.
msomsa 10y ago
I think that it will not generate violent movements. In my opinion there is not nowadays an scene for a huge protest in the developed countries, so if there are protest, as long as they will be pacific, is very difficult that they will have repercussion. In the case, the demonstrations will be huge, they could induce new social movements and parties in the governments of the developed countries fighting for some political ideas to change the automation. .
Joeri 10y ago
It's unlikely that people will identify automation as the cause of the problem. Take a look at the U.S. manufacturing sector. What is the story? Jobs are being shipped overseas, and the manufacturing sector is dying. What is the reality? Measured by output the U.S. manufacturing sector is bigger than ever before and has grown by a fifth since 2000, while cutting the number of workers by a third. Profits have soared, double what they were in the 90's. Automation is the cause of manufacturing job loss, but people blame nafta and elect trump to close the borders.
cdiego 10y ago
We are destroying the natural world, without respect or harmony with nature. Itsn't the automation the real problem, its our relations with others people or kind of life.
- JoeAltmaier 10y ago
  Perveresely, with automation taking jobs that leaves people more time to spend in nature. So we'll be returning to harmony?
  - eswat 10y ago
    Doubt it. We’ll just create other work opportunities for those being displaced by automation. Google "Economic Possibilities for Our Grandchildren" or http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/05/26/no-time http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/05/26/no-time
    - JoeAltmaier 10y ago
      Yeah weird. In the '50s we wrote stories about automation removing the yoke of labor from everybody, freeing us up to be our better selves. Now we panic that Capitalism is threatened and invent stupid ways to patch it up (make-work, mandatory service etc).
  - jhoechtl 10y ago
    Unfortunately no, instead you will spend it with Nezflix, Amazon Prime, your game console, Alexa, ....
- gumby 10y ago
  Automation can help our relation with the natural world. For example we use weed killers because labor is expensive (and the work is horrible: mindless and backbreaking). Robots could do all the weeding and spare the environment from the depredations of Roundup.
usgroup 10y ago
probably not because it's happening slowly and has been happening for 2 centuries ...
jhoechtl 10y ago
Before that will happen, we will likely see insanitites like a 25 hour workday https://myprivate42.wordpress.com/2016/12/19/lets-shift-to-25-hours/ https://myprivate42.wordpress.com/2016/12/19/lets-shift-to-2... or the abolition of cash.
rocqua 10y ago
Indirectly. The protest will follow from unemployment combined with the huge income divide. These will be the results of automation, but the protest will focus on the inequality. Perhaps some countries (kinda like France at the moment) will take action to strengthen job security by legislation, those countries will lose out economically though. (gotta append this with stating this is guesswork)
spangry 10y ago
I think that if the public continues to putter along on auto-pilot for much longer, absolutely not. Acknowledging that I sound like some nutbag conspiracy theorist, we can already see systems of mass control being quietly put in place. At the moment, the general public appears to be very accepting of these systems, or just totally unaware that they can (and will) be used to control society in the future. I'm not just talking about your three letter agency direct dragnet surveillance type programs, I'm also talking about stuff like cloud-based voice & speech recognition that is only one FISA warrant away from being the NSA's very own voice-print database. I don't even think many of the people implementing these systems intend them to be used as systems of mass control. But they will, and they will be used very intentionally to stifle any kind of popular 'neo-luddite' movement. Why? Because automation will result in massive concentration of wealth (remembering the 'auto-pilot' assumption). Production will become extremely capital-intensive (i.e. people replaced with machines), and the few people who are not owners of capital yet still 'employed' will probably be paid astronomical salaries due to their similarly astronomically high 'labor factor productivity'. So you will have a handful of extremely wealthy 'neo-capitalists' with much greater scope for 'free political speech' (i.e. buying politicians with their mountains of money). Last time we had a huge jump in the amount of capital used in production (the industrial revolution), while I wouldn't call it a 'fair fight', workers at least had a fighting chance, because: - Capitalists had relatively less resources than future neo-capitalists will. To analogise, if 'industrial revolution capitalists' could employ professional strike-breakers and private security forces, future neo-capitalists will have the resources to field entire armies. With laser rifles. - Society hadn't, just prior to the industrial revolution, constructed massive and intricate systems of total social control. We're doing this right now, in many cases not realising it. - The state was at least sort of impartial in most cases. In some historical periods the state even sympathised with workers' concerns, due the formation and mainstream success of political parties representing 'labor'. Even now, these 'labor' parties seem totally adrift, like rebels without a cause. And the effect of money (er, I mean 'political speech') in politics will only get exponentially worse as capitalists become exponentially richer (er, more eloquent and verbose). - There were clearly identifiable groups of people (i.e.'the workers at factory x', 'the workers in industry y', etc.) with identifiable and specific common goals and interests (i.e. 'get industry y to share more of its profit with labour', 'get factory x to build fire escapes so we all don't burn to death next time' etc.). In the context of future automation, this simply will not exist. Good luck organising a strike at, say, googles robot factory, when you're not actually an employee (as you're not employed at all). Under the 'auto-pilot' assumption, the only power we will truly have is as consumers. Even just typing that last sentence makes me feel a little ridiculous. Because of the factors outlined above, there will be no counter-revolution. There will be no Karl Marx. There will be no new 'extreme opposites' (like communism), nor will there be new 'moderate balancing forces' (like labor unions). They will be killed off in their infancy or, ideally, never conceived to begin with. So if you don't want this future, the time for action is right now.
hacknat 10y ago
I want to echo, in agreement, with the many people here who are saying that there will likely be protests, but not against automation itself. Present evidence suggests that it is true. However I want to push back against the idea that current protests against, for example, lack of manufacturing jobs are totally misdirected or will be in the future (if they are not against automation). While I think blaming NAFTA and outsourcing for a loss of jobs is ridiculous at least people are recognizing that the problems are structural and public rather than technological. What would protesting automation even look like? Stop the machines? The last movement to do that was small, ineffectual, and was perceived to be ridiculous. Some kind of safety net or redistribution of wealth is needed in my opinion. The classic response to redistribution is to say that it's paternalistic, but if automation doesn't make up for the jobs it destroys what are the alternatives? If modern civilization survives climate change ours and the next few generations are going to be judged with a very heavy hand and rightly so. There is no dearth of knowledge or critique in our culture, but there is an exceptional amount of inaction and passivity.
- slake 10y ago
  > What would protesting automation even look like? How about truckers stoning or blocking an automated truck that wheels into a rest stop to refuel? Maybe rest stop operators refuse service to automated trucks. (Can they do that legally?)
sbmthakur 10y ago
There might be small protests but massive protests are unlikely. Back in 1980s in India there were massive protests against introduction of computers in banks. At that time people were not much aware about the positive role computers can play in society. Today things are different and people are more aware about technology.
slake 10y ago
I do believe there will be a tipping point if it really creates large scale unemployment even in a certain sector. Without an appropriate safety net people won't have enough money to buy food which will trigger substantial social unrest.

