Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

jdmcnair t1_j0qtr4r wrote

Reply to comment by SteppenAxolotl in The social contract when labour is automated by Current_Side_4024

This is a pretty useless critique without further elaboration. Obviously some people end up living in mansions and others end up in prison for life, so there's some loose scheme of valuation at play, even if that scheme is fundamentally bogus or unjust.

3

SteppenAxolotl t1_j0r3jt4 wrote

That dynamic has nothing to do with social contracts. That is simply the natural outcome of capitalism in the case of ending up in a mansion. Ending up in prison is simply the natural outcome of wanting a nice life and being too lazy or stupid to create those conditions yourself, taking it from those that can is the easiest pathway.

1

EscapeVelocity83 t1_j0r53ta wrote

It's like when we had wars the losers went to prison death or slavery

1

SteppenAxolotl t1_j0r7bnj wrote

It's nothing like that.

Expecting strangers to work to support you and, as expected, when they refuse which will require you to support yourself, that inst the same as condemning you to slavery. Trying to force strangers to work to support you would be the same as enslaving them.

1

curloperator t1_j0zxumo wrote

>Trying to force strangers to work to support you would be the same as enslaving them.

Kind of like how the rich have constructed a system whereby they force us to work for them at thier companies in order to eat

1

SteppenAxolotl t1_j1z5z2s wrote

Except the rich are maybe 20% of the electorate, the 80% is more responsible for the system. That's you.

1

Affectionate-Unit96 t1_j0td2lz wrote

Then you have SBF, who has both lived in a mansion and some of the shittiest jails on earth.

1

jdmcnair t1_j0vo0qa wrote

I mean, I think you and I are agreeing that the dynamic is mostly bogus, but whatever we think of it, that pretty much is the social contract. People are assigned worth roughly based on their overall value proposition to society. If they are more useful than detrimental, they get a reasonably fair shake (though that has been rapidly changing in recent decades). A person's utility may be wrapped up in possession of resources that they inherited through no merit of their own, and their detriment may be tied to environmental reasons beyond their control, but it's still what they'll be judged on, fair or not.

1

AndromedaAnimated t1_j0sgnxe wrote

Most people ending up in mansions live in those mansions from birth. This is a case of hereditary wealth (feudalism).

Most people who actually go to prison have never lived in mansions but would really love too.

Most people who have not lived in mansions from birth will never live in mansions.

Risking prison is one way to acquire mansions which will be transferred to your descendants via feudalism.

This is also the case how the first mansions were acquired.

Wealth breeds wealth, not merit. And wealth is only rarely bred by merit. It is usually ceased by strength and egoism.

And once you have mansions, you won’t land in prison usually as you will be able to afford good lawyers, caution payments and bribes.

There are very rarely people who lived in mansions once and now live in prison. This is a case of her. bad luck mostly, or of having pissed off someone who owns more mansions.

It has nothing to do with social contract and has everything to do with people going against it in the past to acquire wealth by taking it from all others, and just pretending it didn’t happen generations later.

1

EscapeVelocity83 t1_j0r4yo2 wrote

I'd imagine the computer will offer genetic alterations in lieu of prison since behavior is all genetically derived

0

EulersApprentice t1_j0roxr1 wrote

Hrm... that sounds to me like a bit of an oversimplification. A building is derived from its blueprint, but once the building is constructed, changing or destroying the blueprint doesn't do anything to the building, you know?

2

curloperator t1_j0zyp6j wrote

Except that's not how DNA works. Our genetics are not just a static blueprint, they are also part of the construction team and our bodies and minds are being constantly constructed 24/7 based on the blueprint. So in the case of genetics, if you change the blueprint, the building will automatically and actively get reconstructed in real time based on the changes. So in this case yes, changing the blueprint automatically begins to change the building.

EDIT: spelling

1