Automation

I design and build robots for a living so IDGAF

>Why would he fuck you, a fat neckbeard with poor personal hygiene, instead of one of the dozens of models he has on full time payroll to do whatever he wants with, whenever he wants?
Humiliation.

Attached: shaq.png (829x436, 344K)

>not wanting to live in a world full of NEETs

Attached: 1550125880635.jpg (640x640, 116K)

So tax the wealthy harder. Maybe Invent a new tax that targets specifically a percentage if the worth of assets similar to property taxes and also collect all assets on the passing of the person. Then they'd just be fucked as everyone else when automation rolls in.

>get paid to automate shit
>Also get paid to make sure nothing breaks
>also automation must always be updated as new features are added to the product
Checkmate atheist.

>thinking you can tax the wealthy
I'll just move to Monaco.

automation -> cheaper goods -> lower prices -> better quality of life

unemployment has remained around 2% to 5% for the past couple centuries, barring depressions, regardless of economic growth because human labor is resource, just like any other, and follows the laws of supply and demand.

You don't have to move at all.

Highly recommend reading the book "Capital Without Borders", it's about the wealth management industry, what they do, and how/why it works. Just finished it today.

The short version is:

Good luck taxing the wealthy. There are 30 different offshore tax havens fighting tooth and nail for wealthy people to house their assets there, inside of a corporation, inside a trust, inside a foundation. Nobody except the wealth manager and the person who hired them can get access to any of those assets. No one.

I wish it were as simple as "just tax the wealthy more". That possibility was lost several decades ago.

If I was a NEET, I would commit full-time to learning how to draw and coding games. Instead I have to work some shit 9-5 and try my hand at starting businesses before I can work my craft.

We need to lock down those loopholes. As it is right now the wealthiest people hardly pay any tax, compared to the average family paying the vast majority of taxes.

I can't wait for UBI to become a thing. I would be pretty happy with a McJob if i didn't have to worry about rent.

The top 1% earned 20% of all income and paid 40% of all taxes. They paid more than the bottom 90% combined.

Good luck with your president giving tax breaks to every wealthy faggot around.

I regret voting for him as much as i regret being a edgy Jow Forums retard for a time

Who's going to pay for it?

The middle class can't afford it. The wealthy barely, or don't at all, pay taxes.

First, those numbers are far, FAR from accurate. The actual story is much more dire for anyone outside of the wealthy class.

Second, "top 1%" is a useless term because that includes people earning on the order of $100k. That is not, at all, wealthy. Not even close.

All of them do it. Republicans and Democrats work for the same group of people, they're just there to give (you) the illusion of choice.

The poor and middle class have had almost no impact on politics in several decades. It's all by and for the wealthy.

>I AM an engineer and I AM worried
fuck do i feel bad every time i see someone as stupid as you. go back to reedit you stupid fuck

The top 1% is people earning 400k. Try again.

WOW im fucking amazed. oblivious rddit tard

>whos going to pay for it?
Just kill all welfare and redirect it to UBI
we'll save money

>The top 1% is people earning 400k. Try again.
There are people making that in a month.

Why would the product need constant improvement if there is zero competition? Use your brain for once, automation means whoever has the biggest factory and with that the lowest costs, wins and no one can touch their price unless they build out an even bigger factory. The future looks like you won’t have several companies but just one, forget that anyways because the big issue everyone seems to ignore and forgotten about the lesson of Henry Ford, who is going to buy your product if no one is getting paid enough to buy it?? I have been seeing this in other so called developed countries with low wages, when you don’t pay people more than they need to just survive they stop buying superfluous shit, and businesses that make their living selling superfluous shit can’t stay in the market because people can’t afford to buy it so they close and it gets blamed on a poor economy when the issue is simply people don’t have the god damn money.

