Robots, artificial intelligence, and other automation technologies enable companies to produce more. They also displace workers from their jobs, wreaking havoc on those who have no other training and are financially vulnerable.
Research by Dartmouth and Massachusetts Institute of Technology economists featured in this week's National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) Working Papers says the speed of automation is excessive and should be cut in half.
"Firms do not necessarily take into account the consequences that automation has for their workers. Instead, they tend to focus on the value that automation will bring to the firm and its shareholders," says co-author Nathan Zorzi, an assistant professor of economics.
"Automation can benefit society as a whole. But it also comes at a cost in the short run. It displaces workers who can be financially vulnerable," says Zorzi. "The government should tax automation to slow down its adoption while these workers retrain and transition to new jobs."
[Also Covered By]: Phys.Org
[Journal Reference]: Inefficient Automation [PDF (732Kb)]
While the race is on for more automation and cost reduction, this paper suggests exactly the opposite. What do you think ?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by looorg on Wednesday June 29 2022, @10:29AM (6 children)
Zorzi sort of nails the issue there. Companies doesn't have to consider other consequences then their bottom line. For them automation is probably always a good investment. This since salaries for workers is a large post in the budget that will more or less always increase while an investment in a machine/automation is an investment that will pay for itself -- normally so do the employees but I assume there is a difference in when, how fast etc. I guess they (companies) just never have to consider the question of if everything gets automated who will buy their products and services; if nobody has any money that is. But as long as "others" take responsibility and automate less then they don't have to. So for them it's sort of a chicken race as to whom is going to have to bite the bullet.
That said sure tax automation and use those money to invest in training for people to get other jobs. Better jobs. Cause I'm fairly sure we do not want to go back to some pre-automation era where we all do nothing but manual labor again.
Technically tho I'm not even sure the paper actually suggests less automation. They sort of just suggest a redistribution of resources gained from automation. Cause we in some regard are all both winners and losers on the automation train. We all want more and cheap things, we don't want to do hard, boring and dangerous work. But yes until we live in some abundance driven Star Trek utopia where everything is free we still need the economy to work and provide for all (or most).
I'm surprised they just don't mention UBI as the solution, at least I didn't notice it in the article (didn't read the paper).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @11:13AM
TFA and your comments remind me of Kurt Vonnegut's "Player Piano" where automation puts most of the town out of work, until...(I won't spoil the ending--it's a great story).
> We all want more and cheap things
Speak for yourself. While I'm big on buying tools when I have a job/project to do, I'm very careful about impulse buying "gadgets" and have very few of that kind of thing.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Opportunist on Wednesday June 29 2022, @03:50PM (4 children)
If it was up to me: UBI. Knowing that I'll have to foot the bill with my taxes (hell, I already do it, my tax alone is enough to keep two families fed and sheltered...).
I prefer to have a bunch of lazy assholes sitting on the couch existing on kibble on my bill to having the same assholes holding me at gunpoint for the 10 bucks in my back pocket because that idiot might be stupid enough to pull that damn trigger. I want that lazy bum to sit on his ass watching afternoon TV, get his couple 100 a month to sit around and not be a nuisance an leave me the fuck alone! That's money well spent!
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @04:37PM (3 children)
Experience in the USA shows that they don't sit on the couch. They find other mischief to get into. Frequently violent or destructive (or violently destructive) mischief. This despite being eligible for a raft of programmes including food, housing and income support.
People forget that, including state and federal systems, the USA actually has a pretty solid social safety net. Per capita, comparable with most of Europe.
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @08:05PM (1 child)
As my statistics prof used to say: "Tha niggaz skew tha numbaz"
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @08:11PM
Racist incel can't help itself.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Opportunist on Thursday June 30 2022, @06:39AM
Odd. Why does it work over here?
We pay our low-lifes money to sit at home on their asses. Comfortable (well, for varying degrees of comfort...). Get up when you please, do what you please, waste the few bucks you get on cigarettes if you so please. Trade that for an uncomfortable cell where they tell you what to do, when to do it and you can't even smoke?
Nah.
I think the main difference is that here, you can barely manage to avoid being caught in the social net. We pretty much pick those idiots up, stuff them into houses, hand them some money and tell them to STFU. And hey, they do it. They're lazy, with zero ambition to get anywhere with their lives, and they're happy just to exist and get by. I'm quite happy to pay them the couple 100 to stay out of the way.
In the US, these same lazy people that can't be assed to get a job would have to go out of their way to apply for social services. First problem, half of them is too stupid to know which side is up on the form they have to fill out. The other half is too lazy to be bothered to do it. So they don't get no money, they have nothing to lose and they become a problem.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Opportunist on Wednesday June 29 2022, @10:51AM (41 children)
The first industrial revolution replaced human and animal muscle work with steam power. And while it may look like replacing animal muscle with steel doesn't displace humans, those animals needed tending, way more than the machines needed maintenance. Industrial manufacturing and mass production required these people, and while the conditions in early factories were horrible, you could actually "use" these people, or at least most of them, because there wasn't a huge requirement for training and skill. Anyone could take a sheet of metal, put it into the press and push a button.
When the next wave hit automation, about the middle of this century when computers displaced an army of typewriters and clerks, the emerging service industry had a use for them.
But what this time?
Looking down the history of automation, what is certainly easy to see is that the skill, training and also intelligence required to still get a job went up. It doesn't take a lot of skill, training or intelligence to carry a bag of manure from A to B all day. It's not very skill dependent to fit machine built part A into hole B and push a button in a factory. It already took a bit more skill to work as a typewriter, copying letters over and over for mass mail. It took even more skill to provide services. We're now at the point where highly skilled people get displaced by AI. And people with sub-par intelligence already struggle to find any kind of job.
And it's not possible to just retrain them. It's easy to say "Well, so far, every time some new jobs emerged". Yes, and maybe this time too. But every time a new job came along with automation, the skill level required of that job was magnitudes above the jobs its displaced. People have a finite ability to be trained. You can't take a manure carrier and turn him into an AI specialist. That's simply not in the cards.
We will need to figure out what to do with the people who do not have the required intelligence to have a job in the future. Because everything that doesn't require any is already being automated or is in the process of being automated.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @11:20AM (11 children)
First thought -- more people will wind up on disability (for one reason or another). Initially, this will require more lawyers, since it's often advantageous to hire some legal help to bolster your claim of disability.
Of course, this will lead to AIs that can replace those specialist lawyers...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Opportunist on Wednesday June 29 2022, @11:28AM (10 children)
So a lower IQ is now a disability? At what point will we admit that we simply don't have enough work for everyone?
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @11:41AM (4 children)
With the right quotas you can have enough jobs for everyone. Can't find enough qualified Black women? No problem, you've got a quota to fill so hire the next one who walks through the door and then hire a qualified candidate to actually do the work.
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Wednesday June 29 2022, @12:35PM (3 children)
Sorry, sir, this here is sensible discussion, meaningless hyperbole is down the corridor to the right.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @05:10PM (2 children)
Meaningless? Not quite, pretty sure the fascist troll wants to bring back slavery.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @08:10PM (1 child)
>> bring back slavery.
It's in the Constitution and was practiced by the Founding Fathers, so just give the Supreme Court a bit of time.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @08:15PM
>> just give the Supreme Court a bit of time.