59 points by Mister_Y 10y ago

Like it happened with the industrial revolution when the luddit movement tried to stop it and how can we face it nowadays with the next automation revolution

SYA_SP 10y ago

Although it can definitely happen something similar, this time robots could come for jobs in which you need studies to be good at, so that tells us that it can get really nasty. But to be honest I just think we should reduce the working hours when that happen!

cixin 10y ago

I doubt protests will be prompted by automation explicitly. Take Britain as an example, it used to be the largest manufacturer in the world [1]. Now less than 13% of its economy is based on manufacturing. This hasn't cause massive protests at the level I think your proposing. The question therefore is if automation is likely to have knock-on effects, resulting in widespread poverty. This might well result in popular unrest. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_in_the_United_...

yummyfajitas 10y ago

The modern luddite movement is already here. A few days ago I was unable to get an Uber out of Hyderabad airport because of a "strike". "Strike" might be the euphemism of the year - it refers to angry taxi drivers/autowales striking Uber drivers who continue to drive. This is not an isolated experience, many other countries (Columbia, France, Brazil) have the same problem with violent angry mobs trying to shut down automated competition. Politicians mostly side with the luddites; here in Maharashtra, Shiv Sena (racist party of Maharashtra, for those unfamiliar) is strongly opposed to Uber. French politicians similarly surrendered to the terrorists.

