The Singularity Approaches!

Careful.. Paul will want a fee for his contributions as a muse. Probably Royalties too.

 

A new second life? *perk*

 

Who needs enemies when folks are wanting to poke around the ol brain pan before an existential threat shows up. Early adopters also early nominees for Darwin Award is my guess.

Most of what I saw on Second Life studies by college kids was all "Virtual Prostitution, real Johns?" So *perk* may be the most euphemestic response possible for this news.

 

I used to play on a roleplay sim in SL for like a good three years or more. Fun times.

 

Playing with fire
scientists are so preoccupied and in a rush with whether or not they can do things that they didn't stop to think if they should.

Example
Anyone else think its a good idea to weaponize/modify viruses that could kill off the majority of the human race just so they can study them?
Supposedly the argument goes..That by doing this they learn how to make antivirus etc etc...
Ehhhh yea.. Playing around with fire...

As for robots.. Robotics has already caused more problems than its helped..For the average person that is. Job loss, lower wages, etc. Companies love automation though..makes for higher profit margins.

 

Lmao I've written 3 different responses to this and all went long... but damn is this article wrong in so many ways. The articles name itself is right, but totally misses the "why" of the dominance, as though replacing people with machines accomplishes anything other than multiplying by zero when the cost of manufacturing is too high for a domestic market, and when such products meant to be produced in high volume are no longer allowed to cross the borders as an export because China will have caused a literal trade war.

Developing automization tech is a win / win for China, but not because they'll even use it. Driving the rate at which First World workers lose their jobs drops the prices on American made goods (and goods sold in American markets) because as part of the price point American wages were factored in. Nowadays product prices don't reflect that outsourcing causes layoffs, which has kept prices high and flooded Western markets with imported Chinese goods not made by Americans, a relationship that will reverse in any area where there is greater parity between Chinese and American prices. Parity in regards to profit derived from taxes and tariffs for State & Federal Governments who will have no cause to continue protectionist rackets in favor of businesses when the Chinese can offer volume.

Or: they develop the tech, but use it only after their markets have become consummer driven service industries (providing jobs for laid off automization employees), and don't lose any quality of life for their citizens who already have some of the cheapest goods on the planet that only get cheaper. Using it before results in a trade war with the West, or China being forced to have reciprocal IP and patent law, requiring the State to drive their grey markets out of the most profitable areas and to police counterfeiting: an unattractive and unpopular reform that will raise prices in China and not recognize that they have a tiered market where owning non-knock off goods functions as a status symbol. The latter scenario with (finally) fair reciprocal trade is the preferred one for conservatives in the First World, a proposition the increasingly Nationalistic Western powers will angle for at the expense of everyone else. But most notably the pro-Brussels German backed faction within the EU that is killing their movement with "anti-fiscal irresponsibility" measures which are cultural and political suicide for politicians who would like to keep the boons of holding democratic office: boons contingent on healthy economies and citizens not in revolt.

Accelerating automization accelerates businesses in the West using the tech and taking advantage of temporarily inflated prices that don't reflect the cost of production, with the product value (and probably quality) dropping because of competition between businesses for a shrinking market share comprised of more frugal shoppers. Achieving this requires that pro-big business protectionists (like Donald Trump) have needs not in allignment with the working class who lose the most from laborless production.

China then has read the game-board, seen that the EU is killing itself by refusing to acknowledge a slowing global market while strangling its Nation States to the point of fiscal conservative revolt, and that in America and Britain the conservative voters are aiming towards peace with Russia so that they can maintain Market Monopolies and keep China from rising to their same status. Hence their investments, as achieving price parity and making attracted imported Chinese goods in the long term is a win: regardless of what domestic stances they take.

As a best case scenario for them, we don't demand IP and Patent protection within their borders, and we do use Automization tech at a scale the Chinese can't. As the Chinese government keeps power from Nationalistic tendencies of their people and the acceptance of their protectionist market stances which are "For the People", that just happen to keep above water their economy that uses at every turn currency recycling between sectors of their quasi-capitalistic state. Shaking up this delicate balance before people can physically hold or use the goods derived from automization and in addition creating a massive unemployed work-force displaced from those industries, would hardly be a good idea in the age of Crypto-currency and a shrinking global market.

If China truely domestically produces their AI and commercial automization tech, then they will either be forced to join the rest of the First World and offer reciprocal patent protection if they actually become an industry leader. If they fall behind competitors, and don't take on recirprocal patent law, they can continue stealing tech, leap-frogging competitors with no R&D costs, and forcing continuing investment and development that must be utilized to make profit and recoup money lost. Driving down wages and increasingly making volume sales more attractive for the needs of the citizenry, from the eyes of the Government that allowed them to be made unemployed in the first place.

That the articles author blames Donald Trump for forcing businesses to skimp on advertising to pick up their own development costs doesn't recognize that non-protectionist Globalist policies are less profitable today than they were 2 years ago. Booming American market investment that coincides with a Protectionist Conservative president isn't a freaking fluke. Either the Nationalists lose, or win. A "win" in the long term is if the Nationalist movement refuse to allow automization to go into full effect until its profitable for citizens and the government (as will China), and they gain a perpetual market monopoly on high quality goods that siphon investment from every other developing nation to the benefit of First World nations, and such one sided investment continues until wages rise for those outside of the First World, until then the comparatively "slow" growth of their own high end goods market will make all but the most Nationalistic invest in a way that most profits them. Or: they lose by winning, as after a brief surge in popularity the necessity for protectionist stances go away because the Globalists are killing their own movement and leaving a power vacuum for China and Russia to rise up through. Without socialized central banks making Global Fractional Reserve Banking possible without Governmental oversight, protectionist practices become inherent to economies, but Capitalism and the flaws of our represenative system allow for divided political bodies to fail and pass protectionist labor measures and leave open the door for uncontrolled mass automization which leads to no labor to protect, and thus we'll accept foreign trade after we disrupt our own markets because it is literally more profitable for the people and the Government.

Why the non-protectionists don't just co-op the movement I can't say, allowing more lee-way in handling domestic matters would be a good start (Greece / Italy). It seems Macron is now to some extent stealing fiscal conservative talking points, but more likely thats just to protect his and his allies own investments. The EU is performing massive over reach, and soon democratic consent will no longer exist and the majority of nations can do as the Polish government is doing with their high courts, and just take the reins of the whole damn contraption after ousting those that aren't necessary and actively harming the cause of sustainable international trade. More harmful than the Conservatives could hope to be by temporarily punishing themselves and their economies with full blown isolationist stances.

China gets that, and anyone that sees authoritarian protectionist China's actions as good for the world as a whole hasn't done the basic political math.

The Far Right dream of total investment in the First World and the reverse flow of cash that has taken place beneath Globalist policies and ungoverned Central Banks is merely the best and most selfish path they could possibly achieve for themselves. Somewhere between "Great for us" and "Okay for everyone else" is a middle ground of economic policy. The EU, UK, and American Socialists just haven't figured that out yet... and it doesn't seem as though the media is leaving them any wiggle room if they do change course. As any reversal will make them politically aligned with the fascist nazi nationalists... as has happened with Macron.

Its not just apolitical conservative Americans like me who think things are going off course, even people sympathetic to socialism and international trade beneath the old system can see that the current custodians are f**cking things up. While the "Far Right" wants all the money to flow to the First World, those that support the old ways just want GATT and Supranational Governing bodies to work like they should, fairly and in the interest of long term profit for all participants. I'm a little too jaded to buy into that, but I can at least tell apart those who sincerely review the facts and those that regurgitate them in service to ends no one except their co-conspirators could know.