They've got to take care of more pressing issues like transvestites first, You wouldn't want to buy some chattel and find out later that you'd paid for the wrong gender... there's a reason we have laws, after all.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @12:31PM (2 children)
> So a lower IQ is now a disability?
I'm not sure I'd couch it in those terms (since IQ never impressed me as measuring more than "ability to test well"). But basically yes -- if you aren't capable of holding down any of the available jobs that seems like a definition of disability.
There are two people on disability (SSD) in my small extended family, in the "adult children" category. Both are able to function at some minimal level (drive, balance a check book) but for different reasons they are not able to work. One has done volunteer & part time minimum wage work in a senior residence (activities for the old folks), but this didn't convert into a job with enough income that could support them. The other has held down backroom retail jobs (not interfacing with the public), but never for long before health issues intervened.
According to this there are nearly 10 million in the US collecting on disability, https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/di_asr/2018/sect01.html [ssa.gov] Further down there is a map by state, overall average is 4.5 percent of the population aged 18–64 (at or about age 65, you can start getting regular social security retirement checks).
Seems likely that the ranks of the disabled will swell as jobs become more complex. Eventually I also expect that the experiments with UBI will turn into something larger.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by HiThere on Wednesday June 29 2022, @01:39PM (1 child)
But I think you are talking about the last wave of automation, not even the current wave. (The current wave is still getting started, and not yet wide-spread. The last wave was things like automated check-out systems in grocery stores. Electronics allowing work to be outsourced to the customers rather than actual "artificial intelligence".) The current wave is things like self-driving vehicles, automated warehouses, etc. I'm not sure where Siri and Alexa fit in. They feel more like "this wave" than "last wave". Perhaps their centralized nature allowed them to get an early start.
As for next wave...it's still under development, but it includes things like automated theorem checkers, automated cell classifiers, etc. Currently it's just an amplifier for highly skilled professionals, people who have trained decades to achieve their skills. How it will develop is a matter of speculation. (I've got my guesses, which I think are reasonable, but other guesses might be equally reasonable.)
And we don't have a clue as to how the one following the "current next wave" will work out. Partially it depends on decisions that we (as a civilization) make right now. It could be excellent, it could be horrible. It could also be excellent for a few and horrible for most.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Wednesday June 29 2022, @11:50PM
They'll be directing consumers to products that sponsor them. Assuming they don't do that already.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by RS3 on Wednesday June 29 2022, @04:04PM (1 child)
I've thought about this whole topic for years. I certainly don't have all the answers, if any, but I usually come around to: some people work too many hours, taking work that could / should go to someone else. 99% of our thinking- individuals, corporations, courts, governments, society in general, is in reference to $ (or whatever currency you use). But maybe we should think more about working hours.
I'm looking to change jobs and a few weeks ago an ad came up- they listed annual salary- it was pretty good, higher than average for the work category, and they listed working hours, but it didn't make sense. I called the recruiter- no joke, it was 6 days, 12 hours, yes, 72 hour work week. Not one week on, one week off, but 72 hours x 50 weeks / year. My immediate reaction was: that's 2 people's job. So the hourly pay is much below the normal range for that position. And who would do that? And how long will they last working that many hours? Said worker will burn out, make mistakes, and who knows what will happen.
I don't know how to deal with the problem of distributing working hours more evenly / fairly. Graduated income tax system, like we have in the US, might help- the more you make, the more they take.
There used to be stricter laws regarding overtime pay being higher than your normal $ / hour, but those have been relaxed over the years. Maybe forcing companies to pay (much) higher overtime pay would encourage them to hire more people instead?
(Score: 2, Interesting) by khallow on Thursday June 30 2022, @12:14PM
It could go to someone else, but why bother? Work is not a zero sum game. What's missed here is that when someone works a lot, they create opportunities for other workers. They'll need support at their job. They'll need someone to cover their home-side tasks that they're too busy to do. They'll need someone to provide the nicer goods and services they'll buy with the extra resources they now have. And so on.
Find a better class of problem to worry about - that's the best solution here.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday June 29 2022, @11:48AM (15 children)
And yet, we still don't have any signs this time is supposed to be different. I would take this complaint more seriously with evidence.
Which is false BTW. It's a lot harder to build stuff completely from scratch than to be a cog in the assembly line, for example.
There's two huge problems with the narrative. First, we're still aggressively hiring people, especially in the developing world. And second, there's a lot of regulatory crap being thrown in the path of would-be employers. Not much point to complaining about automation when countries are pathologically punishing anyone who tries to employ other people.
Fix the big problems first.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Opportunist on Wednesday June 29 2022, @12:15PM (14 children)
What new jobs do you think will emerge that can be done by someone whose job tagline used to be "do you want fries with that" or "welcome to Walmart" after they have been replaced by automatons? These people already do the last jobs that can be done with the skill level they have. You think they can be retrained to maintain the machines that replace them? Oh, certainly, some of them will. And they will also be the only ones that you still need, because what used to be done by 10 people is now done by machinery, maintained by a single person.
Building stuff from scratch is more complicated than screwing a knob on a screw. Yes. But these people were not the ones that screwed the knobs. The knob screwers are those that used to shovel manure and harvest corn by hand before machines took their jobs. I'm not worried about skilled laborers. They will somehow be retrainable. I'm talking about people who are already struggling to do the jobs they can do now and whose jobs are about to be replaced by machinery.
And finally, the point is not to keep people occupied with work. People are generally perfectly capable of doing that themselves. People need money. I'm absolutely sure if we do away with all safety and payment regulations, you'll have no time finding people to do a deadly job for pennies. And those jobs will be available really soon again, too. But I wouldn't exactly call that an improvement. Or even desirable.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday June 29 2022, @12:47PM (6 children)
Yeah, I dunno about that. There used to be a thing called automats, where you walked into the restaurant and were presented with a wall of cubbyholes with individual glass doors, behind which rested pieces of pie, a serving of pot roast with potatoes, etc., and you pulled them out a la carte and paid for them at the register. They did away with all the servers and hostesses, etc. But those automats don't exist anymore and restaurants still use humans as hostesses and servers.
Likewise there are now roombas and dishwashers and all kinds of automated devices for cleaning, but cleaning services that use humans still exist. Why is that?
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by HiThere on Wednesday June 29 2022, @01:49PM (1 child)
They exist, but they don't use as many workers as they used to. Automats were replaced by vending machines, which also use fewer workers. (The food they supply isn't as good either, but it's available at a lot more locations and any time of day.)
There often isn't an exact equivalence after a change. There are usually tradeoffs. But if you make machinery do a lot of the work that used to be done by people, you need fewer people to do the remaining parts of the work. Otherwise it would never pay to use machinery. Just count the number of horses that are still employed. They exist, but there aren't many.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @07:49PM
We've got a couple automats locally, but they never had the many doors of the original ones, these days the plates circulate con conveyors and are pulled based on a schedule if nobody buys them. It's not a great idea, they mostly do it for novelty's sake.
But yeah, most of that moved to vending machines or fast food restaurants.