You mean the top 0.1%? They pay 20% of all income taxes. The top 0.01% pay 10% of all income taxes. One in 10,000 people pay 1/10th of all taxes.

because if the peasants get too upset they'll become violent

Not an argument. Reddit is even more delusional about automation than Jow Forums

Hmmm

>To be certified as a one-percenter, you’ll need to earn $718,766
>investopedia.com/personal-finance/how-much-income-puts-you-top-1-5-10/

>to be in the top one percent nationally, a family needs an income of $389,436
>cnbc.com/2017/06/12/how-much-you-have-to-earn-to-be-in-the-top-1-percent-in-every-us-state.html

>To be among the top 1 percent of U.S. earners, a family needs an income of $421,926
>cnbc.com/2018/07/27/how-much-you-have-to-earn-to-be-in-the-top-1percent-in-every-us-state.html

Important: all of these are talking about wages, which for wealthy people are a very, VERY tiny fraction of their overall income. So sure, we can take your completely unfounded "20% of all income and paid 40% of taxes", and it's still meaningless, because whatever figure you got that from (if you ever had one to begin with) was looking at regular income, not capital gains, and taxes on payroll, not income tax.

The wealthy, I mean the top ~0.1% earn an astoundingly disproportionate amount of total national income and wealth increase, while paying an absurdly small amount in taxes on those gains, because "wealth management" is real and works, extremely well

Attached: 1514010006770.jpg (600x375, 38K)

So you just treat their wealth a federal property tax. Evasion of it would be as criminal as anything else. It's a trivial solution only stopped by cuckservatives.

don't wanna work

You literally just outed that you have no idea what you are talking about. The figures from the IRS includes capital gains. Capital gains are part of your tax return just like with wages. You must be an underage faggot who never did taxes if you don't know this.

Attached: 1550976120.png (1281x920, 196K)

>why the fuck do so many retards say shit like
>>the horse driven plow is a good thing, you'll be freed from plowing by hand
etc, etc.
OP is a faggot

Ok good for them, and their wealth provides them the luxury to be able to pay more of the share of taxes.

Sure, but asking them to pay more won't do anything. If you increased the tax rate of the top 1% to 100%, that would only generate an additional 20% of tax revenue, assuming they don't all just move somewhere else and take the economy with them.

How will the economy survive without a consumer underclass to buy goods and services? The only solution is for the companies to redistribute their wealth so there's actually somebody to buy their shit.

And you just showed YOU have no idea how the wealthy handle their wealth.

You think everything they own, all the businesses, houses, cars, jets, and yachts are in their name, in the US? You really think that?

If that's the case, then what exactly are all those offshore tax havens for? What happens there, if wealthy people are actually declaring and paying taxes on all the wealth they're earning?

Besides that, the picture you posted is for INCOME. Income and capital gains are explicitly distinct concepts in the tax code. The fact that you don't know this as (I'm assuming) an adult means you're either extremely poor or extremely stupid.

Plows were tools, automation is about replacing minds. No, this hasn't ever happened before.

>Take the economy with them

The world doesn't work like Ayn Rand describes it retard.
It would do something, it would send a message that competitiveness is taken seriously and landed nobility don't hold a position of excessively disparaging wealth and power over everyone else and their offspring aren't much better off than the rest.

the economy would fall apart if a lot of jobs were automated and those people all had no income and were heading for a life on the streets.

The government will tax the companies more and spread out the basic income to the people. I welcome it, most people end up doing fuck all with their lives, just living paycheck to paycheck and falling into depression.

some things you should consider:
AI is not General intelligence, and there is reason to believe there never will be AI which can surpass humans.

Jobs getting automated is not new, the loom was automated, the gun factory was automated, but no one throws a shit-fit now. Any job that can be done repetitively, or which is deterministic, will be replaced. This includes pajeet copy-pasting boilercode. That doesn't mean ALL jobs will be replaced, as some jobs require a general intelligence which people with an IQ > 110, or intelligence, reasoning, and critical thinking (all of which AI does not have). So if you're an Engineer its far more likely you will be using an AI assistant or a team of AI to do the work for you, but you'll be the one at the helm calling the shots on how to implement solutions. Creativity, also, cannot be replaced.

