Nothing new ... and yet!
The
Civilization of leisure», It's already a pay that we talk about it!
We are in a society still very Manichean or the man must suffer, so it's not tomorrow the day before. At least not so much that individuals will still find enjoyment in suffering.
Another more terrifying scenario against idleness: new wars? New type! Psychological wars that kill you slowly (see suicide due to stress in companies, it's a form of internal war that ...)
However I like the bottom of the article, but we can see that we are dealing with a penguin paper economist economist of my two ...
He apparently does not know too much "the practical life", the real economy (not the virtual one, with which economists like him have screwed up the planet on their knees ...)
He does not seem to know that this "revolution" (if it takes place) will be done gradually and that it is the man who will have to adapt to it, not the robots ... to "The economy of men". So that he tells us concretely in real life, how will it unfold (and not seen the walled walls of his office ...) ... That he also tell us who will pay our pensions?
He does not seem to be well acquainted with the planned obsolescence ... Will these future robots be exempt? I doubt!
He does not know either the technique of
hassle marketing as much as technology as service ... Which makes people prefer to give up rather than repair or even use ... They are discouraged by modes of operation exotic and dissuasive, which did not start when taken hand.
He does not know econology
and did not read this thread:
https://www.econologie.com/forums/ifixit-tu- ... 68-10.html
The first thing, it would be robots capable of ALL repair, to make themselves all the parts that are no longer in stock, etc ... But here I doubt that it takes the path.
Then there are all the priority energy problems and the solution of the exhaustion of the raw materials which are not addressed ... The next revolution in the health sector which will go back to hair,
But 100% agree with the resignation of individuals (still quoted elsewhere in another thread ...)