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Wednesday June 29 2022, @02:21PM (3 children)
The automat restaurants were a novelty. They didn't exactly do away with a lot of jobs, they moved from bringing you the food to cleaning and stacking the automats. The more or less descendent from these restaurants is the fast food restaurants where instead of pulling your food out of a hole you have someone who instead of stuffing food into holes now stuffs food into paper bags. Otherwise, same shit. Weirdly enough, though, with less personnel.
As usual, one of the main reasons these things didn't catch on was that they didn't actually replace human workers efficiently enough. Same for roombas. You'll notice that the main application for them is private homes, not offices. Mostly because buying that roomba is cheaper only when maintenance is free because you're doing it in your spare time.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @03:38PM (1 child)
That will probably happen now that there are robo ACS that can return for both charging and dumping as well as map out their surroundings. From there, it's just a large capacity battery and heavy duty motor away from doing that
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Wednesday June 29 2022, @03:47PM
I kinda doubt that professional cleaning in a commercial environment will soon be replaced by robots. Too many variables, and being responsible and liable for anything that happens, coupled with a salary that is WAY below that of someone who could actually program or at least maintain said robots for the cleaning staff will probably keep these people employed for at least another decade or two.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @09:15PM
Not really "same shit" at all. As well as take-away, you could also purchase a proper sit-down meal at an automat. Check out pictures of old automats - the pies looked awesome! Fast food places today are mostly sandwich things and french fries and stuff that can be tossed in a bag.
(Score: 0, Redundant) by khallow on Wednesday June 29 2022, @10:31PM (6 children)
To be honest, I think the old jobs will remain. Replacing low skilled human labor with automation isn't that valuable. I'll note that most of the world is still heavily hiring such labor.
Or relevant. My take is that what I'll call "economic expression" is more important than the fact we have needs. Economic expression is your presence in the economy - it's not just your needs, but everything you do that affects anyone else economically. My take is that if the only thing you do is generate needs that someone else has to satisfy, then you have a target on your back.
So here, the problem is twofold. First, we have centuries where you could spit out the above narrative and be just as wrong as you are now. Second, we have this pathology of destroying a person's economic expression just because they have needs. I'd rather have the ability to affect my world and change it to better myself than a slightly more guaranteed provider of my needs.
My take is that the number one destroyer of low skill work (or most other work for that matter) are regulations and corruption. For example, the authors of the research of the story are recommending slowing down via taxing progress (in the form of automation) rather than analyzing the causes of "frictions" - it's more friction to fix friction. As I see it, we're already seeing the negative effects of slowing down. More of the same will just cause more of the same problems. Then maybe we'll need to slow even more - maybe even full stop or reverse.
(Score: 2) by turgid on Thursday June 30 2022, @09:21PM (5 children)
Give it another couple of decades until the technology gets better and cheaper. It's inevitable. As long as we have the raw materials and energy to make the machines, it'll happen.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday July 01 2022, @12:15PM (4 children)
(Score: 2) by turgid on Friday July 01 2022, @03:17PM (3 children)
In the UK, we're about to automate farm labour out of existence. There are already weeding robots, and now there are fruit-picking robots under development, that can harvest soft fruit better than humans. These things always get cheaper and cheaper after the R&D costs have been recouped, as you know.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday July 02 2022, @03:15AM (2 children)
So the UK hasn't done it yet, right?
Assuming R&D costs do get recouped. This wouldn't be the first time automation didn't turn out as planned.
(Score: 2) by turgid on Saturday July 02 2022, @11:58AM (1 child)
Things don't stay the same for ever. New stuff gets invented. Why should this not work?
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 0, Troll) by khallow on Sunday July 03 2022, @12:40PM
A very poor argument for "I'm sure it'll be different this time."
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Wednesday June 29 2022, @12:28PM (8 children)
How about transitioning to "relaxing and enjoying life"?
An example of how we could do this in the USA, if we actually wanted to:
1. Eliminate the cap on income taxed for Social Security, and if necessary also apply that tax to capital gains and other non-labor income.
2. Use the money to slowly but steadily lower the minimum age to collect old-age Social Security and Medicare benefits from 63 down to 55.
3. If need be, also provide a boost to the SS cost-of-living increase to make earlier retirement more financially viable.
Result: Sure, the really rich guys make a bit less money, but as a tradeoff now the older people for whom working is often difficult and even dangerous could spend their time with their grandkids or volunteering in the community or sipping lemonade on the porch.
And it's not like this would be completely unprecedented or something, because a century ago the plan was for everyone to work until they dropped dead, and the policy of Social Security and retirement plans was what enabled a lot of people to enjoy a decade or two of their later years.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Wednesday June 29 2022, @12:38PM
Not too different with the plan for everyone today. Kinda sad we didn't progress in a century.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @12:39PM (5 children)
> 2. Use the money to slowly but steadily lower the minimum age to collect old-age Social Security and Medicare benefits from 63 down to 55.
Interesting. I've been suggesting (to no avail!) that Medicare age should slowly be lowered until we have universal single payer. With a published timetable for the conversion (10+ years) this would give the health insurers a known target to find some other things to do (insurance companies are, I believe, the biggest lobby against single payer).
But this is much too simple, and too slow, for politicians to support.
(Score: 3, Informative) by HiThere on Wednesday June 29 2022, @01:51PM
It's not just too simple, it also requires a single intention to be maintained over multiple administrations.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Wednesday June 29 2022, @02:44PM (3 children)
What puzzles me is that exactly this model is running in Europe and it works. It works. It's cheaper, more reliable and fairer for everyone involved. It's not perfect, but it ensures that everyone can get medical attention without breaking the bank, whether he's CEO of a Fortune 500 or the cleaning lady of the toilet in the same Fortune 500. The CEO may have some private additional insurance that allows him to pick and choose doctors and hospitals, but that's pretty much it.
For some weird reason there is incredible resistance in the US against such a model Especially by those that would benefit the most from it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @04:23PM (1 child)
There are many reasons for such resistance.
Here's one that is in the recent news: if the federal government gets to decide about abortion, then large parts of the country are going to be extremely unhappy, violently angry or both no matter what the feds decide. It's the perfect no-win.
A related concern is things like drug policy. Just look at the whipsaw between all-the-opiates-you-can-take, to no-opiates-never-no-matter-what. I've seen that in my community in the last decade.
Another problem is the service provision levels at things that are run by the government, such as the VA. Not great.
Another problem is the discovery that bureaucratic overhead in insurance companies is high, but if you think that's high you ain't seen nuthin' yet because the government bureaucracy attached to medical provision is simply off the charts, and because of things like federal employment regulations and public service union contracts, it's hell to actually cut down again.
Yet another problem is the fact that while things like Medicare sound all fancy and workable, you find on close inspection that the government underpays, thereby forcing providers to milk private sector patients to make up the difference; a hidden subsidy of vast expense and expanse.
Now add to that the latent mistrust of government involvement in personal decisions of all sorts, and you see that this is ripe for massive court challenges on myriad fronts. Medicare and medicaid already have been.
I could go on (limited access to professional certifications, perverse regulations driving people and companies out of the industry, the implausibly unworkable necessary expansion of the federal budget and concommitant taxation, take your pick) but the prospect of offering a workable single payer idea to the people of the USA at large is in a no-man's-land somewhere between no, fuck you, and bro-look-at-the-groovy-patterns.
