[extropy-chat] Popular Luddism

[Samantha Atkins]

On May 31, 2004, at 4:34 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> So, perhaps a slight restatement: it doesn't matter
> what one calls it - "science", "everyday life", or
> whatever.  What matters is its actual (not
> theoretical, not planned, but street-level real)
> effect on peoples' lives, especially their wallets and
> labor allocations.  It is the case that almost anyone
> today, even in the most disadvantaged background, can
> learn and gain employment in some high-tech trade *if
> they want to*.

Considering the number of techies still out of work in the US I find 
this assertion outrageous.   And these are the people already highly 
trained in various high-tech areas.   I doubt very much that any but 
the most gifted adults without training can gain such employment in 
less than 2-3 years in ideal circumstances.   In a high-tech job lull I 
doubt that inexperienced people can get in at all without serious 
degrees on average.   How will these people support themselves or be 
supported while gaining training?  What happens to the "superfluous" 
workers?   Why will their numbers not swell as technology advances ever 
faster?   And please, none of the standard assertions or references to 
historical incidents largely not analogous to our current much nearer 
to Singularity situation.

Generally people will fear technology if they believe it will put them 
at an even greater disadvantage and pose greater dangers to them.  
These disadvantages can be economic, or being more powerless relative 
to the State or facing more possibility of death due to more high tech 
means of destruction available to more would-be killers.   If we want 
to reach the public at large we need to cast technological progress in 
ways that ameliorate their fears.  Progress needs to mean a higher and 
more trustworthy standard of living, better and more available health 
care, better tools and education more widely accessible, greater access 
to information, entertainment and computation and so on.

It is up to us to mold technological change into a boon rather than a 
curse.


> The disadvantage is little more than
> the fact that they *DON'T* want to - or, at least,
> they don't think they do, even if it is the logical
> conclusion of their desires (largely the same ones
> most of us feel, relative to the self) - and the
> factors that promote that decision.
>
> How can we get so much of the world to stop wanting to
> commit (economic/political/social/actual) suicide?
>


You can begin with understanding the actual situation a bit more rather 
than assuming everyone is sufficiently like yourself and if they are 
not like yourself that it is somehow their fault.   Casting fault 
itself is a huge waste of time.

- samantha