A co-op future between white-collar workers and AI is the most likely outcome. Its also possible that due to the faultiness of even the most advanced AI some blue-collars will still be on site but in mechs or something to that effect.

Focus on deporting the darkies back to their shitholes, not on AI and what-if's.

You're an engineer ffs, focus on actual machines instead of fucking magic.

When you file INCOME taxes, you put your capital gains in line 13 of form 1040, under the INCOME section. If you don't know this, you are an underage faggot.

Attached: 1550976930.png (1633x664, 324K)

Resons why we need minimum basic income

that will halt the economy though, so they'd have to keep printing money, but that wuldn't work either.

Maybe. But why would the wealthy (and corporations) keep you around, if they don't need you anymore?

The function that the middle and lower classes serve, right now, is not to consume. It is to produce. It always has been. Poor people are "put up with" because AT PRESENT they're still necessary to run the cash registers in stores, change the oil in cars, and drive delivery trucks.

Once those needs are taken care of by automation, that means the wealthy no longer need poor people to do those jobs. Robots and computers do them. So now poor people are literally useless - only consuming resources, only producing trash, only polluting "the wealthy's" environment.

What makes you think the wealthy will need anyone to consume anything for them, when they'll be able to produce anything they want essentially for free?

>The government will tax the companies more and spread out the basic income to the people.
I hope that you're right. You aren't, but I hope you are.

Jesus Christ.

Alright, let me explain this to you. Yes, short term capital gains (sale of assets held under 1 year) are treated as income.

But wealthy people aren't earning their money from short term capital gains. They are earning their money from real estate sales, business sales, long term held assets. That is not called "income" by the tax code and by law. That is called "long term capital gains".

And beside this, you COMPLETELY IGNORED the rest of my post. Answer the questions. Here, let me put them up again for you, in case clicking backlinks is too difficult a concept:

>And you just showed YOU have no idea how the wealthy handle their wealth.
>You think everything they own, all the businesses, houses, cars, jets, and yachts are in their name, in the US? You really think that?
>If that's the case, then what exactly are all those offshore tax havens for? What happens there, if wealthy people are actually declaring and paying taxes on all the wealth they're earning?

General AI is a whole different issue and we don't need anything even resembling that to automate a catastrophic amount of jobs. But, I'm curious:
>there is reason to believe there never will be AI which can surpass humans
How so?

>That doesn't mean ALL jobs will be replaced
The issue is, this is the crux of your argument. And it doesn't matter - you don't need to replace all the jobs. You don't even need to replace "most" of them. A 15-20% replacement rate, very very conservatively, is enough to bring radical changes to society.

Look at economic depressions in the modern era. Unemployment rates of 10-20% are enough to catastrophically upset the middle and lower classes.

I think the first casualty will be truck drivers, honestly. That's going to be the first salvo.

>That is not called "income" by the tax code and by law. That is called "long term capital gains".
Then why do you put them in line 13 of the INCOME section of the 1040, and why does line 22 states that it is included in your TOTAL INCOME? Don't tell me you thought that line was for short term gains only and you've been evading taxes your entire life?

>You think everything they own, all the businesses, houses, cars, jets, and yachts are in their name, in the US? You really think that?
Most do, because they would want to avoid jail time.

>If that's the case, then what exactly are all those offshore tax havens for? What happens there, if wealthy people are actually declaring and paying taxes on all the wealth they're earning?
You think these wealthy people supposedly using tax havens will suddenly move their money back and pay their taxes properly if the rates are raised?

>wealthy people pay no taxes!
The top 1% accounts for 40% of all tax revenue.
>b-but the top 1% is not considered wealthy!
The top 0.1% accounts for 20% of all tax revenue.
>b-but some of them have offshore accounts!
Your goalpost moving is hilarious.