(Score: 4, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @04:41PM
Leave it to a rightwinger to boil a topic down to the most stupid vapors.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Wednesday June 29 2022, @04:28PM
The reason is pretty simple: A lot of people in the US would rather sacrifice their wealth, health, and even their life to avoid risking helping someone else that they think is deserving of death or at the very least "beneath" them.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday June 29 2022, @11:29PM
IF.
Already we're just ignoring the huge problem with Social Security (and similar programs throughout the world) - it costs too much for what it offers. I think the ideal solution is rather to end it, but I understand that most people won't support that. So instead, I suggest minimizing the damage from such a program by making it live within its means. That means no increase in taxation and a reduction in benefits till it matches revenue in.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @01:04PM (3 children)
There's no guarantee that that will happen again. At this point, most of the jobs left are service sector ones and most of those jobs can be automated even easier than the manufacturing ones. Just because there were still areas left that couldn't be automated in the past, does not guarantee that will remain the case in the future. We could easily end up in a dystopian world as depicted in metropolis where an underclass doing a few menial tasks exists while everybody else loves s life of leisure.
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Wednesday June 29 2022, @02:23PM (1 child)
We are already pretty much in that metropolis dystopia?
Well, only that we import that underclass from abroad and can't understand when they complain about because we don't speak their language, but that class is already here.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @07:59PM
Fair point, although most of those folks have been doing it for a generation before their kids are able to do something better. I'm thinking about something that's inherently closer to chattel slavery where no generation is able to escape being trapped. And we're getting there, there's fewer good paying jobs and fewer options for moving up to something with some dignity.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday June 29 2022, @11:41PM
Depends what we do. My take is that it takes a lot of work to build a good society. Should be enough to go around, if we're doing it right.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Wednesday June 29 2022, @11:30AM (1 child)
In Europe, employers usually pay to make people redundant. E.g UK:
https://www.gov.uk/redundancy-your-rights/redundancy-pay [www.gov.uk]
They are only allowed to make people redundant as part of an overall restructuring/work force reduction.
Is that the case in the US?
(Score: 5, Informative) by Thexalon on Wednesday June 29 2022, @12:36PM
No. In the US, it varies by which state you're in, but the general policy in a lot of the country is that the boss can sack you for any reason or no reason at all at any time. You can often get unemployment insurance benefits which are paid in part by the employer, and sometimes the employer offers a severance package, but there are definitely situations where people can wake up, go to work, and come home with no job and no income starting right then with no time to figure out how they're going to pay the rent that month.
In general, Europeans would be horrified by what people have to put up with in the US. For example, compare the Finnish parental leave system (about 1 year paid, split between the parents) to the US parental leave system (mom gets a few months, but no pay, dad has to go right back to work, oh and there's now a big hospital bill to pay too).
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @11:44AM
You're an idiot.
You'd rather throw away technology than raise taxes. Completely fucking stupid.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by crafoo on Wednesday June 29 2022, @12:11PM (13 children)
Riiiiight. Tax the productive to support the unproductive, dressed up a little bit for the stupid people.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Opportunist on Wednesday June 29 2022, @12:41PM (11 children)
Well, at some point you'll find that it's cheaper and easier to pay tax to give people something to lose than being held at gunpoint for your money. Because someone who has nothing to lose doesn't give a fuck about trading your life for the 10 bucks that you have in your pocket.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday June 29 2022, @11:55PM (10 children)
Like their freedom? Jail is a thing here.
The problem with this narrative is that the people who hold other people up at gunpoint generally don't have the skills to keep stuff - you give them something to lose and they will lose it. Why else are they doing something with such an incredibly low return on investment, even if they don't get caught or shot?
Now, if you're speaking of education, training, or something else to generate knowledge, experience, or skills, that's different. They can't lose that.
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Thursday June 30 2022, @05:17PM (9 children)
What good is freedom if you're broke, starving and have literally nothing to lose? Freedom only matters once the core needs are taken care of. I.e. you have food, you have shelter and you have a fairly good chance of not dying within the next 24 hours. If these needs are not met, being locked up in jail is actually an improvement, and even being killed somewhere down the line is one if the alternative is dying right now.
What I can say is that it works. I can actually literally see that here in the town I live in. Take it or leave it.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday June 30 2022, @10:10PM (8 children)
This sort of person will never be free. It's just not an issue for them, starving or not. The problem is rather who else will be enslaved in the process?
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Monday July 04 2022, @02:33PM (7 children)
Actually yes, they are free. That's the whole point of the discussion here. By giving them something to lose, that freedom, you give them an incentive to not cause trouble.
And yes, it works.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday July 04 2022, @10:42PM (6 children)
I think rather that you just have a wealthy enough society that just happens to engage in this exercise. If that fails, then it doesn't matter how you try to bribe the losers of your society - you won't have enough.
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Tuesday July 05 2022, @04:40AM (5 children)
You'd be surprised how little you need to bribe people to leave you alone.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday July 05 2022, @12:55PM (4 children)
Sorry, I believe that's my line. My take is that we aren't close to that. And crafoo's point remains. It doesn't make sense to tax the productive to support people who can support themselves.
I grant that the productive/unproductive labels are ambiguous. But when we're speaking of people mugging others, we're speaking of people who could choose to be at least unproductive in a less harmful way, but aren't.
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Tuesday July 05 2022, @03:34PM (3 children)
Weird, why does it work over here?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday July 05 2022, @10:37PM (2 children)
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Wednesday July 06 2022, @05:16AM (1 child)
And the US economy does not?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday July 06 2022, @12:06PM
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @12:44PM
I'd support the unproductive anyway, even without taxes. There are unproductive people in my family (for "reasons"). The productive ones support them--luckily our family has a sustainable mix of productive:unproductive. Not all families or individuals are so lucky--but as a society the US is very well situated to look after the unfortunate and unproductive.
Or do you not consider yourself part of society?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Wednesday June 29 2022, @12:12PM (12 children)
The reason that this is considered such a problem is that we've decided for some reason that most humans should be forced to work for money for 40+ hours a week to ensure their own survival.
I swear, if Star Trek's replicator was invented, there'd be people arguing that we should destroy it, because how else would we force people to flip burgers for $10 an hour?
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @01:08PM (8 children)
In the long term, I do think we'll wind up with a UBI and paying people to engage in hobbies just to ensure everybody had the necessities and isn't just sitting around causing trouble. The other alternatives don't seem particularly stable, sure we could pay people to move rocks from one end of a field you another but at that point, you might as well just give them the money.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @01:26PM (1 child)
If there will be an UBI, don't expect it from politics. When an UBI was suggested in my country the liberal/conservative parties didn't want it, because the idea was socialist (thou should work for money) and the socialist parties didn't want it because the rich people would also get money (the wealthy get even wealthier).... so, if you want an UBI, you'll have to do it yourself (and then it's called "passive income").