tushar-r 10y ago
>A few days ago I was unable to get an Uber out of Hyderabad airport because of a "strike". "Strike" might be the euphemism of the year - it refers to angry taxi drivers/autowales striking Uber drivers who continue to drive. Nope. The Uber and Ola drivers are themselves striking against the two companies. "The drivers have also demanded that no new cabs be licensed until existing drivers are guaranteed a minimum of daily bookings. "The managements should give us at least 12 guaranteed bookings during peak hours for the first five years of each cab,” the association said in an earlier statement."" [0] [0] http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/ground-report-hyderabads-ola-and-uber-drivers-hit-streets-anger-earnings-drop-55170 http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/ground-report-hyderabad...
- yummyfajitas 10y ago
  I was told by the person I was visiting in Hyderabad that those who didn't go along with the strike were attacked. However I cannot find independent corroboration of this via Google (then again I don't speak or read Telugu). So I may be mistaken on this and I concede that the anecdote may be badly chosen. That said, in other cities the luddites have become violent: http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/mumbai/mumbai-taxi-drivers-protest-against-ola-uber-cabs-2867789/ http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/mumbai/mumbai-taxi-d... https://www.google.co.in/amp/www.hindustantimes.com/india/uber-cars-smashed-by-protesters-in-mumbai-and-pune/story-wRijJcNjPecM0IDXGKARaK_amp.html?client=ms-android-google https://www.google.co.in/amp/www.hindustantimes.com/india/ub... https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jun/26/uber-backlash-taxi-drivers-protests-paris-global-revolt https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jun/26/uber-back...
  - deadbunny 10y ago
    Violence an intimidation towards "scabs" has a long history.
  - tushar-r 10y ago
    >I was told by the person I was visiting in Hyderabad that those who didn't go along with the strike were attacked. That is common in any strike in India. Previously, when auto drivers went on strike for any reason, if one of them broke the strike, they would be beaten up.
chinathrow 10y ago
> French politicians similarly surrendered to the terrorists. How do you feel calling someone striking a terrorist?
- yummyfajitas 10y ago
  Why are my feelings relevant? If you must know the answer, I feel like a person who's read a dictionary and knows that terrorists are people who use violence and intimidation to achieve their political goals.
  - chinathrow 10y ago
    I assume you're from the U.S. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/2656f https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/2656f "(2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;" Rough words for a few Uber drives in France.
    - yummyfajitas 10y ago
      I know it's confusing when white people are called "terrorist", but the definition clearly fits. If it helps you to understand, think about the Pune/Bombay examples I linked to above (where the perpetrators and victims are all brown).
    - rocqua 10y ago
      I believe the strikers, not the uber taxi drivers, are the ones that are called 'terrorists' here.
  - marcosdumay 10y ago
    Any army that ever participated in a war fit this. I think there some "terror" missing from this definition. Anyway, it is a word that should just not be used today. There is no context where it clarifies anything anymore. The GP is correct in distrusting people that use it, and I add that some loss of trust should be automatic.

alphonsegaston 10y ago

Yes, but if we continue down our current path, they will not be directed at automation itself. Instead, advanced propaganda and bot networks will organize discontent against whichever targets allow the protesters to feel temporarily empowered, but that pose no actual threat to entrenched powers. The Russians are far further down this road than the US. Go read about how Surkov simultaneously creates Neo-Nazi movements, gives money to anti-Putin protestors, and props up the Russian Orthodox Church. https://www.amazon.com/Nothing-True-Everything-Possible-Surreal/dp/1610396006 https://www.amazon.com/Nothing-True-Everything-Possible-Surr...

alistproducer2 10y ago
Hypernormalisation is an awesome documentary that actually covers this subject. If you've got a couple hours to kill I highly recommend it. It can be watched on youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fny99f8amM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fny99f8amM
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
fsloth 10y ago
Automated stochastically generated fads and hate campaigns as political camouflage - Oh my. In the future it's not rogue internet devices which will cause only trouble - it's fallible individuals who will create critical mass for social proof for any random idea. Soon we can buy actual online cults as easily as stolen credit card numbers :). But I suppose this is already happening at a nation state scale, but only in the mechanical turk sense of automation. Who will be the first automated propaganda unicorn ...
chatmasta 10y ago
Open source sockpuppet software seems like an inevitable equalizer in the propaganda field.

