https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU
This video from discussed the scenario where our jobs are gradually replaced by robotic/AI workforce, the author argues that our jobs, not only the ones require lower skill, but also white collar jobs will be soon replaced by robots, which in his opinion is a disaster to human being, because most population on earth are working relatively simple tasks that can be replaced by robots, and this would lead to human's losing jobs and social status.
The author made an interesting analogy to support his argument: back when we haven't had steam engine, horses were the primary transportation tools, ever since industrial revolution, horses become rarely needed in our society, they are replaced by machines. Therefore, he said, human will face the same destiny as the horses did, becoming "useless", population sharply plunge.
Wait a minute here, why is being replaced even bad for horses? Now horses don't have to do the heavy lifting, they don't risk their lives on battlefield, they don't have to run day and night to deliver goods or transport people, they are enjoying a generally higher social status as luxury commodities and "athletes", if I were a horse I'd be happy to see this happening, I couldn't wait for that day to come! By arguing the situation of job losing for horse the author ignored (whether or not purposely) the fact that employment rate alone can't always be a yardstick to measure happiness. By saying that horse population sharply declined the author is, one, misleading us to think that the larger population a race has, the better off; two, making it as if the horses somehow "disappeared" from the surface of earth, obviously implying that the horses suffer horrible fate in competing with machines. But wrong, first of all let's not simply follow the author's lead and take for granted that more population means better social status and less population means less prosperity, it's simply not. Second, it's not like the horses were concentrated together and massacred or something, they gradually faded out, that's it, nicely and peacefully, cars came into people's life, nor was it like suddenly everybody bought a car in one day and collectively abandoned horses. The author was obviously misleading us to think it over simply. People knew that cars are better than horses so they stop buying and breeding more horses, the strong and athletic horses were chosen to remain active in "better jobs". So is the fate of human, we are not going to be suddenly replaced by mechanical minds, yes we are being replaced but not suddenly, but gradually, technology and production capability won't allow us to employ one robot per job yet, just like people couldn't buy a car immediately after cars emerge on market. Robots will replace us in the worst, most dangerous, most unwanted, riskiest jobs first, then slowly moving upwards to higher level, more skilled jobs. In the meantime it is also a transition of human being, once robots are taking jobs and making life easier in developing countries, people don't have to have so many children anymore, birth rate slows down, in developed countries people's hands will be freed and invest more energy and time into high intelligent, high skill fields. In the end the result will be just like horses today, not a bad ending, but exactly the opposite, a much better place for us to live, much easier lives, higher social status and pursuit, lower population(which is also a key to battle poverty) and more wealth.
Seriously the author of the video, do you want us to keep birth rate high and overpopulate the earth so that you can claim the victory over machinery? Or do you want human being to have a reasonable sized population all living in wealth and ease?