But still, if your home finances are positive, creating a passive income source is IMHO a good idea.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @02:07PM
Of course not, the politicians are extremely corrupt and willing to let the entire world burn do they can personally become obscenely wealthy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @03:21PM (5 children)
We have a long experience with paying people who don't work. It's called "welfare" in America, and those neighborhoods are always riddled with crime and social dysfunction. "Welfare for everybody" is not the answer.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @04:50PM (3 children)
Those neighborhoods are riddled with crime hecause the welfare is not even enough to survive on and comes with poverty traps built in, usually at the insistence of some Republicans worried that people will get "free" money. People have to turn down job advancement because the pay bump isn't enough to offset losing benefits, so congratulations your regressively punitive policies are achieving exactly the opposite of what you want. Then you whine about crime while the politicians you voted for refuse to vote for child care or baby formula.
Wake up conservatives, the GOP is the billionaire's party and they actively work to exploit you and your loved ones.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @06:14PM (2 children)
Welfare would work if it weren't for those pesky Republicans! Since it hasn't worked well anywhere, let's go whole hog and foist it on everybody with UBI. THIS TIME, IT WILL WORK! Sing it with me.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @07:31PM (1 child)
It's time for trickle up economics. Cut checks to the poorest in an amount approximating what's needed to scrape by with no strings attached. We've seen that when UBI has been given that people are generally reasonable with the money.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday June 30 2022, @12:21PM
Strings like excessive regulation and corruption? My take is that if you deal with the strings, you don't need to cut checks. If you don't deal with the strings, then you're just squandering more money.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 30 2022, @01:44AM
Oh, when you said "welfare" I thought you were talking about farm subsidies.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @01:57PM (2 children)
It's not like there was a "decided" about it. Reality is what it is. It does not pour manna into your mouth at will. That you dislike this does not change it.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Thexalon on Wednesday June 29 2022, @08:28PM (1 child)
The 40-hour work week was definitely decided.
- Hunter-gatherers typically work about 15-20 hours per week.
- Medieval peasants work time varied a lot by season, but was quite possibly less than that of a modern person.
- During the Industrial Revolution, work time steadily increased, as industrialists learned that by making employees work longer hours they could make more money. By the end of the Victorian Era, it was not uncommon for people to have to work 80-100 hours per week.
- With the arrival of trade unions, union leaders invented the slogan of "8 hours labor, 8 hours recreation, 8 hours rest", and that eventually got codified into laws such as Fair Labor Standards Act, which mandates overtime for working more than 40 hours.
We decided how long we were going to work. Sure, that number doesn't yet make sense to be 0 hours per week, but there's no particular reason to think that it should be 40 hours per week. We just made that up and thought it seemed to work pretty well. And in some countries, 35 hours per week is closer to the norm: 9 AM to 5 PM with an hour for lunch.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday June 29 2022, @11:58PM
As was the many ways to work around it like being on salary, working multiple jobs, gig work, self-employed, etc. Think about it.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by khallow on Wednesday June 29 2022, @12:15PM
1) No significant verification of the model.
2) Optimizing only for value of labor and ignoring the value of the production and more particularly the future progress from the automation.
3) No attempt to study the "frictions" of the model. I'll note, for example, that minimum wage, zoning, and profession licensing all would introduce substantial friction into this model, but perhaps not as much as the subsidized loans of higher education.
(Score: 2) by JustNiz on Wednesday June 29 2022, @01:00PM (1 child)
I mean making profit is the whole reason why companies even exist.
it's pretty naive for anyone to expect anything other from a company than for it to prioritize it's own bottom line.
Actually if a CEO/company did anything else, they would be opening themselves up to being sued by their own shareholders.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @02:14PM
There's no requirement that they bribe politicians and pay starvation wages in order to overcompensate executives. The profit motive is just an excuse for psychopathic behavior.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @01:20PM
I wish someone had slowed down technology so people could keep doing things the old, inefficient way.
This Internet thing, why do we even need it, for example? Smart phones that enable Internet use by everyone? Let's go back to wall phones and pay phones--for the people! Paper books as the source of information, too.
Then somebody would have to pay to retrain me.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday June 29 2022, @02:26PM
I guess what I'm trying to get at is that work, employment, and the economy serve a greater need than just the material. It is more cost-effective on paper to run an automat than a regular restaurant. But the diners must be demanding something else when they choose to eat at a regular restaurant instead of an automat. Maybe they like having other humans wait on them for a change. In other words, there's a little bit of fantasy social hierarchy-role reversal at play. The man who spends his day taking orders from his boss gets to go to a restaurant and have others dance to his tune for an hour.
Me, I would rather have machines do all the work because I don't like giving orders to other humans because I hate it when other humans try to order me around. The one problem with machines is that they like to break down or malfunction, which means you tend to run around fixing them and managing them, which begs the question: who is serving whom?
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @03:06PM (3 children)
It is a crying shame we still are made to pull 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, in the goddamn year 2022. Is being stuck at it for a goddamn century anything other than a mockery?
If we have N people working 20-hour week, instead of N/2 working 40 hours, we have a 100% surplus of qualified workers to be tapped in an emergency. When something unexpected, like Russia starting a stupid war, happens, there would be no time wasted finding and teaching extra workers for doubling the production of military hardware, or explosives, or fertilizers, or anything else. The same people who worked 2 days one week, 3 days the other, in peacetime, are enough to fill two 8-hour shifts 5 days a week when needed, doubling the production the very next day.
Reducing the work week is investing in people. WHY contrive bullshit jobs in "services", wasting human potential instead?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @04:53PM (1 child)
Greed. Lowering the work week while paying employees the same salary means costs go up. Why else do we hear stories of loading job responsibilities on to obe person, then they leave or burn out. Greedy management.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @06:43PM
When/if the elites do not want (fear the reaction to) letting the "unnecessary" people die from hunger and exposure, you (the workers and the businesses) DO pay for their feeding, clothing, and housing ANYWAY, through taxes. In addition, you pay for the damage from the crimes they do, for the police keeping a lid on those crimes, for jails those criminals end up in. Keeping people unemployed while working other people till they drop is NOT free.
When government employs those people in bullshit jobs instead, you get to pay even more. Every bullshit bureaucrat requiring bullshit reports from you, means hours of your time spent on bullshit. Time is money, whether you hire someone to shovel the bullshit for you, or pay with hours of your only life turned to shit.
As to costs going up, aren't we currently "enjoying" exactly that, WITHOUT the benefit of getting twice more free time to cope with that?
BTW, given that overworked people do LESS work in more days (see Microsoft's experiment with 4-days work week), those costs will not go up as much as a naive expectation predicts.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday June 29 2022, @10:39PM
I'm sure that my being able to count twice as many beans with plenty of remaining time for leisure and sleep will save Earth when The Emergency comes. Wasn't there a documentary where some photogenic star saved the universe with accounting? Imagine, if he were working 40 hours per week instead of 20. He could have saved two universes!
(Score: 3, Funny) by oumuamua on Wednesday June 29 2022, @04:54PM (5 children)
What 'essential jobs' are and that there are actually very few of them. The country could survive with very few people working. Once these essentials are automated the companies can be bought out by the government or crowdfunding and everyone's basic needs can be met (but of course people still pay for luxuries). This is why philanthropist Bill Gates has bought up a lot of America's farm land, to eventually surprise us with a giant philanthropist gesture.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday June 30 2022, @12:00AM (3 children)
Why in the world are we interested merely in basic needs? It's just not a problem for most people in the developed world - due to their own work not government. Maybe we ought to think about why that is the case.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by turgid on Saturday July 02 2022, @01:12PM (2 children)
There are an awful lot of people who don't live in the developed world, though.