rm_-rf_slash 10y ago

Stephen Hawking made a great point last year when he wrote that automation/robots aren't the problem, capitalism is the problem. Most of the world takes for granted a system that allocates resources and the results of production in a way that encourages the highest profits with the least costs. Since humans are the highest cost, they are the biggest target for automation. We have a golden opportunity to create a better, more equitable way of living now and in the future. Let's not let this moment go to waste. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5616c20ce4b0dbb8000d9f15 http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5616c20ce4b0dbb8000d9f15

mvitorino 10y ago
95% of people used to work in agriculture and now less than 5% do in most modern countries and also, as a result, there is a lot more food to go around. Automation has been around for a while now. It's not a new problem and hasn't caused society to collapse yet. As to alternatives to Capitalism, Communism was one that promised a more "equitable" way of living...
- JoeAltmaier 10y ago
  It's more inefficient than Capitalism, which is its Achilles heel. Socialism works when there is 'free' production to fuel it. Like in the Netherlands. It fails when the money stops pumping in, like Venezuela. Automation may provide the free input that makes a more humane (more Socialist) system work for everybody?
  - mvitorino 10y ago
    There is no such thing as free production because resources are not unlimited.
    - JoeAltmaier 10y ago
      Oil out of the ground is the nearest thing then. Once its automated, it has negligible marginal human cost. Or, did that mean something about 'poor planet we're exhausting its resources'? Then never mind.

diego_moita 10y ago

No, automation is not new anymore and unions are declining. Besides, domestic appliances and cellphones changed the way people look at machines and technology. It is easier to demonize immigrants and globalization. That is already the main target of anger.

Pica_soO 10y ago
If you demonize globalization, the result is local automated recycling and production. Thus this actually increases as in decentralizes automation.

msomsa 10y ago

I think that it will not generate violent movements. In my opinion there is not nowadays an scene for a huge protest in the developed countries, so if there are protest, as long as they will be pacific, is very difficult that they will have repercussion. In the case, the demonstrations will be huge, they could induce new social movements and parties in the governments of the developed countries fighting for some political ideas to change the automation. .

Joeri 10y ago

It's unlikely that people will identify automation as the cause of the problem. Take a look at the U.S. manufacturing sector. What is the story? Jobs are being shipped overseas, and the manufacturing sector is dying. What is the reality? Measured by output the U.S. manufacturing sector is bigger than ever before and has grown by a fifth since 2000, while cutting the number of workers by a third. Profits have soared, double what they were in the 90's. Automation is the cause of manufacturing job loss, but people blame nafta and elect trump to close the borders.

cdiego 10y ago

We are destroying the natural world, without respect or harmony with nature. Itsn't the automation the real problem, its our relations with others people or kind of life.

JoeAltmaier 10y ago
Perveresely, with automation taking jobs that leaves people more time to spend in nature. So we'll be returning to harmony?
- eswat 10y ago
  Doubt it. We’ll just create other work opportunities for those being displaced by automation. Google "Economic Possibilities for Our Grandchildren" or http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/05/26/no-time http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/05/26/no-time
  - JoeAltmaier 10y ago
    Yeah weird. In the '50s we wrote stories about automation removing the yoke of labor from everybody, freeing us up to be our better selves. Now we panic that Capitalism is threatened and invent stupid ways to patch it up (make-work, mandatory service etc).
- jhoechtl 10y ago
  Unfortunately no, instead you will spend it with Nezflix, Amazon Prime, your game console, Alexa, ....
gumby 10y ago
Automation can help our relation with the natural world. For example we use weed killers because labor is expensive (and the work is horrible: mindless and backbreaking). Robots could do all the weeding and spare the environment from the depredations of Roundup.

usgroup 10y ago

probably not because it's happening slowly and has been happening for 2 centuries ...

jhoechtl 10y ago

Before that will happen, we will likely see insanitites like a 25 hour workday https://myprivate42.wordpress.com/2016/12/19/lets-shift-to-25-hours/ https://myprivate42.wordpress.com/2016/12/19/lets-shift-to-2... or the abolition of cash.

