but the legal system does dictate the actions of businesses

if we hit a point in automation in which all low skill laborer work could be replaced with an automated alternative, even into new job sectors, where will these people work

They wont

let's just make hunger games as a response to AI taking low level jobs

if you no work then you go in the pit!

Are you arguing that we should legally prohibit people from using AI in their businesses

That we REQUIRE businesses to use human labor

Sounds like authoritarianism to me

I am saying that it is in businesses's long term best interest to do so

But it isnt

I already posted my citations for this

So far you have nothing

Why would a call center not automate their positions?

A transportation company?

I have a new argument, Its not just about the money, its about the accountability humans have that robots do not have

Trucking would save 60 billion on wages alone

you cannot program conscious decision making that is as dynamic as a human's ability to do so

And more than double production

Yes you can

To an extent

What decisions could a low skill human make that an AI cant?

Hell in the 90s thry made a near impossible to beat AI for chess

I'm saying that if AI threatens humans and their quality of life then it should have restrictions imposed on it

^^^^^

we can make a moral decision about automation if it would negatively impact our quality of life or the way certain people live their lives

Because that AI could make decisiond based on calculating every possibility for the next thousand moves in an instant

I am switching arguments rn,

but I will get back to the chess argument

that only works because it is in a constrained ruleset which is chess

You dont have a right to force your subjective morality onto someone else

real life is infinitely more complicated than chess

You dont play much chess do you

AI has actually demonstrated creative ways of breaking rules and finding loop holes. They would be better than any human lawyer lol

are you really going to argue that real life IS NOT more complicated than chess?

Even with twal live being more complicated than chess that was an AI nearly impossible to beat in the 90s

Think about where cell phones were in the 90s vs now

Now apply that to AI

many would argue that those technological advancements are a huge cause of the problems humans are currently facing

now apply that to AI

Do their arguments have veracity?

Thats subjective