What do you mean..? the status quo is like this already. People choose the most competitive product so if a machine is the better performer then payment is made towards purchasing and maintaining a machine instead of paying a worker.
The current electorate 100 percent supports this and considers this fair. You actually have to create a new nation state if you don't want this.
> People choose the most competitive product so if a machine is the better performer then payment is made towards purchasing and maintaining a machine instead of paying a worker.
how do you explain the significant market for hand made products?
regardless, this wasn't my point
my point was the electorate aren't going to support e.g. Microsoft replacing every single worker in the US with a piece of code
regardless of Microsoft's opinion as to what it thinks is fair
>how do you explain the significant market for hand made products?
Because a segment of people think the hand made product is superior. So they purchase it. I never made the claim that machine made is superior to hand made. I made the claim that If machine made was superior then people won't employ others to make hand made things.
For a vast swath of products, machine made is often more superior. With AI, that swath becomes even larger.
>my point was the electorate aren't going to support e.g. Microsoft replacing every single worker in the US with a piece of code
The electorate is not clear about this. Morally it's a strange situation because free trade is a liberty that's part of the American Dream. If a machine can automate all jobs then it's a persons god given right to use that machine rather then pay someone to do the work. The implications of AI nor the morality of the change AI will bring is so muddy it can bring a democratic electorate into a deadlock via conflicts of interest and slow decision making.
>it's no more a god given right that it's an incited mob's right to burn down the fab or datacenter that someone else "own"s
If you change societies current outlook on morality and law then yes you are right. But currently society has laws in place that define burning down a data center as wrong. Those laws do not differentiate between whether it was done by an individual or a mob. These laws are also agreed upon by most people. You can make up your own personal morality, but good discussion should be founded on a shared reality and the status quo majority interpretation of it.
>property rights in liberal democracies will not survive a starving middle class
And this is the paradox I am referring to right? Our current interpretation of morality is at odds with practicality.
The current electorate 100 percent supports this and considers this fair. You actually have to create a new nation state if you don't want this.