tptacek 2 days ago

That's fine; read it as me speaking to the whole thread, not challenging you directly. Technology drives economic productivity; increasing economic productivity generally implies worker displacement. That workers come out ahead in the long run (they have in the past; it's obviously not a guarantee) is besides my point. Software is automating software development away, the same way it automated a huge percentage of (say) law firm billable hours away. We'd better be ready to suck it up!

  • myk9001 2 days ago

    > That workers come out ahead in the long run (they have in the past...)

    Would you mind naming a few instance of the workers coming out ahead?

    • tptacek 2 days ago

      Sure. Compare the quality of life of the Computers to that of any stably employed person today who owns a computer.

      • myk9001 2 days ago

        Got it, you're talking about workers getting ahead as a category -- no objections to that.

        I doubt the displaced computers managed to find a better job on average. Probably even their kids were disadvantaged since the parents had fewer options to support their education.

        So, who knows if this specific group of people and their descendants ever fully recovered let alone got ahead.

        • tptacek a day ago

          My argument is explicitly not premised on the claim that productivity improvements reliably work out to the benefit of existing workers. It's that practicing commercial software developers are agents of economic productivity, whether anticapitalist developers are happy about that or not, and have really no moral standing to complain about their jobs (or the joy in those jobs) being automated away. That's what increased economic productivity means: more getting done with less labor.