Replying to ringo

the big problem with most of this isn't that it raises the "bar of quality"

it's that it eliminates a means of earning a living, for a great many people.

if you can't see why that's evil without arguing against it, I have nothing further to add :)
Avatar
Mark Camper 2y ago

A bit of a broken window fallacy, nah?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

88
ringo 2y ago

ill have to spend some time parsing this over.. https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/08/broken-window-fallacy.asp new nomeclature here.

Avatar
hh 2y ago

This article is so poorly written that it makes it look like the fallacy is the conclusion against it.

Avatar
bkb2443 2y ago

This is the original from Bastiat

https://mises.org/library/broken-window

Avatar
Mark Camper 2y ago

My point is that similarly as just breaking windows to give people work has somewhat obvious negative consequences, telling other people to not use 10x tools because it steals people jobs will have the same consequences.

I agree that in the short term, if there's a rapid change, people will have hard time adjusting. And some might not... But ultimately it creates more capital in the world, and makes all other remaining scarce skills relatively more valuable.

I feel like I've recently heard a great podcast elaborating on AI's impact on humanity along these lines with some "Austrians" - either Human Action Podcast, or Stephan Livera. Can't find it now. But found that Dominic Frisby has just made some episodes on it, and looking forward to listen to his perspectives, he's usually a well balanced and practical libertarian. (https://fountain.fm/episode/14275230998)

PS. There should totally be more discussions about this, it's life-changing topic.

88
ringo 2y ago

but do we really need more capital, or do we actually need people to be trained in SELF reliance and community interaction? remember the phrase "it takes a village?"

Avatar
Mark Camper 2y ago

Both