Here in the developed world, in the UK, we are heading backwards rapidly. We keep electing increasingly further-to-the-right governments and this has culminating in us having a Tory/ERG/Faragist government, full of people who wrote Britannia Unchained, who have no respect for human beings.
Before the Second World War, things in the UK used to be bad. People we hungry, cold, malnourished (rickets was common), housed in hovels and often had to work in dangerous conditions for a pittance. Jobs were insecure. People had to queue at factory gates in the morning in the hope that they would get selected to do some work. Many had to go home to their families penniless, not having been given a job for the day. People went hungry. They couldn't heat their houses. Rent was extortionate. The fortunate - the landlords with the money - could charge what they liked and could keep getting richer.
Healthcare was expensive. You had to pay to see a doctor, and going to hospital cost money. One of my wife's grandmothers had to give up school at 14 to stay at home to nurse her mother who was terminally ill with breast cancer.
One of my grandfathers had to leave school at the age of 12 to work. He came from a very poor family. In both cases, the teachers insisted that the children stay at school, showing promise but they just couldn't.
After the Second World War, after the misery and horror, and the existential fight against fascism, the people of the UK overwhelmingly voted for change. They voted for a Welfare State and a National Health Service, which began in 1948. Everyone was entitled to medical care and treatment prioritised by clinical need rather than ability to pay. Taxes went up to pay for it. People got dental treatment that they previously hadn't been able to afford. Women could give birth in hospital attended by the best medical professionals. Sick people had medicine and were given operations.
The Welfare State redistributed some of the country's wealth to the young (child benefit), the unfortunate (unemployed), the sick (unable to work), the disabled and the old (state pension). It wasn't a huge amount of money individually, but it allowed people to live with dignity rather than starve or freeze to death in pain begging on the streets.
Social housing was built. Old slums were demolished. The social housing was provided at low rents so it was ideal for those who worked in the public sector, or were too old or sick to work.
College and university education was provided for free for those who met the academic standards. Your exam grades mattered, not the wealth of your family. This was a huge win for social mobility. Both of my parents benefited directly, and so did I.
Margaret Thatcher came along and began to dismantle it. She decided to blame the poor, sick, disabled, old and unfortunate for their own situations and repeated the mantra that everything should be done for a profit.
The social housing got sold off. Parts of the NHS started to be outsourced to private for-profit companies, welfare benefits were reduced and made harder to claim, university education was made no longer free. Taxes were cut. That's great if you're lucky enough to be able to work for a living, and if you are well enough paid that you can use the market to your advantage. Low paid people ended up having less and less money after paying their rent. Less social housing meant more for-profit private housing.
There was inflation. Public Sector workers (nurses, teachers, police, fire, ambulance, local government...) started to see their salaries reduced as a means to control that inflation. Their retirement ages were increased to reduce the cost of their pensions.
New Labour was invented - a centre-right incarnation of the Labour Party - and got elected in 1997. They managed to fix a few things, like some of the decay in the NHS, but they were only suffered to live by the right wing Murdoch/Dacre/Rothermere media and had to be very careful they didn't get labelled "commies."
The Welfare State used to provide enough money for people to live with dignity. Due to the cut backs, it no longer did and food banks were introduced (by New Labour, yes) and their use has increased steadily ever since, meanwhile the right wingers keep cutting back the welfare state.
They introduced punitive measures to "encourage" people to get jobs such as making them wait 5 or 6 weeks after submitting a claim before getting any money. How are you supposed to pay your rent and buy food for 6 weeks with no money?
How are you supposed to work if you are badly chronically ill, disabled or terminally ill? It's well known and publicised that nowadays the Department of Work and Pensions hounds terminally ill and disabled people into looking for jobs, while denying them anything to live on.
Things have got so bad that homelessness is very visible with the streets full of beggars and rough sleepers. Food banks are running out of food because we can't afford to donate to them. Inflation is once again heading for double digits.
The NHS has been defunded, outsourced and used as a cash cow for private service providers (often with links to Tory Party members) to milk. It's increasingly difficult to get to see a doctor when you're ill.
Schools have been privatised along the American system, with highly-paid senior management while the teachers enjoy pay cuts and overwork to the point of ill health. Public Sector workers are treated with disdain and derision by the mainstream mass media, accused of indoctrinating children with Marxist beliefs, being greedy and lazy, having over-generous holidays and pensions and so on.
And yet the right wing are the parties of sound economics and responsibility? They just cut us out of our trading bloc too, on which 40% of our economy depended.
It's the far-right race to the bottom. It's accelerating. This is Britannia Unhinged.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday July 03 2022, @01:28PM (1 child)
My take is that you should take a hard look at all the stuff you're complaining about being defunded as part of this historical problem. I'd start with the free benefits like that health care, education, and social housing. That doesn't help your country function.
Public employees doing much better than private employees is a sign of trouble, and that the criticism is likely accurate enough. We have thousands of years of history of public employee groups monetizing their political power. This just seems more of the same.
That "trading bloc" had a lot of strings attached and continues to attach insane requirements to membership - like ending [soylentnews.org] fossil fuel transportation by 2035. Maybe the timing of UK's departure could have been better, but really how would the UK survive continued EU membership?
(Score: 2) by turgid on Thursday July 07 2022, @07:27PM
In the olden days, before there was regulation, people were starving, over-worked, dying of accidents, disease, exposure and so on, and little children were sent out to work to make ends meet. Over centuries people learned, fought for reform, and a better society was built.
Yes, after the Second World War there was foreign investment and we borrowed a lot of money to rebuild, but we also learned from the lessons of history and built a welfare state. Meantime, right-wingers mishandled the economy and we became the sick man of Europe. We joined the EEC and things started to improve.
Other people have it worse, therefore we have too much?
The nature of private business is that it pays its staff as little as it can get away with and works them harder that is healthy or sustainable in the name of maximising profit above all else.
We, as human beings are intelligent enough to aspire to better.
Yes, it wasn't just about trade, it was about co-operation, removing borders and building a more peaceful and prosperous world. It was about protecting the rights and freedoms of ordinary people, not just the old aristocracies and super-rich.
What an absurd statement followed by a ludicrous question. Well, England has become a xenophobic, insular, far-right basket case, so perhaps a UK containing England couldn't have lasted long in the EU.
Let's see how Scotland and Northern Ireland do in the next few years. With a bit of luck we'll free Scotland to be a modern democracy and perhaps Northern Ireland will eventually become part of the Republic of Ireland.
We're never going to change the minds of people like you. We can't even discuss the issues with you because you apparently don't acknowledge our points, twist the arguments and repeat tired old political and economic cliches.
I think it's best if you have your USA and your England and the rest of us have our own countries to run. We'll stand - or fall - on our own two feet, thanks. I don't share your 19th century vision. I'm looking to the future.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 2) by turgid on Saturday July 02 2022, @02:42PM
Ha ha!
Bill Gates want to look after our money for us (us Little People would only waste it) and give us back a small percentage out of the goodness of his own heart when he feels like it.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @08:48PM
Your signature's YOUR UNDOING:
"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss hosts files"
You must be a NO-MIND: Especially as I SHOT YOU DOWN discussing hosts making YOU the SMALLEST NO MIND since you lost on hosts with you getting SHOT TO PIECES with the above & what's below as proof thereof!