>The function that the middle and lower classes serve, right now, is not to consume. It is to produce
It's both. Who are the cashiers serving? 99% of those they serve are not millionaires. The vast majority of value that these companies get are from "poor" people consuming their goods or services.

this. they'll give us free money and legal drugs and deepfake VR porn

If you are an engineer won't you also afraid that you would be the one getting replaced too? For example what used to take 10 person now only need 5 person to automate? And if you say there's plenty of other job offer avaiable then you will also need to compete with other laid off engineers and other millions of engineer from third world country?

cranky's advice: git gud faggot, otherwise no shekles

>when they'll be able to produce anything they want essentially for free?
If it's free, why would it be a problem to give everyone access? There's already an enormous food surplus in the first world, ensuring no one will starve. This phenomenon will simply spread to other economic sectors.

Transportation is looking like the first industry to have deep impacts from automation, I agree.

>cap gains
irs.gov/taxtopics/tc409
Golly, if long term capital gains are treated as regular income, then why would there be a different tax rate for them? Please, please explain that to me you retarded bootlicker. Or are you just an astroturfer desperately trying to shill for the wealthy? They do pay people to do that. Maybe you're one of those slaves.

But answer the question: if long term cap gains are regular income in your book, then how and when does the lower tax rate on long term cap gains apply? Or is that just a nonsense number that the IRS and tax code and documents constantly reference for no reason?

>Most do, because they would want to avoid jail time.
Okay okay hold on. I've been hostile because I thought you were a bootlicker or a paid shill, but that statement shows that you actually just don't know how wealth management works. The short version is this:

Wealthy people hold most (sometimes literally all) of their assets in trusts, foundations, and/or corporations. Many/most of these vehicles are headquartered outside the US (or whatever country the wealthy person is from - every country on earth gives reason for wealthy people to hand off their assets), mostly in countries considered tax havens. Places like the British Virgin Islands, Jersey, Mauritius, historically Switzerland, Luxembourg, there are a ton.

Offshore tax havens are, pretty much by definition, low- or no-tax jurisdictions. And because they're sovereign nations, they can tell the US/UK/Canada/Whichever tax authority to go fuck themselves if they ask for information on a wealthy person's assets.

Through trusts, foundations, and corporations in offshore tax havens, wealthy people can follow the letter of the law and pay low or no taxes, because by the letter of the law, they don't own anything (or own very little).

It's more complex, but that's the gist.

>How so?
as a brief rundown:
- everything artificial is inferior to its organic counterpart
- AI is deterministic, and the human mind might not be (due to unpredictable quantum mechanics and wierd neuron properties)
- the limitations of hardware and the slowing of moores law
- AI is by nature Quantitative, but Humans are both Quantitative and Qualitative
- AI is not self-agent
That's off the top of my head. I went ahead and found this article if you're interested: psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/mind-in-the-machine/201606/the-myth-sentient-machines

>The issue is...
That's the point though. Ideally we get rid of all the unemployeds and progress as a species. I'm sick of bleeding-heart societies that kiss the ass of sub-50 IQ retards and appeal to the dumb masses, fuck the masses. The only way forward is upward and we can't move up if we're held down by dumb brutes. Either we exterminate these dumb gibs-niggers, or they make themselves useful.

When that time comes i'll be ready with my drone swarm and 3 recreational McNukes.

Yes, that's a major concern of mine. Everything you said is right.

>why would it be a problem to give everyone access?
Why would a wealthy person do that? What possible reason would they have for suddenly caring about the well-being of the average person?

And don't say "yeah well rich people start charitable foundations and give away tons of money all the time", because you are wrong.
1) Very, very few wealthy people do this.
2) Those that do, spend a tiny, TINY fraction of their wealth doing it
3) The vast majority of those cases are for the wealthy to further their own agendas (by instituting social changes, pressuring lawmakers, etc) or simply because they want recognition

So no, the fact that some wealthy people run charities today absolutely does not mean every wealthy person is just going to give away the fruits of their robots' labor out of the kindness of their hearts.

Because I bought chainLINK.

