I'm looking for best recommendations (on SOL, or otherwise) for stories that have taken a real stab at a near-future post-scarcity society, or at least one on the way there. My take on this is a bit dark. I'm not convinced the "technology creates more jobs than it destroys" paradigm will continue to hold. But, I'd love to see how others who might see it differently have put their impressions into stories!
Suggestions?
I'm looking for best recommendations (on SOL, or otherwise) for stories that have taken a real stab at a near-future post-scarcity society, or at least one on the way there.
I have to ask what you mean by "post scarcity"?
Please don't take this as a rejection of your request, but clearly you have to mean something by "post scarcity" that is very different than how I would understand the term. It's difficult to make recommendations when you don't understand the ask.
As I understand the concept in economic terms, it would mean that literally everyone can have everything they could possibly want (yes, want, not need) at minimal cost. Everyone who wants a 300 foot super yacht gets to have one at little to no cost to them.
This would take something on the order of Star Trek replicator technology. Personally, I can't conceive of that as a near future thing.
As I understand the concept in economic terms, it would mean that literally everyone can have everything they could possibly want (yes, want, not need) at minimal cost. Everyone who wants a 300 foot super yacht gets to have one at little to no cost to them.
This would take something on the order of Star Trek replicator technology. Personally, I can't conceive of that as a near future thing.
Science Fiction virtual reality could solve that.
There are some Wuxia stories that cover the topic already.
Fair enough. Moving in that direction. I'm thinking of a near-future society that is at least moving in the direction of having most goods and services supplied with little need for human labor. The example of the impact of self-driving vehicles would be one step along that way. Self-publishing is, likely, another. Take similar trends several steps, or maybe more than several, into the future. Although Ready Player One didn't really delve into society much, it seemed to be a bit of a dystopian view of such a future. But, I'm looking for stories that are more explicit. Any ideas?
I'm not convinced the "technology creates more jobs than it destroys" paradigm will continue to hold.
I'm thinking of a near-future society that is at least moving in the direction of having most goods and services supplied with little need for human labor. The example of the impact of self-driving vehicles would be one step along that way.
The paradigm you cites has never held short term.
If you look back every new technology created at first social problems by setting free many people who needed the income.
Textile manufacturing in the modern era is an evolved form of the art and craft industries. Until the 18th and 19th centuries, the textile industry was a household work. It emphasized mechanization in the 18th and 19th centuries, and science and technology in the twentieth century.
The invention of the sewing machine brought ruin for many tailors. The first practical and widely used sewing machine was invented by Barthélemy Thimonnier and the factory was burned down, reportedly by workers fearful of losing their livelihood. (Thimonnier didn't sell his machines, he opened factories to produce clothing.)
The invention of chemical dyes ruined farmers, because plant dyestuffs produced less brillant colors by higher costs.
Horse drawn wagons couldn't compete with Railroads, sailing ships couldn't compete with steamers.
Every significant new technology created problems, the faster the changes, the severer the short time problems.
HM.
Agreed that has been the case in the past. But, as is suggested elsewhere in this thread, if the intellectual requirements for making a signifcant contribution are steadily going up (say, from truck driver to programmer), then there's going to be problems, even if people are staying the same or even improving slightly.
if the intellectual requirements for making a signifcant contribution are steadily going up (say, from truck driver to programmer)
Being a Truck driver is not the brain dead job you seem to think it is.
Absolutely not! Sorry if I left that impression. Focus, anticipation, probably tons of technical knowledge and skills. But, those may not result translate to other careers, that's all.
I can't remember if I put it in this thread, though I remember looking it up, but there are good reasons to believe that a variety of AI-based approaches could significantly eliminate a lot of "routine" legal work, perhaps sooner than self-driving vehicles will affect trucking. And the overwhelming majority of lawyers won't adapt well, either.
That's my biggest point. It is possible that this shift in how humans produce goods and services could be different than those that came before and result in perhaps scores of millions of "unnecessary" working age adults in advanced societies, perhaps even worse in undeveloped countries.
I find myself unpersuaded that "it's going to be fine." In fact, I would predict that this phenomenon is far more likely to have severe negative effects on human wellbeing than "global warming."
I find myself unpersuaded that "it's going to be fine." In fact, I would predict that this phenomenon is far more likely to have severe negative effects on human wellbeing than "global warming."
There isn't any need to wait for results, we already have them.
Institutional welfare is proof it's going to 86 human wellbeing.
The premise is well intentioned, but as they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Remove a person's ability to have pride in their work/life and the need for motivation, leaves mental zombies, who don't value human life in its wake.
I've seen this on the 'reservation and in the projects.'
Search for Manna by Marshall Brain. Starts out with computers running a fast food restaurant by giving the workers step by step instructions through a headset.
Then they started using it for other service jobs. 🙄
Then it got bad.
Lonny
"technology creates more jobs than it destroys"
I'm not convinced of that either, but even if it's true, the jobs it creates are going to be beyond the ability of the average person. Note that the average IQ is declining.
Once machines/robots are able to do everything necessary to provide food, shelter, etc. the few elite who have the knowledge to control those machines are quite likely to decide that there is really no need to keep all those useless people alive.
