> Even a pretty good UBI probably wouldn’t be enough to cushion the landing for people who make a lot right now and have made financial decisions (number of kids, purchasing a house, etc)
The UBI should take number of underage children into account.
If the house turned out to be too much they’d have to sell.
Yes electricians are definitely safer than those of us who work in front of a computer all day, but I don’t think AI is good for them either. First of all, more young people might try to become one, potentially crowding the sector. Second, if the rest of us are poorer we’ll also spend less in housing and other things that require an electrician.
To me the biggest difference is that there’s some place for high quality, beautiful and expensive handcrafted woodwork, even if it’s niche in a world where Ikea exists. Nobody will ever care whether some software was written by humans or a machine, as long as it works and works well.
^This. Even if there was a demand for hand-crafted software, it would be very hard to prove it was hand-crafted, but it's unlikely there could be a demand for the same reasons as there is no market for e.g. luxury software. As opposed to physical goods, software consumers care for the result, not how it was created.
If it looks like a cabinet, works as a cabinet and doesn’t fall apart, by all intents and purposes it’s a cabinet. 99% of people out there won’t care if it was a “craftsman” or a robot built it. Just like most people buy furniture at Ikea.
The difference is that the person who was a woodworker is no longer needed. Why can’t the customer just walk up to a kiosk and ask the machine to start building? The machine or another one specialized for QA can then assess if it fits all the technical requirements which the customer doesn’t necessarily understand. This is what most people here are worried about, eventually the professional human being will no longer be needed by businesses which can produce everything with neither customer nor business owner being in need of specialized knowledge which they previously needed to acquire by hiring professionals.
If that’s you’re best response, a snarky and unfunny comment that would make a GenZ guy blush, I’m not surprised you can’t fathom that age is a factor.
And they're pretty much the only example of an embedded browser architecture actually performing tolerably and integrating well with the native environment.
> Nowadays, movie fans seem much less impressed by CGI in films. There's a general distaste for a perceived overuse of CGI in favor of practical effects, and there are a lot of complaints that recent CGI is less-convincing and more fake-looking than it used to be, even in the biggest budget films.
Funny it says this right after mentioning Jurassic Park. I, an avid JP fan that was blown away by the movie (and the book) when I was a dino-obsessed teenager, always thought that it was the non-CGI dinos the ones that didn't look that realistic (even if the "puppets" were fantastically done, it was more about the movement/animation). Although we have to keep in mind they used those mostly for close up shots where CGI would've looked even worse.
The UBI should take number of underage children into account.
If the house turned out to be too much they’d have to sell.
reply