[wat0n]

Yes, I doubt I'll have to deal with that question anytime soon. Beyond that, I remain in the "if it happens, it happens" camp.

Nothing would stop people from doing other things and having a routine, I think. But it doesn't sound likely to be happening anytime soon.

[Unthinking Majority]

Life has become easier, generation after generation, especially since the start of the industrial revolution. What has been the result? Are we happier? We can extend our lives through medicine, but we're also lazier, fatter, more spoiled and entitled, more socially isolated, and have less meaning in our lives. The family unit has been corroded. People aren't having children because they value material comfort and freedom over love and the effort a family takes. Everyone has become hyper-sensitive about everything and lost their resilience. Having 4 siblings you fight with and that pick on you growing up will build a lot of resilience.

Everything above will increase exponentially if our lives become even easier with 100% recreation and no work requirement. Many people will be useless to themselves and others. We'll become like spoiled rich kids. Many men won't leave their rooms playing video games and watching porn, and many women won't get off Instagram or some other social app. Nightmare dystopia.

[Unthinking Majority]

delete

[Unthinking Majority]

Necessarily having to work in order to survive is fairly central to class antagonisms and people will probably always agitate over the fact until work becomes something that is entirely voluntary or no longer necessary or arranged entirely around personal interests and interchangeable hobbies.

When parents support a child into adulthood and don't require them to get a job, go to school, or pay for themselves in any way thus having 100% recreation is this better or worse for them?

Many just sit around wasting away playing video games, watching Netflix, browsing Instagram much of the day. Is this good to give this privilege to humanity? Some will find use of their time, others will stagnate and get fat, lazy etc. People are in great part a product of their environment. If the choice is comfort all of the time, many will take it, and they'll be totally lost and devoid of meaning in life, socially isolated etc.

It's good to be forced to work and thus be forced to wake up early in the morning and get out of the house and be useful to society and yourself.

[late]

"The medium is the message. This is merely to say that the personal and social consequences of any medium - that is, of any extension of ourselves - result from the new scale that is introduced into our affairs by each extension of ourselves, or by any new technology."

Marshall McLuhan

We are trying to absorb computers, the internet, and communication tech like cell phones. The printing press set off a century of war, we are trying to deal with the 3 existing tech advantages, and right now a 4th is emerging, AI.

No idea how this will all play out. But it will be interesting.. You know, like the Chinese curse.

We can structure our lives differently, but like climate change, it's above our pay grade.

[Wellsy]

I chose other because I do think the pushing back of natural necessity through technology is a net positive but that the tole of humans would be richer for the greater time to oursue pleasures if we’re not restricted to capitalist relations of wage labor. Under such conditions it can intensify the disciplining and extraction of value from workers without enhancing their lives directly at work.
If we didn’t need to struggle to survive, as is the case with many then meaning must come from elsewhere and I do not romanticize the struggle and stress of people living precariously. No one prefers to be dirt poor than wealthy in our current system.
The issue is changing social relations and technology in itself doesn’t radically change them by themselves. The same technologies that can already change the health and well being of everyone are not put to their best use brcause the motive to build infrastructure for a good beyond profit does not exist. Motives beyond profit do exist but are supplanted by profit seeking. People could do a great many things but they may face other limitations like persuading others of their good ideas.

[Tainari88]

I chose other because I do think the pushing back of natural necessity through technology is a net positive but that the tole of humans would be richer for the greater time to oursue pleasures if we’re not restricted to capitalist relations of wage labor. Under such conditions it can intensify the disciplining and extraction of value from workers without enhancing their lives directly at work.
If we didn’t need to struggle to survive, as is the case with many then meaning must come from elsewhere and I do not romanticize the struggle and stress of people living precariously. No one prefers to be dirt poor than wealthy in our current system.
The issue is changing social relations and technology in itself doesn’t radically change them by themselves. The same technologies that can already change the health and well being of everyone are not put to their best use brcause the motive to build infrastructure for a good beyond profit does not exist. Motives beyond profit do exist but are supplanted by profit seeking. People could do a great many things but they may face other limitations like persuading others of their good ideas.

I think there will come a time where people will be able to live with some balance in their lives between family responsibilities, work and leisure activities.

Let the drudgery work be left to robots and AI to deal with. Also, AI should be making our lives safer, and less stressful and more about time to be with our friends and family members.

I think there should be standards of living that are acceptable. For everyone. Eradicate grinding poverty and educate everyone. That should not be a hard task to complete.

But it does require prioritizing good values Wellsy. Without good values in this world? Nothing of import means anything really.

I hope you realize that you are a very great husband, father and son-in-law, son, and in general a great man.

Never internalize the failure of a system never designed to be for and about human beings and being humane. It is about the lack of respect for the work of shaping the young. Again, values that are bad are to blame. They do not put their money, time and effort into what they should. Do not ever internalize their failures Wellsy.

You are doing it all with a lot of care and effort. Look after your own self care. And enjoy your life.

Amor.

Think about it. Amor is a great thing eh?

[MistyTiger]

Other.

