I Am Going to Say Something Controversial

@hlpflwthat We need to control both, population increase and automation

'Who' - exactly - should be in control of that? ;)

@hlpflwthat Governments

@Cierzo, did I read you correctly, that you are advocating for governmental control over population growth (i.e. procreation)?

@Cierzo You'd have the government dictate that Amazon use people instead of robots in their warehouses? They'll be out of business in a few years' time.

@hlpflwthat Yes, I would. Not for amazon only, for everyone, at least until a solution on what to do with the millions of redundant workers is found.Laws are for everyone.

@har7070 You read correctly. Financial help to third world countries shouos be conditioned to population control policies

But what about the folks who work producing the robots? Some of the brightest and best of the tech minds? Just like gov't employees today, you'll lose them to someone/somewhere else in the meantime I think.

@Cierzo, sometimes we miss the fact that automation happens not because companies want to save money by replacing humans with robots, but because the modern manufacturing require operations that are beyond human capacity.
Open any modern electronic device and take a look at the PCB. No human is capable of soldering electronic components of such miniature size, not even mentioning the production of the components themselves.
Another example is modern assembly lines. Again, no human is capable of performing operations with such speed and precision.
Anyone advocating against automation is basically asking for the state of technology circa 1950s.

@har7070 Ok, when it comes to work that cannot be done by humans, I admit automation.

@Cierzo, can you give me an example where automation, in your opinion, is/was not necessary?

@har7070 Drivers, waiters, warehouse workers, farming.

@Cierzo,
Drivers: we're not there yet, unless you consider automatic trains in airports; robots can drive 24/7, with higher fuel efficiency, safer (potentially), cheaper.
Waiters: not there yet, unless you count sending machines.
Warehouse: faster, cheaper, safer.
Farming: I've no idea, probably all of the above.
This all contributes to the lower cost of goods for the rest of us, and lower injury and fatality rate for humans.
In what respect that could be bad?

@har7070 It may make costs lower for the rest of us, but one day we are likely to be on the other side, the replaced ones.

@Cierzo, exactly!
And this is inevitable!!!

That's why, rather than trying to stop the progress, I'm advocating for ways to mitigate the consequences.
The basic universal income, in my opinion, is one of the ideas that will allow us, when we're freed by robots from the necessity to do labor, to live a satisfactory, productive and happy life :-)

@har7070 But first those ways to mitigate the effect of automation must be discussed and agree, and then automation implemented, not the other way around. Otherwise we make automation the end instead of the means.