Cable Forum - View Single Post - Labour taking a close look at universal basic income

Anonymouse · 06-06-2016, 16:20

<somewhat O/T>
It's not just robots which might replace workers - what about nanotech, which is already finding its way into our society? Imagine a workforce that can be produced for next to nothing (other than initial R & D, obviously), can be configured to whatever work application is needed - and doesn't need food, water, rest breaks, money, sex, recreation or, indeed, anything other than raw materials and programming instructions.

(And please don't give me that "grey goo" nonsense - programming languages will be, and probably already have been, developed that can avoid that; there will always be some hardwired protocol to shut the nanites down if need be.)

Such a development would mean disaster in a civilisation still ruled by the profit motive as ours is. But I suspect employers wouldn't care about putting most of the world's working population out of work because:

It costs money just to hire workers.
It costs money to keep them warm/cool (depending on circumstances) so they don't get sick, i.e. fainting due to heatstroke or freezing their unmentionables off.
They get sick, which cuts into productivity, which costs money.
They get injured or even killed - ditto. Hell, sometimes they kill each other...
It costs money to train them, and it often takes years.
It costs money for any equipment they need.
Eventually they retire, which costs money for their pensions.

None of this applies to nanotech. Build enough of them and they can build others for no extra cost, these others can build still more, and so on. When they're finished with their tasks, they can be programmed to disassemble each other and the raw material can be used again. And again, and again, and again...

Sounds very attractive to an employer, doesn't it? At the risk of sounding self-centred, thankfully it isn't likely to happen in my working lifetime.

The next generation, though, may have something to worry about in 20 years or so.
</somewhat O/T>

Having been on Universal Credit and seeing how well that's worked out, I'm against the idea of UBI.

06-06-2016, 16:20	#9
Anonymouse RIP Tigger - 12 years?! Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Bolton Age: 59 Services: EE Superfast Broadband Posts: 1,559	Re: Labour taking a close look at universal basic income <somewhat O/T> It's not just robots which might replace workers - what about nanotech, which is already finding its way into our society? Imagine a workforce that can be produced for next to nothing (other than initial R & D, obviously), can be configured to whatever work application is needed - and doesn't need food, water, rest breaks, money, sex, recreation or, indeed, anything other than raw materials and programming instructions. (And please don't give me that "grey goo" nonsense - programming languages will be, and probably already have been, developed that can avoid that; there will always be some hardwired protocol to shut the nanites down if need be.) Such a development would mean disaster in a civilisation still ruled by the profit motive as ours is. But I suspect employers wouldn't care about putting most of the world's working population out of work because: It costs money just to hire workers. It costs money to keep them warm/cool (depending on circumstances) so they don't get sick, i.e. fainting due to heatstroke or freezing their unmentionables off. They get sick, which cuts into productivity, which costs money. They get injured or even killed - ditto. Hell, sometimes they kill each other... It costs money to train them, and it often takes years. It costs money for any equipment they need. Eventually they retire, which costs money for their pensions. None of this applies to nanotech. Build enough of them and they can build others for no extra cost, these others can build still more, and so on. When they're finished with their tasks, they can be programmed to disassemble each other and the raw material can be used again. And again, and again, and again... Sounds very attractive to an employer, doesn't it? At the risk of sounding self-centred, thankfully it isn't likely to happen in my working lifetime. The next generation, though, may have something to worry about in 20 years or so. </somewhat O/T> Having been on Universal Credit and seeing how well that's worked out, I'm against the idea of UBI. __________________ "People tend to confuse the words 'new' and 'improved'." - Agent Phil Coulson, S.H.I.E.L.D. WINDOWS 11, ANYONE?!