I easily tore you apart with FACTS (i.e./e.g. - Paralyzing botnets is EASY if you have the C2 & other servers it uses information - FACT & why security articles post Indicators of Compromise (IOC)).
---
Dalek EXTERMINATED by APK (again)!
No small wonder he got rid of his OLD SIGNATURE of "exterminate", lol - especially after ALL of the below FACTS:
FACT: Hosts work vs. Symbiote C2 server(s) per this line from a MUCH better article than the one used here from bradley13 per "configuration in the binary that used the git[.]bancodobrasil[.]dev domain as its C2 server" from https://www.intezer.com/blog/research/new-linux-threat-symbiote/ [intezer.com]
& did I block that in my original posts here https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=49835&page=1&cid=1253504#commentwrap [soylentnews.org] on this BOGUS sockpuppet upmodding yourselves shithole website (which also noted FIREWALLS are invaluable here too, per wildcards (or even IP address use, URL domain/subdomain too in many as well))?
YES I DID! I was correct!
FACT: hosts files block symbiote C2 servers which is all you really need to do to nullify their communication.
FACT: Exfiltration isn't possible without orders either.
FACT: Orders come from C2 servers!
And what did you say to ME hypocrite?
I showed real results doctors had on video stating it themselves.
YET All you do is cite MSM VERY FAKE NEWS!
Proven TONS of times to be so in fact along with their "fact checkers" !
I put up what PHD and MDs by the truckload literally let us see (not just YOUR MSM "russia, Russia, RUSSIA" disproven in COURTS vs. Trump very fake news)?
Do as I say not as I do right dalek?
You are a hypocrite BS artist that CONTRADICTS himself!
More from your losing attempt @ DEBATING me (you = IGNORANT FOOL in this area of genetics & TOTALLY undereducated in it - whereas by COMPARISON I am not):
THIS IS ALL ABOUT GENETICS!
WHAT IS mRNA after all?
ANSWER = A part of protein synthesis involving mRNA, tRNA, & rRNA for the creation of DNA!
IF RNA single helix strands JOIN improperly into a NEW double-helix DNA (via Guanine, Adenine, Cytosine & Thymine) it creates ERRORS (cancer is 1 possible bad one, mutations another etc.)
See NHEJ below.
dalek - have you taken any genetics coursework?
I have & got A's (as my science elective requirement during my CS degreework)!
1st of all, TONS of vaccines have used poisonous Graphene oxide (or dioxide) as ADJUVANTS over time.
Secondly: ELECTRON MICROSCOPY EXPERT Dr. Young SHOWS POISONOUS GRAPHENE IN VACCINES ALSO:
https://www.brighteon.com/9e58bf44-05e7-4b71-97e5-b243f6cf890c [brighteon.com]
&
https://www.brighteon.com/9fbd7735-b49d-4e31-a146-f67d7eb54d75 [brighteon.com]
GRAPHENE OXIDE's in Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson (Janssen) + AstraZeneca:
https://www.brighteon.com/6d8fcfd7-4811-4e64-90c9-bd5585b59ff5 [brighteon.com]
&
A major cause of myocarditis, clotting, CANCER MALIGNANCY etc.? That's right: GRAPHENE OXIDE.
Graphene Oxide Promotes Cancer Metastasis https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31877027/ [nih.gov]
An Israeli study PROVES that the NHEJ (non-homologous end joining) mechanism in your cells is DAMAGED by SPIKE PROTEINS in the death vax & IT IS LINKED TO CANCER per https://naturalnews.com/2021-11-02-covid-vaccines-inhibit-dna-repair-cause-cancer.html [naturalnews.com]
All FROM my +5 upmodded post on COVID killshots (which they HAVE proven to be on TONS of levels) https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=46034&page=1&cid=1197563#commentwrap [soylentnews.org]
LOL: Well, there's the BS you state WHERE YOU ATTACKED ME only to DESTROY YOURSELF for me - thank you, lol!
HOW IRONIC!
(Dalek "EXTERMINATED" not only by FACTS from experts in microscopy, but DALEK'S own WORDS he has to EAT, lol!)
NOW THE "ICING ON THE CAKE" EXPOSING YOU, sockpuppeteer UPMODDING YOURSELF obviously + downmod bombing scumbag - RIGHT FROM YOU once more:
THANKS FOR SHOWING US YOUR "MODUS OPERANDI" SOCKPUPPETEER troll! Fakename & all for a FAKE like you!
APK
P.S.=> THIS? This was just "too, Too, TOO EASY - just '2ez'" & it always IS vs. hypocrites like you, fakename... apk
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 29 2022, @11:51PM
Your signature's YOUR UNDOING:
"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss hosts files"
You must be a NO-MIND: Especially as I SHOT YOU DOWN discussing hosts making YOU the SMALLEST NO MIND since I easily tore you apart with FACTS (i.e./e.g. - Paralyzing botnets is EASY if you have the C2 & other servers it uses information - FACT & why security articles post Indicators of Compromise (IOC)).
---
Dalek EXTERMINATED by APK (again)!
No small wonder he got rid of his OLD SIGNATURE of "exterminate", lol - especially after ALL of the below FACTS:
FACT: Hosts work vs. Symbiote C2 server(s) per this line from a MUCH better article than the one used here from bradley13 per "configuration in the binary that used the git[.]bancodobrasil[.]dev domain as its C2 server" from https://www.intezer.com/blog/research/new-linux-threat-symbiote/ [intezer.com]
& did I block that in my original posts here https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=49835&page=1&cid=1253504#commentwrap [soylentnews.org] on this BOGUS sockpuppet upmodding yourselves shithole website (which also noted FIREWALLS are invaluable here too, per wildcards (or even IP address use, URL domain/subdomain too in many as well))?
YES I DID! I was correct!
FACT: hosts files block symbiote C2 servers which is all you really need to do to nullify their communication.
FACT: Exfiltration isn't possible without orders either.
FACT: Orders come from C2 servers!
And what did you say to ME hypocrite?
I showed real results doctors had on video stating it themselves.
YET All you do is cite MSM VERY FAKE NEWS!
Proven TONS of times to be so in fact along with their "fact checkers" !
I put up what PHD and MDs by the truckload literally let us see (not just YOUR MSM "russia, Russia, RUSSIA" disproven in COURTS vs. Trump very fake news)?
Do as I say not as I do right dalek?
You are a hypocrite BS artist that CONTRADICTS himself!
More from your losing attempt @ DEBATING me (you = IGNORANT FOOL in this area of genetics & TOTALLY undereducated in it - whereas by COMPARISON I am not):
THIS IS ALL ABOUT GENETICS!
WHAT IS mRNA after all?
ANSWER = A part of protein synthesis involving mRNA, tRNA, & rRNA for the creation of DNA!
IF RNA single helix strands JOIN improperly into a NEW double-helix DNA (via Guanine, Adenine, Cytosine & Thymine) it creates ERRORS (cancer is 1 possible bad one, mutations another etc.)
See NHEJ below.
dalek - have you taken any genetics coursework?
I have & got A's (as my science elective requirement during my CS degreework)!
