Re: Seriously, how many centuries has this exact debate been going on?
"History is important, I'm not suggesting otherwise, but using it as a barometer against today's employment opportunities is bonkers."
Then I would suggest re-examining post-WWII history (you can go back further if you want but this is likely to be sufficient to see details) to see just how far we have come and how many jobs have changed or disappeared completely.
"We all know that the roles needed in society change and automation and AI (whatever that means in reality) drives this."
Yes...and in general, society as a whole has improved on the back of change. And generally change has improved both the lives AND jobs of the less well off. Look at jobs that had high accident rates 10-50 years ago and how they are done now - machines have replaced people and the people manage the machines with a subsequent increase in rates of production with less injuries.
You look and see Deliveroo and Amazon Fulfillment Centres and I would suggest both are likely to become more automated in the future as the human acts as as a robot. And there are questions around safety/injury.
What I see is an increasing requirement for human education and knowledge and the potential for that to drive future change.
Will people still be left behind by this? Yes and the aging population is likely to require a lot more social care as cheaply as possible. At least until we figure out how to automate that.
Will society as a whole benefit? I believe so. Based on history. Trying to retain the status quo has been where society crumbles and revolution is needed to move forward again. When there is change, those at the bottom have something to strive for. And technology revolutions tend to be a lot gentler than political revolutions.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