Attached: 1545521918858.jpg (1296x1311, 908K)

>Then why do you put them in line 13 of the INCOME section of the 1040, and why does line 22 states that it is included in your TOTAL INCOME? Don't tell me you thought that line was for short term gains only and you've been evading taxes your entire life?

>Golly, if long term capital gains are treated as regular income
When did I say anything about regular income. Those statistics are based on INCOME, as reported in line 22 in Form 1040, which includes line 13, capital gains. Long term and short term. Don't tell me you are berating the wealthy for legally avoiding taxes, when you've been illegally avoiding them your entire life? Can anything be more ironic?

>Wealthy people hold most (sometimes literally all) of their assets in trusts, foundations, and/or corporations. Many/most of these vehicles are headquartered outside the US (or whatever country the wealthy person is from - every country on earth gives reason for wealthy people to hand off their assets), mostly in countries considered tax havens. Places like the British Virgin Islands, Jersey, Mauritius, historically Switzerland, Luxembourg, there are a ton.
If all these wealthy people are doing this, then who is paying 40% of all taxes?

different user here.
I'm supposing you're a socialist and/or communist?

Going further on this, remember the Panama Papers? How a bunch of information got leaked on wealthy people hiding assets in Panama (forgot to mention, it's another big tax haven) and do you remember what happened as a result of all that?

Some newspapers reported on it. It might've been mentioned on the national news once, maybe. I'm sure quite a few threads on reddit cropped up talking about how evil these people are and what awful things they're doing etc etc.

But you know what happened to the assets? You know what happened to all these wealthy people? A FEW got hit with fines. A few. Out of thousands or tens of thousands.

The reason for that is, in the vast majority of cases (certainly when you're dealing with a competent wealth manager), all of this asset management is 100% in line with the law. Follows it to the letter. It just doesn't follow the spirit of the law. But the spirit of the law (typically, that everyone should pay their fair share for the common good) means jack shit in court and absolutely nothing to the IRS.

I would highly, HIGHLY recommend you read a book called Capital Without Borders. It explains how all of this works, and importantly, why it works and why it basically can't be stopped, even with international cooperation.

I think we're losing track of the big picture here. Can you tell me exactly what kind of scenario you're envisioning? Maintenance of all essential infrastructure, food production, all fully automated?

Look up technological deflation.

- Automation means things are cheaper to make.
- Automation means fewer jobs.
- More people competing for jobs keeps wages down.
- Nobody buys anything due to nobody having money.
- Corporate profits don't grow. Executives get fired everywhere. Stock market stops growing. Declining companies get bought out by larger companies until there are de facto monopolies.
- Corporations try every evil scheme in the book to make profit. They try raising prices to increase profit (hello $2000 phones), but doesn't work because nobody has money. They try buying politicians and passing laws to fuck people over and make people forced/dependant on their monopolies, but it still doesn't solve the problem of nobody having money. We can try subsidizing their purchases with welfare but there's less income to generate tax revenue.
- Prices go down as whatever companies are left try to liquidate their inventory. Eventually there reaches an equilibrium where people buy, say, $5 iPhones. Corporations reluctantly accept this equilibrium because, due to all the automation and technology, iPhones only cost $0.01 to make anyway.

>The only way forward is upward and we can't move up if we're held down by dumb brutes. Either we exterminate these dumb gibs-niggers, or they make themselves useful.
While I agree with the sentiment, the wealthy (that is, the people who make the laws) don't give a shit about bringing our species up. They care about taking care of themselves, their families, and their friends. That's it.

So all I can say is when that time comes, my dude, good luck.

I'm not berating the wealthy for legally avoiding taxes - I would do the exact same thing in their position, because it's the most logical. What I am saying, is it's a fucking major problem for EVERYONE ELSE and we need to start taking it seriously before shit turns bad for everyone here.

And I mean that - everyone in this thread is fucked when automation hits that tipping point. No one here is wealthy enough to just fly away to a safe country, not even close.