rocqua 10y ago

Indirectly. The protest will follow from unemployment combined with the huge income divide. These will be the results of automation, but the protest will focus on the inequality. Perhaps some countries (kinda like France at the moment) will take action to strengthen job security by legislation, those countries will lose out economically though. (gotta append this with stating this is guesswork)

spangry 10y ago

I think that if the public continues to putter along on auto-pilot for much longer, absolutely not. Acknowledging that I sound like some nutbag conspiracy theorist, we can already see systems of mass control being quietly put in place. At the moment, the general public appears to be very accepting of these systems, or just totally unaware that they can (and will) be used to control society in the future. I'm not just talking about your three letter agency direct dragnet surveillance type programs, I'm also talking about stuff like cloud-based voice & speech recognition that is only one FISA warrant away from being the NSA's very own voice-print database. I don't even think many of the people implementing these systems intend them to be used as systems of mass control. But they will, and they will be used very intentionally to stifle any kind of popular 'neo-luddite' movement. Why? Because automation will result in massive concentration of wealth (remembering the 'auto-pilot' assumption). Production will become extremely capital-intensive (i.e. people replaced with machines), and the few people who are not owners of capital yet still 'employed' will probably be paid astronomical salaries due to their similarly astronomically high 'labor factor productivity'. So you will have a handful of extremely wealthy 'neo-capitalists' with much greater scope for 'free political speech' (i.e. buying politicians with their mountains of money). Last time we had a huge jump in the amount of capital used in production (the industrial revolution), while I wouldn't call it a 'fair fight', workers at least had a fighting chance, because: - Capitalists had relatively less resources than future neo-capitalists will. To analogise, if 'industrial revolution capitalists' could employ professional strike-breakers and private security forces, future neo-capitalists will have the resources to field entire armies. With laser rifles. - Society hadn't, just prior to the industrial revolution, constructed massive and intricate systems of total social control. We're doing this right now, in many cases not realising it. - The state was at least sort of impartial in most cases. In some historical periods the state even sympathised with workers' concerns, due the formation and mainstream success of political parties representing 'labor'. Even now, these 'labor' parties seem totally adrift, like rebels without a cause. And the effect of money (er, I mean 'political speech') in politics will only get exponentially worse as capitalists become exponentially richer (er, more eloquent and verbose). - There were clearly identifiable groups of people (i.e.'the workers at factory x', 'the workers in industry y', etc.) with identifiable and specific common goals and interests (i.e. 'get industry y to share more of its profit with labour', 'get factory x to build fire escapes so we all don't burn to death next time' etc.). In the context of future automation, this simply will not exist. Good luck organising a strike at, say, googles robot factory, when you're not actually an employee (as you're not employed at all). Under the 'auto-pilot' assumption, the only power we will truly have is as consumers. Even just typing that last sentence makes me feel a little ridiculous. Because of the factors outlined above, there will be no counter-revolution. There will be no Karl Marx. There will be no new 'extreme opposites' (like communism), nor will there be new 'moderate balancing forces' (like labor unions). They will be killed off in their infancy or, ideally, never conceived to begin with. So if you don't want this future, the time for action is right now.

hacknat 10y ago

I want to echo, in agreement, with the many people here who are saying that there will likely be protests, but not against automation itself. Present evidence suggests that it is true. However I want to push back against the idea that current protests against, for example, lack of manufacturing jobs are totally misdirected or will be in the future (if they are not against automation). While I think blaming NAFTA and outsourcing for a loss of jobs is ridiculous at least people are recognizing that the problems are structural and public rather than technological. What would protesting automation even look like? Stop the machines? The last movement to do that was small, ineffectual, and was perceived to be ridiculous. Some kind of safety net or redistribution of wealth is needed in my opinion. The classic response to redistribution is to say that it's paternalistic, but if automation doesn't make up for the jobs it destroys what are the alternatives? If modern civilization survives climate change ours and the next few generations are going to be judged with a very heavy hand and rightly so. There is no dearth of knowledge or critique in our culture, but there is an exceptional amount of inaction and passivity.

slake 10y ago
> What would protesting automation even look like? How about truckers stoning or blocking an automated truck that wheels into a rest stop to refuel? Maybe rest stop operators refuse service to automated trucks. (Can they do that legally?)

sbmthakur 10y ago

There might be small protests but massive protests are unlikely. Back in 1980s in India there were massive protests against introduction of computers in banks. At that time people were not much aware about the positive role computers can play in society. Today things are different and people are more aware about technology.

slake 10y ago

I do believe there will be a tipping point if it really creates large scale unemployment even in a certain sector. Without an appropriate safety net people won't have enough money to buy food which will trigger substantial social unrest.