Society has long operated on a simple bargain: we contribute our labor and, in return, gain income, security, and a stake in the economy. Governments tax our wages to fund public services; corporations rely on human workers to create value; and in return, workers expect their efforts to be rewarded with opportunity and security. This centuries-old implicit bargain will soon come under strain.
Maybe this is a small detail to focus on, but I often see a problem when people try to tell a story along the lines of âsociety was stable and harmonious since time immemorial and then this new, disruptive, dangerous technology came alongâ. I see a problem with this story.
Slavery wasnât abolished in the United States until 1866. Two centuries ago would be 1825. So, is anything resembling a fair bargain exchanging labour for âincome, security, and a stake in the economyâ really âcenturies-oldâ?
North America and other parts of the world also have a history of indentured servitude.
Even well into the 1900s, workers were treated in a way that was exploitative and violent. For example, Fordâs management and security tried to violently suppress union activities, in at least one case killing some of the workers.
The brief overview of the history of labour under the heading âRevisiting Our Social Contractâ also doesnât mention slavery, indentured servitude, or other ugly, violent parts of this history.
AGI or transformative AI would, in theory, cause fundamental changes to the way society organizes itself around productive labour, capital investment, government revenue, the welfare state, and so on. Yes. This possibility does raise social, political, and ethical questions. Yes. I get that when youâre writing an article like this, you often just need to quickly put together a framing device to get the conversation off the ground.
But this framing device just seemed a little too whitewashed for my taste.
Zero disagreements to this comment here! The idea of an economic social contract is orders of magnitude more complicated (and yes, ugly and violent) than what Iâm describing here. There have definitely been many eras of massive inequality and feudalism /â lack of power which complicate this narrative.
I canât claim to be an expert on these topics, or to do them justice in a post like this! And perhaps in future writing of this style I can gesture to or mention the complicated nature of the historical parallels rather than leaving them without context.
Maybe this is a small detail to focus on, but I often see a problem when people try to tell a story along the lines of âsociety was stable and harmonious since time immemorial and then this new, disruptive, dangerous technology came alongâ. I see a problem with this story.
Slavery wasnât abolished in the United States until 1866. Two centuries ago would be 1825. So, is anything resembling a fair bargain exchanging labour for âincome, security, and a stake in the economyâ really âcenturies-oldâ?
North America and other parts of the world also have a history of indentured servitude.
Even well into the 1900s, workers were treated in a way that was exploitative and violent. For example, Fordâs management and security tried to violently suppress union activities, in at least one case killing some of the workers.
The brief overview of the history of labour under the heading âRevisiting Our Social Contractâ also doesnât mention slavery, indentured servitude, or other ugly, violent parts of this history.
AGI or transformative AI would, in theory, cause fundamental changes to the way society organizes itself around productive labour, capital investment, government revenue, the welfare state, and so on. Yes. This possibility does raise social, political, and ethical questions. Yes. I get that when youâre writing an article like this, you often just need to quickly put together a framing device to get the conversation off the ground.
But this framing device just seemed a little too whitewashed for my taste.
Zero disagreements to this comment here! The idea of an economic social contract is orders of magnitude more complicated (and yes, ugly and violent) than what Iâm describing here. There have definitely been many eras of massive inequality and feudalism /â lack of power which complicate this narrative.
I canât claim to be an expert on these topics, or to do them justice in a post like this! And perhaps in future writing of this style I can gesture to or mention the complicated nature of the historical parallels rather than leaving them without context.