>If all these wealthy people are doing this, then who is paying 40% of all taxes?
The numbers on income and taxes are skewed (because of wealth management) and completely ignore wealth already obtained. Wealth is far, far more important when it comes to financial stability than income is.

I wouldn't call myself a socialist, and definitely not a fucking communist. I support whatever policies do the most good for the most people. ie, socialized healthcare is good for the public, gun rights are good for the public, better education and access to education is good for the public.

>Can you tell me exactly what kind of scenario you're envisioning? Maintenance of all essential infrastructure, food production, all fully automated?
100% full automation of everything is very far off or not possible. What I'm talking about is mild, maybe 10-20% of jobs lost to automation. That's all it will take for shit to take an extreme downturn, at least for the non-wealthy. Remember, they can just hop in their jets and fly away.

Are you also in this thread ?
Anyway I live in third world so even if USA or Europe implements UBI and going full automaton tommorow I probably will taste it at least 10 years later and with shittier implementation.

not the same user but there is no reason with sufficiently powerful hardware that a true AI can arise. whether the brain is deterministic or has random elements doesn't matter, because if it's purely deterministic then it's possible for ai and if it has random elements factored in our thinking then you just use a random number generator (instead of using pseudo rng algorithms just grab a bunch of environmental variables and mix them up to get your random number, such as fan speed, core temps, etc.). humans aren't "self agent" either. there is no such thing as free will (other than in the sense that no one is forcing you at gunpoint to do something or you get run over by a car accidentally etc). if you think about it for even a minute you realize there is no such thing as free will: there is only either a determined action, or a random action. if an action requires both a deterministic process as well as a random element, then you can just divide it and call them two separate actions. neither option, gives you "self agency". you have no control over what your brain thinks. for your thought to have "free will" you would have had to think about having that though BEFORE you had the original though-otherwise it just pops into your head based on a deterministic/random algorithm.

Maybe. Who knows, I could be wrong, maybe the scenario you're suggesting is what will happen.

Regardless, that's still going to be a years or potentially decades-long process that will be absolutely awful for everyone in the middle and lower classes. And it's something we need to prepare for.

I didn't post in that thread but it's why I started this one; some dipshit said "lmao u dont need to worry about automation because then everything will just be free lol" but there are a lot of people who actually, literally think that.

I work a shitty wage slave job every day and frankly I hope it does get automated.

So then you can be homeless instead?

Because technology has made it easier for stupid people to be "successful" and thus breed more stupid people; while the smart people creating and maintaining the technology are wasting their lives studying and working to just barely afford not living amongst the stupid people and thus not being able to breed nearly as much. The average person is now stupid and thinks having a job is the measure of success, and can't conceive how fucked they're being by the rich owning class that is often just as stupid as they are.

Technology is making humanity stupider, we're all doomed.

If every single job was automated.

Nobody would have to work.

Nothing would be scarce.

You would be able to focus your entire time to do something you like.

there's not much you can do to prepare, maybe squirrel away some supplies and hide in the country. you could probably scratch out a couple years of miserable living until some wealthy family buys the land and has robots murder you.

Yeah if you own the robots. But you won't, because you're not rich enough right now.

Societies only works if someone pay taxes for support hospitals, schools, police and roads. Low incomes and robots made The average Joe economically irrelevant but government oddly refuse raise taxes to the 1% and robots when World's Billionaires are public figures easier to monitor and control.

>Why do you think automation is going to be good for the average person?

Automation is a tool and a weapon unlike any other that human beings have developed; it will almost certainly allow the already non-american powerful entities to consolidate their power further. Because Trump, already today whenever our Representatives in United States Senate or Congress make a phone call, post something on Facebook, or travel from one city to another, they are likely to be monitored by Russian/European/Chinese microphones, cameras, drones, or spy software. Algorithms analyze the gathered data, the Russian/European/Chinese intelligence forces pinpoint and neutralize federal legislation, what they consider to be potential threats

What if I own the land?