I like working if the work is worthwhile and I like it. I like using my brain, talent and helping others. Plus, I need to get out of the house. I'm used to leaving the house every morning and coming home in the afternoons.

I wouldn't mind a 5 to 10 hour work week even. But if I didn't work, I'd end up finding an activity that looks like work. The life of leisure wouldn't suit me. I need to be busy.

I would have more time for digital art that I could sell online perhaps and that is a type of work. Or I would write for a few hours in a day.

[MistyTiger]

Delete

[MistyTiger]

Delete

[MistyTiger]

Delete.

[Wellsy]

I think there will come a time where people will be able to live with some balance in their lives between family responsibilities, work and leisure activities.

Let the drudgery work be left to robots and AI to deal with. Also, AI should be making our lives safer, and less stressful and more about time to be with our friends and family members.

I think there should be standards of living that are acceptable. For everyone. Eradicate grinding poverty and educate everyone. That should not be a hard task to complete.

But it does require prioritizing good values Wellsy. Without good values in this world? Nothing of import means anything really.

I hope you realize that you are a very great husband, father and son-in-law, son, and in general a great man.

Never internalize the failure of a system never designed to be for and about human beings and being humane. It is about the lack of respect for the work of shaping the young. Again, values that are bad are to blame. They do not put their money, time and effort into what they should. Do not ever internalize their failures Wellsy.

You are doing it all with a lot of care and effort. Look after your own self care. And enjoy your life.

Amor.

Think about it. Amor is a great thing eh?

I love this summary from West Texan Philosophy teacher Rick Roderick.
http://rickroderick.org/105-hegel-and-modern-life-1990/

To stray from the text of Marx just a little bit, in our country one of the ways that we can stand to have a society that is so opulent, and it’s impossible to drive into this city and to not feel it… into Washington DC. And see the Pentagon and these amazing buildings and then just see the bridges lined with people sleeping under it at night. How do we accept it? As people who think that we are still human? How do we accept it? And begin even cynically to accept it? Well, part of the reason for that – at least part of the reason – is that at some level we must believe – and now back to this freedom thing again – that it was their own, sort of, choices that got them there. So they are, sort of, in some sense to blame for being there.

Now, I’ll admit that no-one ever quite spells it out that clearly. But in political discourse in our country the implication is fairly clear. The implication was there and we accepted it for years, when Ronald Reagan used to hold up the want ads in front of TV: “Well, they don’t have to be there, look…” You know, have you ever looked at the want ads, and what’s on it? You know. There are like, fourteen jobs if you want to be in this dial-a-porn business, okay… there’s a job for you. 28 or 9 jobs at McDonalds, for the rest of them you have to be able to read. That puts a lot of people under bridges already, right… at night?

So, a notion of freedom and a society that becomes so callous to the minimal demands of what Marx called “human requirements”… human requirements… it’s not utopian to demand human requirements. That’s the standard objection any time you use the word “Marx” – so that’s why I am sort of getting away from it there – “must be utopian”. No, it’s not utopian to demand that in a world with this kind of technology, that as a moral demand, a society feed, clothe and house its people. A society that doesn’t do it, with the kind of technology and the wealth we have is beneath contempt and makes a mockery of all the previous history of civilisation.

And to the extent that that we are silent and among such brigands, we are brigands too.

That is the most obvious and damning thing I think about capitalist production, the gap between the productive potential and the bleak reality. A bit like how the problem of evil is a very damning suspicion and argument against God, so to is the immense gap between what we can do with our current means, and the reality. Of course nothing ever lives up to it's concept perfectly, but it seems to me it falls immensley short.

The good values part is hard, because every tradition and practice has values inherent to it's manner of existence, how people are meant to collaborate within a project is kind of normatively established by the kind of project it is.
And this is where education is kind of a mess because it is an instition of many differing concepts and influences into what is actually implemented. Capitalist production is a limiting factor in that against the liberal ideal of everyone becoming educated and well rounded in all their human senses is actually a sense of only producing people for their utility. The idea of people learning anything beyond what had direct use for making money in their job or for the country with scientists of different sorts is seen as a waste, and only for the leisurely wealthy. In a sense there is a practical reality that people don't just have the means to afford an education beyond what they feel is needed to help them survive. I felt that way getting my higher education, I had to take extra electives as part of passing my degree but I didn't know that due to not having cultural familiarity with the university being the first person in my family to go to university, and my thought that I was accuring debt and I didn't want to frivolously spend it on just fun and interesting subjects.
I did the best at my electives because I genuinely enjoyed them and it did change how I viewed the world, and gave me a larger perspective of Australia and being Australian, the history of colonization and how history often emphasizes the voices of some over others and how that shapes perspectives now.

I try not to, what I am trying to aim more into is the strength and values of the teachers who do put in the work. Their complaints are not of the ungrateful but of the unappreciated. There isn't a respect for their time, needs, as not just teachers but often even parents.

