Newsgroups: comp.robotics
Path: brunix!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!newsfeed.pitt.edu!uunet!hobbes!earth.armory.com!rstevew
From: rstevew@armory.com (Richard Steven Walz)
Subject: Re: Does Automation Take Jobs Away?
Organization: The Armory
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 1994 22:07:13 GMT
Message-ID: <CtMDG2.E1D@armory.com>
References: <Ct8z84.np1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <1994Jul25.030512.21689@rgfn.epcc.edu> <CtI6Mp.4x9@armory.com> <1994Jul26.122652.26625@rgfn.epcc.edu>
Sender: news@armory.com (Usenet News)
Nntp-Posting-Host: deeptht.armory.com
Lines: 53

In article <1994Jul26.122652.26625@rgfn.epcc.edu>,
Michael S. Miner <ac343@rgfn.epcc.edu> wrote:
>Richard Steven Walz (rstevew@armory.com) wrote:
>: In article <1994Jul25.030512.21689@rgfn.epcc.edu>,
>: Michael S. Miner <ac343@rgfn.epcc.edu> wrote:
>: >     I'm not sure what Papa Joe's Paradise, or any other dead
>: >totalitarian autocracy has to do with robots displacing workers. 
>			.	.	.
>: >half of the tribe out of the hunting with rocks business, but
>: >they just chalked it up to magic.  
>: >     Fighting progress is futile, ignoring it is cowardly, and
>: >arguing about it is just plain stupid.  :-)
>: >Michael S. Miner                         ac343@rgfn.epcc.edu
>: ---------------------------------------
>: The trick is, Michael, how to "force them to adapt to a new world" where
>: they have a much "lower standard of living for laborers" without you being
>: the one to wind-up with a spear in your back and a rock in your skull.
>: You had better train them and accept economic equality with them, because
>: you're way outnumbered. Interesting turn of a phrase: A programmer;
>: out-numbered!!
>: -Steve Walz   rstevew@armory.com
>	I was using the 'we' and 'they' to keep the point straight.  
>I have been an unskilled laborer, the difference for the sake of
>argument is that I, unlike the postulated masses, welcome the day
>when I am replaced by a machine in a repetative task.
>	I'm sure no one complains when they do laundry, because
>some washer woman was put out of work, least of all the would be
>washer!   As for forcing adaptation, It really can't be done.
>Good thing I don't buy all this nonsense about people who resist
>automation.  I really have never met anyone who was afraid of 
>obsolesence anymore than they were afraid of just plain getting
>fired.  I only mentioned it, because there seemed to be many   
>posts extolling the benefits of having a 'working class'
>	One thing I do think: If a person chooses to reject the
>free education we offer in a modern country, then they should
>expect no more than a third world standard of living(even if
>they live in Washington, DC!).  :end of pontification}
-------------------------
Again you push me to categorize you with those who give "nerd" a bad name,
for your apparent ignorance of the human equation in all of this. If they
had all been raised with your advantages, and if people were rational
despite being abused as children and their parents not knowing how to read,
because they were either assumed to be too ignorant or were told they
were stupid over and over, and weren't unlike you, then your equation
works. Without that it looks like trying to float a puck in a B-field
without superconduction or servoing. It won't fly, Wilbur!
-Steve

>-- 
>Michael S. Miner                         ac343@rgfn.epcc.edu
-------------------------
-Steve Walz   rstevew@armory.com

