81,898
edits
A World Without Work: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{review|A World Without Work: Technology, Automation, and How We Should Respond|Daniel Susskind|||Help, help, we’re all going to die}} | {{review|A World Without Work: Technology, Automation, and How We Should Respond|Daniel Susskind|||Help, help, we’re all going to die}} | ||
In which {{author|Daniel Susskind}} grasps a flagon of {{author|Ray Kurzweil}}’s home-made Kool-Aid and bets the farm | In which {{author|Daniel Susskind}} grasps a flagon of {{author|Ray Kurzweil}}’s home-made Kool-Aid and bets the farm. | ||
Technology has ''never'' destroyed overall labour, and Susskind gives no good grounds for believing it | Susskind will doubtless find enough gullible [[general counsel]], anxious to seem at the technological vanguard — and interested mugs like me, who are suckers for sci fi alternative histories — at least to recoup his advance but, like the consistent output of his [[Richard Susskind|father]] over the last three decades, {{br|A World Without Work}} will not signpost, let alone dent, the immutable trajectory of modern employment, failing as it does to understand how humans, organisations and economies work, while ignoring — neigh, ''contradicting'' — the whole history of technology, from the plough. | ||
Technology has ''never'' destroyed overall labour, and Susskind gives no good grounds for believing it will suddenly start now. | |||
No innovation since the wheel has failed to create unexpected diversity, or opportunity — that’s more or less the definition of an innovation, really — ''or'' more subsidiary complexity & inefficiency as a by-product. Both the opportunities and the inefficiencies "need" human, not automated, midwifery, to imaginatively exploit (for the former) and effectively manage (for the latter). | No innovation since the wheel has failed to create unexpected diversity, or opportunity — that’s more or less the definition of an innovation, really — ''or'' more subsidiary complexity & inefficiency as a by-product. Both the opportunities and the inefficiencies "need" human, not automated, midwifery, to imaginatively exploit (for the former) and effectively manage (for the latter). | ||