1st of all, TONS of vaccines have used poisonous Graphene oxide (or dioxide) as ADJUVANTS over time.
Secondly: ELECTRON MICROSCOPY EXPERT Dr. Young SHOWS POISONOUS GRAPHENE IN VACCINES ALSO:
https://www.brighteon.com/9e58bf44-05e7-4b71-97e5-b243f6cf890c [brighteon.com]
&
https://www.brighteon.com/9fbd7735-b49d-4e31-a146-f67d7eb54d75 [brighteon.com]
GRAPHENE OXIDE's in Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson (Janssen) + AstraZeneca:
https://www.brighteon.com/6d8fcfd7-4811-4e64-90c9-bd5585b59ff5 [brighteon.com]
&
A major cause of myocarditis, clotting, CANCER MALIGNANCY etc.? That's right: GRAPHENE OXIDE.
Graphene Oxide Promotes Cancer Metastasis https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31877027/ [nih.gov]
An Israeli study PROVES that the NHEJ (non-homologous end joining) mechanism in your cells is DAMAGED by SPIKE PROTEINS in the death vax & IT IS LINKED TO CANCER per https://naturalnews.com/2021-11-02-covid-vaccines-inhibit-dna-repair-cause-cancer.html [naturalnews.com]
All FROM my +5 upmodded post on COVID killshots (which they HAVE proven to be on TONS of levels) https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=46034&page=1&cid=1197563#commentwrap [soylentnews.org]
LOL: Well, there's the BS you state WHERE YOU ATTACKED ME only to DESTROY YOURSELF for me - thank you, lol!
HOW IRONIC!
(Dalek "EXTERMINATED" not only by FACTS from experts in microscopy, but DALEK'S own WORDS he has to EAT, lol!)
NOW THE "ICING ON THE CAKE" EXPOSING YOU, sockpuppeteer UPMODDING YOURSELF obviously + downmod bombing scumbag - RIGHT FROM YOU once more:
* THANKS FOR SHOWING US YOUR "MODUS OPERANDI" SOCKPUPPETEER troll! Fakename & all for a FAKE like you!
APK
P.S.=> THIS? This was just "too, Too, TOO EASY - just '2ez'" & it always IS vs. hypocrites like you, fakename... apk
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 30 2022, @04:46AM
Your signature's YOUR UNDOING! Dalek EXTERMINATED by APK (again)! No small wonder he got rid of his OLD SIGNATURE of "exterminate", lol - especially after ALL of the below FACTS:
"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss hosts files"
Then obviously You're an ALL-TALK mere CHATTERING do-NOTHING & no viable solution offering NO-MIND since I SHOT YOU DOWN discussing hosts as I easily tore you apart w/ FACTS (i.e./e.g. - Paralyzing botnets is EASY if you have the C2 & other servers it uses information - FACT & why security articles post Indicators of Compromise (IOC)).
---
FACT: Hosts work vs. Symbiote C2 server(s) per this line from a MUCH better article than the one used here from bradley13 per "configuration in the binary that used the git[.]bancodobrasil[.]dev domain as its C2 server" from https://www.intezer.com/blog/research/new-linux-threat-symbiote/ [intezer.com]
& did I block that in my original posts here https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=49835&page=1&cid=1253504#commentwrap [soylentnews.org] on this BOGUS sockpuppet upmodding yourselves shithole website (which also noted FIREWALLS are invaluable here too, per wildcards (or even IP address use, URL domain/subdomain too in many as well))?
YES I DID! I was correct!
FACT: hosts files block symbiote C2 servers which is all you really need to do to nullify their communication.
FACT: Exfiltration isn't possible without orders either.
FACT: Orders come from C2 servers!
And what did you say to ME hypocrite?
I showed real results doctors had on video stating it themselves.
YET All you do is cite MSM VERY FAKE NEWS!
Proven TONS of times to be so in fact along with their "fact checkers" !
I put up what PHD and MDs by the truckload literally let us see (not just YOUR MSM "russia, Russia, RUSSIA" disproven in COURTS vs. Trump very fake news)?
Do as I say not as I do right dalek?
You are a hypocrite BS artist that CONTRADICTS himself!
More from your losing attempt @ DEBATING me (you = IGNORANT FOOL in this area of genetics & TOTALLY undereducated in it - whereas by COMPARISON I am not):
THIS IS ALL ABOUT GENETICS!
WHAT IS mRNA after all?
ANSWER = A part of protein synthesis involving mRNA, tRNA, & rRNA for the creation of DNA!
IF RNA single helix strands JOIN improperly into a NEW double-helix DNA (via Guanine, Adenine, Cytosine & Thymine) it creates ERRORS (cancer is 1 possible bad one, mutations another etc.)
See NHEJ below.
dalek - have you taken any genetics coursework?
I have & got A's (as my science elective requirement during my CS degreework)!
1st of all, TONS of vaccines have used poisonous Graphene oxide (or dioxide) as ADJUVANTS over time.
Secondly: ELECTRON MICROSCOPY EXPERT Dr. Young SHOWS POISONOUS GRAPHENE IN VACCINES ALSO:
https://www.brighteon.com/9e58bf44-05e7-4b71-97e5-b243f6cf890c [brighteon.com]
&
https://www.brighteon.com/9fbd7735-b49d-4e31-a146-f67d7eb54d75 [brighteon.com]
GRAPHENE OXIDE's in Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson (Janssen) + AstraZeneca:
https://www.brighteon.com/6d8fcfd7-4811-4e64-90c9-bd5585b59ff5 [brighteon.com]
&
A major cause of myocarditis, clotting, CANCER MALIGNANCY etc.? That's right: GRAPHENE OXIDE.
Graphene Oxide Promotes Cancer Metastasis https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31877027/ [nih.gov]
An Israeli study PROVES that the NHEJ (non-homologous end joining) mechanism in your cells is DAMAGED by SPIKE PROTEINS in the death vax & IT IS LINKED TO CANCER per https://naturalnews.com/2021-11-02-covid-vaccines-inhibit-dna-repair-cause-cancer.html [naturalnews.com]
All FROM my +5 upmodded post on COVID killshots (which they HAVE proven to be on TONS of levels) https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=46034&page=1&cid=1197563#commentwrap [soylentnews.org]
YOU ATTACK ME FIRST? I annihilate you with FACTS that make you EAT YOUR WORDS you SMARMY little bitch!
PUBLICLY HUMILIATING YOU!
Fact is, ABOVE here in this post's the BS you state I quote above WHERE YOU ATTACKED ME 1st only to DESTROY YOURSELF for me - thank you, lol!
HOW IRONIC!
(Dalek "EXTERMINATED" not only by FACTS from experts in microscopy, but DALEK'S own WORDS he has to EAT, lol!)
NOW THE "ICING ON THE CAKE" EXPOSING YOU, sockpuppeteer UPMODDING YOURSELF obviously + downmod bombing scumbag - RIGHT FROM YOU once more:
* THANKS FOR SHOWING US YOUR "MODUS OPERANDI" SOCKPUPPETEER troll! Fakename & all for a FAKE like you!
APK
P.S.=> THIS? This was just "too, Too, TOO EASY - just '2ez'" & it always IS vs. hypocrites like you, fakename... apk