Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
Robert Gordon, Erik Brynjolfsson debate the future of work at TED2013
Вставка
- Опубліковано 22 кві 2013
- Robert Gordon says that the era of big innovation is over and that U.S. economic growth could slow dramatically as a result. Erik Brynjolfsson says that innovation is far from over and, that instead, we are simply feeling the growing pains of a shift from an economy based on production to one based on ideas. At TED2013, the two debate.
imagine if the presidential debate was half of this
This whole debate gets to the underlying idea of how of the value of the economy can be from ideas. In a world that we are progressing towards where a greater proportion of economic value will have to be made up of ideas, what does that look like? How does it operate? Or the biggest question in my mind, what is the upper limit for the percentage of an economy (and/or the global economy) that can be made up of ideas. Is it possible to have an economy where 90% of GDP is ideas?
After 8 years I think we are going in that direction. Just look at the proportion of intangibles as a % of total assets of S&P 500 companies. I wish I found this content a few years ago and not right now.
I love Robert J. Gordon kicking the bullshit dream crap out of the brats! I would like TED to get David Romer on for his opinion....
Gordon was right. Growth is over, but Gordon's solutions are terrible. We've basically implemented them, and of course they are non-solutions.
I wish people like Erik would talk more about ways to transition into this upcoming society. why not talk about increasing minimum wage while lowering work hours or installing a Guaranteed Basic Income to deal with increasing technological unemployment?
This has not aged well for Erick, he now talks about the Turing trap and how we are creating machines to replace (automate) us.
I should note that Andrew McAfee(Erik's co-author) already stated that a minimal income may have to be installed. and Peter Diamandis is quoted saying "maybe in the future we don't have 'jobs'"
I agree. I think the economies of the future(esp post Singularity) will be much different from today's various social systems. I just think that with the exponential growth of technology jobs will become increasingly obsolete over time and people's primary goals of "knowledge" or whatever people may be interested in will not require them to have a job in order to pursue their goals. I do think people in the future will be productive and will work on their interests and problem solving.
Eric Fortune I hope so
It would be surprising if they could imagine how to think.
Rather than moving to a system of universal welfare how about moving to a system were individuals can use technology to access the markets.
What I mean by this is that people can produce products and do various exchanges so as to earn a living. Money could still be used in this system as could other exchange mechanisms.
Also if there is rapid manufacturing like 3D printing there could be allot of products people can make for them self and their community.
past inventions are life changing, present technologies are life betterment, the internet stll needs electricity to function
It was fairly predictable that the old guy had trouble seeing the technological future. But wasn't it rather contradictory that he thought the solution to unemployment was to open the floodgates to immigrants? What planet is he living on? I know the answer: the old fogies' planet.
Can a computer write a letter to a lawyer or a monography on 19th century infantry tactics? Until we get to than point, there is no real artificial intelligence.
Computer have now written novels.
@@avaq2588 have computer?
This was written by a computer - (Yes, a computer can write a letter to a lawyer or a monograph on 19th-century infantry tactics. The technology for generating natural language text has advanced significantly in recent years, and there are many tools and techniques available to automate the writing of documents.)
I don't agree with Roberts bleak outlook on the future. However, I will agree something needs to change as far as the wealth distribution goes. We're going to have to move to a system of universal welfare. Why? Well, more people are going to become unemployed, and for living standards to remain high, and for people to keep consuming, they need to have money. Without consumption there cannot be economic growth. The rich have to give back, or they eventually won't have anyone to sell to anymore.
Give up all of human knowledge and creation just to not walk a few feet? Why do people think like this yet gym memberships are so popular
I'm on Brynjolsson's side
I do believe in DOWNSHIFTING... to let go certain notions of "progress" in the sake of a better world and quality of life for all... I am raising my hand for that!
You mean become poorer? That will mostly effect those who already are poor.
@@ManicMindTrick Yes, my comment was 10 years-ish ago... I was woke: young and stupid
@@arhabersham Wow, cool to see you have had personal growth. Same here. I wasn't woke, I was into environmentalism and had my eyes shut when the movement spouted retarded leftist nonsense.
We may not have jobs as we would know it today.
Peter Damandis position is that we will have abundance as that is were the technology is heading.
Information maybe the key to economies functioning and such economies would look nothing like we have today and they will not fit communism and capitalism models that we have in our heads today.
Our economies of the future may be pointing into space and with knowledge being peoples primary goal.
Disappointing Erik Brynjolfsson did have an idea of what we should attempt please view the answer he should have given based on his younger self: ua-cam.com/video/Yb5ivvcTvRQ/v-deo.html
Needs are more important than wants, fantasy.
Did he just say legalize drugs.... and get applauded for it...
Economical that's exactely the right thing to do! :D
Brynjolfsson was correct
hahahah
WE NEED TO MAKE DRUGS FREE!!!!