This is the second of a trilogy of posts I wrote over a decade ago about technology and humanity. Last week’s post on the economic effects of technology was Deep Thought 6: The Mind in the Machine. I’ll run the grand finale next week (unless something really exciting happens and I have an old post that sheds light on it.)
The first post looked at the economic effects of technology. This one looks at broader social and political effects. The last post bends philosophical.
I’ll put footnotes on specific points where items I cited did not really hold up. At the end I’ll post a coda revisiting the main themes.
Finally, there is no Deep Thought 1-5. The origin of the title will be revealed at the conclusion of this series. Feel free to contact me if you think you know where it comes from. (Also, there are no vice presidents in this post, but tomorrow you’ll get your Veeply Roundup!)
Deep Thought 7: When Machines Rule
At its best our age is an age of searchers and discoverers, and at its worst, an age that has domesticated despair and learned to live with it happily.
—Flannery O’Connor
In my last post I wrote about how computational capabilities are capable of displacing humans from many, many jobs. With computerized, self-driving cars within technological reach the postal service, Fedex, UPS and innumerable other enterprises could quickly cut their labor costs – and that is just one example. A huge range of human endeavors could be automated, including some of those conducted by professionals such as pharmacists.
Given that scenario, what would people do? Stuff would be cheaper, but it would be a lot harder to make any money – presumably there would still be some jobs. There might be functions that were extremely difficult to automate even with access to massive computing power.1 (I can imagine clothing sales still being a human function – I just can’t imagine a machine saying in a compelling way, “That outfit works on you.”)2 People will probably still produce entertainment and some business and political leadership will still be needed to make critical decisions. Algorithms might identify various optimal distributions of goods and services, but people will need to consider the less easily calculated moral and emotional aspects of these decisions.
Broadly there are two future scenarios. This is not an immediate future, it is worth remembering that for most of the world’s population these technological advances are far from their everyday lives.
The utopian version is one in which everyone enjoys plenty (or at least freedom from want). Some people will pursue regular careers that bring them modest wealth. Many work for a time at a few critical human-dominated fields before “retiring” early. But many take advantage of this plenty to become professional hobbyists – earning modest livings through part-time endeavors as artists, chefs, entertainers, history buffs etc. In short, in the future the world is a vast artists colony in which comfortable people pursue self-actualization. This is the vision of humanity as a bunch of modest trust fund babies.
In the dystopian version, the world resembles a vast government housing project in which almost everyone is given just enough to get by and no one has much of anything to do. People pursue worthy hobbies such as alcoholism and hooliganism.
The truth is the future probably has a bit of both of these scenarios. More and more people are finding extremely interesting things to do (look at all the professional bloggers out there – in my case I look with jealousy.) I’ve been listening to the WTF podcasts by stand-up comedian Marc Maron who does this really cool engaging show out of his garage. He’d never find a mass market on a network, but thanks to the low production costs and ease of distribution he is able to find an audience.
On the other hand, most of the Western nations with well-developed welfare systems have seen the growth of a permanently under-employed class (this isn’t just in the US, Western Europe has it too – just with less violence.) This could expand as more people find themselves with minimal employment prospects. But this expansion could have very nasty consequences; particularly as this environment of anomie is also a wonderful breeding ground for extremism and violence. People need to feel useful to be satisfied.
To keep things in perspective, these are “rich people” problems. Medieval societies didn’t suffer from unemployment because almost everyone was involved in backbreaking labor to avoid starvation. The poor in Western societies live a life of unimaginable luxury compared to most of the people who ever lived (which is not to ignore the very real challenges they face or the need to ensure that they have better access to the opportunities of a modern society.)
But the future then looks like the present only more so, with the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. Presumably, even in the heavily automated world of plenty the creative, ambitious, and talented will find things to do. I worry about everyone else.
From a policy standpoint there are limited options. No education system will turn dumb people into composers or astrophysicists. But even a mind of low intelligence is a very impressive thing.3 Just as I know I can never be an athlete, but I can press my body within its (very) limited capacities. Everyone can be taught/habituated to use his or her mind more fully. In doing so, we can also help focus on what humans really are good for.
Finally, the Utopian scenario may not be all it is cracked up to be. Europe at the turn of the 20th century was a worldly, wealthy, sophisticated civilization. Yet the entire continent turned on itself with an unbelievably fury. Human nature is a constant – we’ll find ways to make ourselves crazy.
Coda
I think in both this post and the previous post I’m a little too focused on jobs. Yes, AI will eliminate some jobs and dramatically change others. But we’ve been warned before about how technology would leave us all unemployed, and that clearly hasn’t happened. In my personal life, the adage that work expands to fill the time available has held true. I expect it may hold true for society as a whole.
Human beings are amazing. Between the unique processing power that is our brain, the unparalleled ability to manipulate objects with our hands, and our capacity for communication—there are any number of things for which replacing human beings is a long way off. And there are going to be fewer of us in the not too distant future. Birth rates are going down all over the world, so there will be incentives to use technology to replace people, but also value people more and more.
My best case scenario, in which people work as they wish, becomes more likely—in a sense we will all be nurses. Well paid with highly portable skills and an endless demand, nursing is a great profession—plus it can be satisfying. Imagine a world in which most people have those options—if they want them. People who want to travel will have little difficulty going to a new place and quickly picking up work. Alternately, people who want to create art or write will have little difficulty finding part-time jobs that enable their serious avocations.
There will also be a push for more skilled workers, so training will be readily available and people can change relatively easily from specialty to specialty. This will also make it easier for people to find their place—do meaningful work that gives them a sense of purpose.
Pie in the sky perhaps, but a global aging population could have profound effects unlike those ever experienced by humanity.
This positive scenario could exist alongside a negative one: the enshittification of everything, the endless AI slop, and the ensuing brain rot. There is so much great stuff out there (like this here newsletter) but it is lost within galaxies of noise. All of the major online platforms are filled with crapware ads, misinformation, and clickbait. There are innumerable ways in which they still make life easier, but harder than it needs to be.
Humanity has been through communications and technological revolutions before. They change politics and society, and rewire our brains. We adapt. We change. We lose some things, but gain others.
The Industrial Revolution allowed the creation of huge amounts of stuff. So many people now live in homes full of crap (I am not exception!) The ability to acquire stuff has taken a common petty vice and turned it into the mass culture of consumerism.
Now the Information Revolution, in which we can produce and deliver endless streams of “content” is devouring our souls. In both of these revolutions there was much good, but we must mitigate the bad. Getting the best out of technology, allowing people to live enriched lives, may require regulation and cultural shifts. The corporations that provide these services exist to make money. But now, money is often not made by offering the highest quality product at the lowest price, but rather through rent-seeking.
On a certain level, all of this is secondary. I think something even bigger is happening. That’s for next week.
That’s the world of Kurt Vonnegut’s debut novel, Player Piano, which I discussed last week.
I believe I have been proven completely wrong on this. People do buy clothes online, although others continue to love the in-person retail experience.
I’m kicking myself a bit for having written something so obnoxious and insensitive.