I do alright as a person. My vice is sloth, I become inert as things become stressful because I don't want to feel what is a deep grief and disconnection from those and that I care about. But I am trying to be more likely to listen to my bodily sensations and reflect on how I feel yet not drown myself in feelings and shift from a narrowing of self pity to thinking about how I can give.

I don't yet know it well enough but I do see sense in that love is in service, giving. You do kind things but not in just a self-sacrificial they owe me way but to truly wish well for others and do things simply for the joy of hoping it serves others well. I have been trying to give my wife more massages lately because she gets more physical strain in her body than me and enjoys massages and so as much as it's not a pleasure to perform, I enjoy how good it is for her body and her well-being.
I am not good at asking for what I perhaps want/need, or even deserve but I think I can do well at being better for others. Although part of being good to others will be standing up for what I need and asserting myself. It is hard to make requests of what you want, it is inherently vulnerable, painful, and risky. But being human seems inherently relational, we find connection and safety in others and it is why such loss is so painful. To lose sight of our connection to others in place of immediate pleasures and things leads to a bleak emptiness, only fleeting desires and pain rather than contentment.

Lately, although there are many things I miss, as a parent I do find great joy in seeing my girls grow. They have changed so much as they bicker with one another, get cheeky, and do naughty things, but they can be so sweet and responsible in ways that even the students I teach do not always enact or struggle to. My youngest is almost 2 years old and she wipes her face with a napkin and throws it in the trash can with no prompting. She knows our routines so well and goes to bed within any fussing because she enjoys it and knows the routine.
My other daughter who is almost 4 is so lucky that she is going with her Grandma to visit her cousin, aunt, and uncle in Virginia in a few months. It's one week which is a long time to be without her that makes me anxious but it'll be so fun for her to play and spend time with them as her aunt is so loving and sweet. Grandma lives across the street from us and is so good to her. Takes her to gymnastics and the library. I didn't have the same sort of relationship with my grandparents as my daughters do and I know they're so lucky to have her.
I feel like they have a good future no matter what limitations there are of the small town we live in because we have good means to access things and aren't so stranded as some poor families here in our small town.

I'll be alright, good sleep, good food, good company is all I need ^_^

[Skynet]

@Fasces We have to colonize the space to spread the seed of life in the universe...


We will rather work in the 4th sector of economy: research and development (creativity is hard to teach AI's)... people can educate them further constantly and do research. Perhaps we need brain computer interfaces to keep up with AI

[Rich]

Intelligent life has existed on this planet for a few hundred million years. We and our pre human ancestors have been living in a rare island of stability. Of course if you had been around at the time that the Chicxulub asteroid struck, you'd realise that I'm setting a pretty low bar for stability. In the majority European Anglo sphere we have enjoyed an incredibly high level of stability for the last century with high levels of life expectancy. There is no good scientific reason for expecting that stability to continue for considerably longer.

Nuclear weapons have bought us a short term increase in stability, but at the risk of massive instability in the longer term. Even the AI we have already developed must surly pose massive risks of instability over the long term, although AI has undoubtedly made significant short term contributions to stability.

[JohnRawls]

It's been thirteen years and AI is, if not an immenent one, at least, a more immenent threat. Any changes?

Once again, AI from movies will not happen. We do not have the technology or understanding to make it. ChatGPT and other LLMs is a parlor trick that fascinated the world but it is still a trick.

At best, the different algorithms and mathematical statistics that we use is a useful automation tool. The problem is that the technology has been here for years in vast majority of categories and LLMs also existed before ChatGPT but there has been no massive implementation of them before so why will it be different now when the fundamental technologies have been here and are the same. Some for many decades, some for decades...

At the end of the day, all those things will be evaluated by the viability of their business ideas and not hype. AI is competing against things like Excel and other simpler variations and if Excel produces 90-95% of what an AI does but AI costs 1 000 folds more to implement then it is a dead idea in its tracks and here is the biggest problem. Modern AI has severe problems in implementation and outside machine learning algorithms inside marketing/banking/consumption, there has been very slow development in to business cases.

[FiveofSwords]

I believe all discussions loke this should be approached from a scientifically correct point of view. That is, human beings are living organisms...we are NOT perfectly rational cosmic entities nor are we economic units.

Living organisms are finely tuned to the habitat they live in. Any radical change in the habitat will harm the organism...even if you think it is arbitrary or irrational. Minimal effort in the study of biology will teach you how sensitive organisms are to a specific environment especially if it remains unchanged for centuries or millenia.

Humans are naturally social animals. And I believe it is fair to say that we have adapted to basically being told what to do in accordance to some dominance heirarchy. Historically we probably average a 10-20 work week...the very long work week we saw arise during the industrial revolution was a new thing and was often supported by tech advances such as artificial lighting. Tech advances in the past 200 years or so have probably resulted in an evolutionary mismatch for humans because it has so radically altered our habitat.

So to answer the general question...would a 0 hour work week be good? I would say no...the result would probably be mass mental illness. But it also depends on how you define as 'good'...because if a 0 work week is inevitable anyway then that would probably be a selection pressure that has to occur sooner or later to adjust the human DNA.