>UBI
visit Venezuela to see how that turns out
keep drinkin' the Kool-Aid, kid

First of all its virtually unavoidable. You'll either commit suicide as a society or end up with it.
Can you imagine a state that bans factory lines? It's automation that killed countless jobs.
Second all of those jobs are garbage, it should be automated or penal work.
Third your cynicism will shield you from the right solutions.
Things like UBI is a start. But major societal restructuring is more important. We'llhave to move to a society where your only actual work is small service jobs or intellectual company work.
Not everyone is cut out for that. Those people either need to be horribly mistreated or go NEET.
>I'm an engineer and I'm worried
Must be a pretty bad engineer then.

We must enter a brave new world in which sub-130 IQ humans are executed, and all generations of people are cognitively enhanced through gene modification. Wage war on the weak. Replace all proles with machines.

my family "owns" a bit of land but I think thats not enough. you never truly own anything in the eyes of a powerful super government with flying killer robots and a population generally too fat and stupid to help you resist them

Adjusting to automation will most certainly not be a good thing.

Automation WILL BE a good thing.

This is why we need socialism NOW

we're still pretty far away from full automation

Why the fuck do so many retards say shit like
>automation means every job will disappear
>automation is possible for every job
>we have or soon will have the technology for full automation, muh 5-10 years, ignore the current state of technology

Amazon is testing drones and driverless cars. The US steel industry is gone thanks to outsourcing and automation. Automation is here, and it will only get worse.

>automating 2 iq jobs
I mean sure it works if you want to doompost

Yes, it'll be the low IQ jobs that get automated. What's your point? Those people will be out of work. It's heartless and cruel to let them die from circumstances out of their control: and it's the harmful capitalistic mindset of "the market doesn't value them so they're worthless" that best represents the issue with capitalism.

The only solution to automation is socialism.

>there is no reason with sufficiently powerful hardware that a true AI can arise
agreed

>then you just use a rng
where do you apply the randomness?

The underlying problem behind the randomness is that we have no fucking clue how the brain works, and a reductionist approach to the mind fails to explain its more elaborate and complex tendancies.

>if you think about it for even a minute you realize there is no such thing as free will
and if you think about it for more than a minute, you realize that determinism is a coping mechanism with no grounds in a probibalistic universe. If you think about it for even longer and use common sense reasoning, you realize that fatalism is superstitious nonsense on the same level of scientific accuracy and credibility as a fortune teller.

>then you can just divide it
the absolute state of reductionists, you can't even grasp the idea of complex systems being irreducible.

>for your thought to have "free will" you would have had to think about having that though BEFORE you had the original though-otherwise it just pops into your head based on a deterministic/random algorithm.
>before you have the original thought
wouldn't thinking about that thought even by a free agent still count as being caused under this definition? Since the moment you think that though you already through about it and therefore never though about it freely, even if you did? I'm sure there's a name for this type of fallacy, but assuming something is because you say so and is proven by doing the thing that should disprove it seems like moving the target before the shot. this is the reasoning is a child, and i don't take the reasoning of children seriously. Do you have anything else to say or am i just going to be listening to a predetermined bot ramble nonsense it doesn't even understand?

>implying the bread line won't be funded by said companies profiting off of robot labor

>pic related me enjoying my free bread not breaking my back working

Attached: bernieBLMSanders.jpg (400x400, 31K)

post-scarity is impossible, so long as there is a source of production and consumption. At best you can get pseudo-post-scarcity by having the rate of production out-pace the rate of supply, but if the means of production somehow halt, then everthing will go to shit.

Hopefully we get rid of the dumb wealthy and dumb poor, and just get a smarter humanity (minus the darkies, they can keep living in their mud-hits banging sticks together)

I can't wait for the Objectivist Utopia to be built.

Well I'm pretty cynical about what my goverment will or won't do. If you're just one person from hundred of millions of people that probably will do that for you. Our R&D is even lower than Vietnam and Malaysia. How could our goverment or companies able to afford UBI for example?

