TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Elon Musk Thinks Automation Will Lead to a Universal Basic Income

20 点作者 FuNe超过 8 年前

3 条评论

bbctol超过 8 年前
If he&#x27;s &quot;not sure what else one would do,&quot; he needs to think bigger. I&#x27;m amazed that America seems so locked in to maximum laissez-faire that the idea that UBI is the actual solution has become remotely popular.<p>When truck drivers are replaced by self-driving cars, they won&#x27;t see their monthly allowance as a benefit. People want to have control over their lives far more than they just want to survive. Sure, you have income. You can spend it on more plastic goods sold by the company that took your job, more consumer electronics sold by the company that took your job, more fast food from the company that took your job, all delivered on a fleet of drones from the company that took your job, while trying not to piss off the government infested with lobbyists from the company that took your job, lest they cut off your allowance and leave you for dead. Cycle that money right back to the same rich guys who claim to function on meritocracy and judge every applicant into their world by their ability to speak the arbitrary jargon, bolstered by a nice degree, the right level of expensive casual dress, and your race and gender. Or you could buy a gun.<p>Giving people comfort without giving them power is a recipe for revolution, and Silicon Valley doesn&#x27;t get that they&#x27;ll be the first against the wall; they&#x27;ll still be wringing their hands and wondering why people voted for Trump when neoliberalism could give them so many cool new phones. Very few people in America are actually starving or on the streets; far more are committing suicide, either directly or through slow drug addiction, not because they don&#x27;t have the means to survive but because they don&#x27;t have the means to control their own lives, create their own future for themselves and their families, have the level of basic dignity that a solution like &quot;here&#x27;s your allowance, now go back to school and study hard&quot; will never provide. Collective ownership, working democracy, a real attempt at a post-scarcity society is &quot;what else one would do.&quot;<p>Welfare is important. UBI could be a fine way of making sure people don&#x27;t starve to death. That hasn&#x27;t been the major issue in the developed world for a long time now.
评论 #13140469 未加载
评论 #13141046 未加载
mikestew超过 8 年前
&quot;I don&#x27;t know what else you could do.&quot;<p>This article regurgitates the same crap I&#x27;ve heard for 45 years, and people have been saying it for longer than that. What else can you do? Same thing that&#x27;s always been done: automate, take the extra profits for yourself, and the line workers can piss off. I have zero reason to believe it will ever be otherwise.
评论 #13141054 未加载
评论 #13140063 未加载
harpocrates超过 8 年前
While I think UBI would perhaps be a good solution to unemployment that increased automation is going to cause, I fear we will end up with a situation like in Kurt Vonnegut&#x27;s Piano Player[0]: those who aren&#x27;t working will have much lower status and living quality than those working, even if they do have some UBI.<p>[0]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Player_Piano_(novel)" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Player_Piano_(novel)</a>