upvote

points

by harimau7772 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby krapp2 hours ago|
next
[-]
It is a viable option. "Quality of life" is a luxury and programmers no longer belong to the class that can afford it. Do what everyone else does and go wherever the jobs are and live at whatever quality the market decides that you deserve.
reply
upvoteby munificent27 minutes ago|
parent|
next
[-]
San Francisco is where the jobs are, and dropping your entire social network on the floor at exactly the moment you need it the most to help you is not good advice.
reply
upvoteby harimau7771 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
I think you are missing the point of the discussion. The idea behind "just retrain" rhetoric is effectively "new technology won't destroy people's quality of life because they can just retrain!". If quality of life isn't maintained, then there is no reason to retrain at all, people can just get a minimum wage job and live in poverty.
reply
upvoteby krapp1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
The rhetoric was a lie. Capitalists lie. That new technology always creates a surplus of newer, better jobs and quality of life always improves for everyone was a lie. That you can "just retrain" and everything will remain the same was a lie.

Even if you "retrain" your quality of life will go down because the market value of your life will go down as automation and AI improve, unless you're a member of the capitalist class. Which, if you need to work for a living at all, you aren't. No matter what you do unless you're personally wealthy your quality of life will go down. That's just what an efficient market does to most people, and AI is going to make the market brutally efficient.

reply
upvoteby achierius1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I wonder how many sectors this will have to happen to until workers realize that nobody's safe. I was shocked to see journalists at major firms peddling the 'just learn to code' line a few years back, given how much their industry had contracted in the decades before.
reply
upvoteby AndrewKemendo1 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
> just give up your existing community and move" is a viable option.

That’s been how humanity has always worked, human migration is probably the largest single driver of social change in human history

Millions of people migrate every year today, I’m not sure what you think the alternative is

reply
upvoteby achierius1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
No, it isn't. This is an incredibly modern phenomenon. We see examples of peoples moving en masse throughout history, yes, but the idea that everyday individuals should expect to leave their community is an incredibly recent one. Such would have seemed monstrous to people even a few hundred years ago. Fun fact: Socrates wasn't actually sentenced to death, he was sentenced to death or exile, and chose death over having to leave his home behind.

> Millions of people migrate every year today

A just society that doesn't force them to.

reply