Anyway what could make UBI realistically work in the world? Do you need at least similiar rates of exchange in all of countries or subsidizing for poorer country? For example what if you want to vacation in German but you're from Thailand? You probably need 10 years to save money meanwhile people from German only need one year to saving their UBI.

There is enough wealth in the world to eliminate poverty. But it's distributed incorrectly, because capitalism is designed around scarcity. You say there will always be scarcity, but that isn't true. If we abandon capitalism, we can also abandon scarcity.

>full automation
-no one can afford to buy consumer goods because no one has any money
-zero demand means zero profit
-every company collapses because no income just expenditures
-massive inflation as rich people try to Jew each other and governments
-politicians stay greedy and hungry for power
-ww3/mass revolt obliterates every technology, factory, government, and wealthy person
Amish mafia wins!

Not even close buddy, you missed the entire point:
>the universe has finite resources
>people are greedy and take more than they need
>any non-capitalistic attempt to distribute resources is a beaureucratic mess

There's the problem of locality, as food and many other resources are perishable and thus only accessible in a certain time frame, meaning that even an infinite supply is scarce.
Then there's the problem of human psychology when you just give people things. Just throw things at people without having them put effort into getting it and they will just waste it instead, like all the first worlders who waste perfectly good food, or buy junk they don't need but think they might one day maybe need. Additionally, there's the problem of dependence on the state/corporation/"not a dictator"/etc which would be distributing all these resources in the first place.
To compound the issue further. Lets suppose humanity scraps the idea of capitalism entirely. How do we distribute the resources? Who will oversee the distribution of these resources? Well, we'll need to quantify the distribution, but the only way to do that is through quotias, but quotias are arbitrary and mean nothing to the producer, assuming there even is an incentive to do fucking anything.
Do you remember that russian nail factory? How they made 1 large nail since the quotia was measured in weight of nails? How they made it large because it mean't they had to do less unrewarding work that ultimately had no impact or correlation to the "reward" they got at the end of the day (which was fuck-all besides some bread and soup)? I sure do.

Even if we had an infinite supply of every object imaginable, we would still not be able to "equally distribute it", and if we theoretically could do so (like in the land of fucking magic) we would just waste it anyways. Capitalism is the best system we've got and the coming problem of automation doesn't simplify it at all.

1. ok we agree cool
2. you don't have to know where to apply the randomness. if there is a random element to apply, then i'm just stating it is positively possible to implement it. you also have to prove the brain factors in probabilistic elements. so far you haven't, and if the day comes that it is proven, the proof itself would have to detail *what* part of the cognition algorithm incorporates these random elements so then we would know where to apply the randomness in our AI. lose/lose for you in this point.
3. i'm not advocating determinism. a probabilistic universe still doesn't give you free will. a deterministic universe doesn't give you free will either. i don't know where you're getting this fatalism nonsense but ok
4.a. that wasn't even a major point. if it makes you feel better then there are *three* options instead of two: deterministic universe, probabilistic universe, and a universe that incorporates both elements.
4.b. i didn't claim complex systems are reducible, but if you could, define for me complex system as well as "irreducible complexity".
5.you got the point but instead of considering it a proof you call it a fallacy. the point i was trying to make is that you end up with an endless chain of thoughts that had to come before your current thought, for your current thought to be "free". think about it. where do your thoughts come from? they always pop into your head, based on your past experiences as well as your current surroundings, right?
6. i'm actually doing more than what is my job. you have to first prove free will exists, before i have to come and prove it doesn't. even if it is trivial, it has to be done because hint hint: default position is always the null position.

ps: stop being so hostile. i thought i was having a discussion online on an interesting topic but you think i'm some sort of gullible horoscope reading "bot". ok. anyways don't expect a reply again because it's late and i haven't slept in 4 days. have a nice day

All of that is irrelevant. The real question one should be asking ones self is "can my job be automated?". If the answer is yes, prepare yourself.

>venezuela
>ubi
t. Uninformed