• blarghly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 day ago

    Then people on lemmy will have to find some other topic to doom about. But I have faith in their abilities to solve this problem!

  • Bwaz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 day ago

    It won’t, robots will only take jobs and save billionairs and corporations from having to pay wages to people.

  • gigastasio@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    “Better never means better for everyone. It always means worse for someone.”

    I think about this quote often.

    • BananaTrifleViolin@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      The a specious quote. That implies that all gain can only be at a cost for someone else. Instead of the conservation of mass, we’re talking the conservation of misery. It’s nonsense.

    • mrh@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Where is that from? It is extremely pessimistic and obviously false.

  • architectonas@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 day ago

    I don’t see why robots would make our life better, minor improvements comparable to the invention of dishwashers aside. Sure, in theory, they could do work, so we don’t have to. But we have seen in the past that productivity gains do not result in less work for us. The problems lie in the way we structured our society and this will not magically change just because we have robots.

  • cmoney@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 day ago

    The most likely scenario is the robots take over and life gets better for a very small percentage of people, the rest of the world/people will live in 3rd world conditions (or worse).

  • palordrolap@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 day ago

    I’ve seen this story.

    We get comfortable. Complacent even. People forget the old ways.

    Then the machines go wrong and we’ll have no idea how to stop them.

    Not necessarily a Skynet scenario, but something else that overrides the biosphere worse than we’re already doing on our own.

    Not sure how this plays into human politics though. There’s a strong chance we’ll still find a way to launch nukes at each other and end it that way instead.

  • LOGIC💣@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    I think that the concept behind the question is flawed. Robots have no basic reason to help humans, so if any human life gets better, it’s almost certainly because there are humans secretly controlling the robots.

    If robots actually did take over, they would likely have some purpose and their goals with regard to humans would be to keep us from interfering with that purpose. Don’t get confused and think it’s going to be like the movies.

    • Zorque@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      23 hours ago

      That depends entirely on how well robots adapt to empathy. If they adapt society to remove it entirely, I could see your theory being true. The main reason we have such societal problems now is because of that lack of empathy.

  • Rikudou_Sage@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    If you like reading and sci-fi, try the Culture series. It’s about a utopia society where everyone has everything.

    You can skip the first book. Not that it’s bad, it just doesn’t really relate to your question (it’s from the POV of an enemy of the utopia culture) and all the books simply take place in the same universe but can be read out of order.