or manually assisting in areas where gps or w/e goes screwy (Which does happen often in truck driving)

Humans will still be needed in an age of automation at the very least because they are infinitely more adaptable. The way I see it we just won’t be wasting 10s of millions of human lives by having them sit in a truck cab for their whole lives. Just like we were wasting everyone’s lives by having them plow fields and pick crops 100 years ago

@amlam Being wise about the chooses we make is never a bad thing, talking about all aspects of a problem does not make for a retarded argument. Tucker is looking at the human part of this issue.

Tucker is missing a large part of the human aspect though. What people do today will be viewed as a massive waste of time by generations who don’t have to do that shit

but thats future generations

that would be normal

its when its under a generation that is the issue

Only a fool would look at the past like that, as you could say the same thing that about almost anything in the past.....

when you spend 3-4 years training in a trade and it disappears

for example

or even 10

We all see it coming now. I get there’s a lot of truckers but that’s still not an argument for why technology shouldn’t do as much as possible

theres an entire field of computer science dedicated to this, the ethical side of tech.

what is made clear in it, is that progression for the sake of progression is not a universal good

especially with ai

I didn’t say it was for the sake of progression. I said it was for the sake of productivity, meaning raising the standard of living of humanity. Humans are adaptable enough to find something to do other than sit in a truck for 50 hours a week

are we measuring that by gdp per capita?

There are a number of ways to measure standard of living. Freeing up human capital to behave more like humans and less like machines though will always be a good thing. Not to mention you don’t have a right to stop people from developing tools

gdp per capita is usually the go to for quality of life in economics.

Science alone isn't meant to look at the effects of its actions (outside of what its testing), that's what the humans are meant to do.
CAN humans adapt? Yes, we do it all the time. Will it harm many humans in the meantime? To many to count. So people will look to try to minimizes this (if/when possible).

Developing tools has always reduced the number of people required to produce something or offer a service though. There’s fundamentally no reason why self driving cars are special

If the timescale is your issue then we should just put out a PSA today “In 10 years truck driver will not be a job. Prepare accordingly”

im with you generally, and yes the rate is an issue for me

Isn't everything always timescale?

Maybe if we had magic it wouldn't be.

brooo...like...life is a timescale...whoahh

🤠

AOC presidential campaigning has begun

socialism is worse than garbage

An interesting read: https://quanticfoundry.com/2017/01/19/female-gamers-by-genre/

no Fighting games...

When I starting playing MMOs in 2006, Fantasy MMO gamers were 83% male, today they are 64% male, quite a big difference in 13 years.

I want to get into a new MMO (or old one).

Probably sorted under "Action/Adventure" would be my guess, but yes, an overlooked category.

I'm surprised the JRPGs are that low actually, most girls I know who play games play JRPGs and not that many guys I know do