Dystopia is inevitable, me thinks.
Might possibly clone a few of the good looking ones to keep around for fun.
the few elite who have the knowledge to control those machines are quite likely to decide that there is really no need to keep all those useless people alive.
Might possibly clone a few of the good looking ones to keep around for fun.
I've got a dystopian story framework that is similar to your thoughts. It's a possibility.
Note that the average IQ is declining.
Just recently? The Flynn effect was based on observations of riding IQ scores for decades.
Yes
IQ levels are falling, and have been for decades, according to a new study.
The paper, co-authored by Bernt Bratsberg and Ole Rogeberg of the Ragnar Frisch Centre for Economic Research in Oslo, Norway, looked at the IQ test results of more than 730,000 Norwegian men.
The men had all reported for national service between 1970 and 2009, for which a mandatory IQ test takes place.
Analysis showed that the men born in 1962 had higher scores than those born in 1991.
Those born in 1991 scored five points lower than those born in 1975, and three points lower than those born in 1962.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/06/iq-scores-have-been-falling-for-decades-new-study-finds/
Read the linked article, it has more details.
Those born in 1991 scored five points lower than those born in 1975, and three points lower than those born in 1962.
Is that right? IQ increased by two points from 1962 to 1975?
AJ
Yes, Apparently it peaked for people born in the mid 1970's, despite that being the disco era! - and it's been "all downhill since".
A converging body of evidence calls attention to a consistent decline in basic cognitive abilities and 'mental speed,' particularly in young males, beginning in the mid-to-late 1990s.
Norway: A 2004 study reviewed "general ability" (which included measures of language and math) in male conscripts tested from the mid-1950s to 2002. Following substantial gains over the first three decades, the gain rate began decreasing and then came to "a complete stop from the mid-1990s."
United Kingdom: In a British study published in 2009, the investigators compared test results for 13- and 14-year-olds in 2006-2007 with data collected from the same age group in 1976. The researchers discovered a "narrowing" in the young people's range of performance, with "far fewer go[ing] on to develop the interpretative and evaluative level of thinking characteristic of formal operations".
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/childrens-health/declining-iq-a-race-to-the-bottom/
Of particular interest to writers is this:
In addition to this decline in the average level of intelligence, which is even disputed, there is also the impoverishment of language. Numerous studies show a narrowing of the lexical field and an impoverishment of the language. It is not only a question of the decrease in the vocabulary used, but also of the subtleties of the language that allow for the elaboration and formulation of complex thought.
History is rich in examples and there are many writings, from Georges Orwell in 1984 to Ray Bradbury in Fahrenheit 451, which have recounted how dictatorships of all persuasions impeded thought by reducing and twisting the number and meaning of words. There is no critical thinking without thinking. And there is no thought without words.
the few elite who have the knowledge to control those machines are quite likely to decide that there is really no need to keep all those useless people alive.
Maybe, but the stupid will sit in government positions and may force them into slavery. You don't need the knowledge, it's sufficient to have the power to punish the few that know how it all works whenever something breaks down or doesn't work as you wish.
HM.
Maybe, but the stupid will sit in government positions and may force them into slavery. You don't need the knowledge, it's sufficient to have the power to punish the few that know how it all works whenever something breaks down or doesn't work as you wish.
The people who control the technology will be the government. Look at media, especially social media today, and tell me that they aren't very close to
controlling what people think. It's only a small step from there to controlling who gets a chance to run for office and who wins. Don't think the winner will be allowed to make his or her own decisions.
And, this is the issue. If technology ("capital" in economic terms) becomes more important, so do those who control it. When ever-larger portions of the populace can't contribute to production sufficiently to earn a living, then what?
And, this is the issue. If technology ("capital" in economic terms) becomes more important, so do those who control it. When ever-larger portions of the populace can't contribute to production sufficiently to earn a living, then what?
Crime.
Crime.
Yes, and...?
What about those who don't want to see themselves as criminals? Who want to feel that they are, in some way, living a life they chose without harming others? Is it possible that personal service becomes a "commodity" valued by those with resources? And how broadly might personal services be construed without social disapproval?
Already done. Trump was a reality TV star, Trudeau is an actor / high school arts teacher, Boris Johnson is an actor who can still orate Greek plays in the original, the President of the Ukraine is a stand up comic whose schtick including playing the piano with his penis. Biden has dementia.
Serious, effective people need not apply.
Look at media, especially social media today, and tell me that they aren't very close to controlling what people think.
Critical thinking is no longer encouraged in higher education. Conformance to a consensus is.
Therein is the true danger.
Critical thinking is no longer encouraged in higher education. Conformance to a consensus is.
Therein is the true danger.
This, exactly this. It's sad to see how little essential-real-life-usable knowledge is no longer taught in school.
It's sad to see how little essential-real-life-usable knowledge is no longer taught in school.
I don't understand. Do you wish more real-life-usable knowledge to be taught in school or less?
AS
I don't understand. Do you wish more real-life-usable knowledge to be taught in school or less?
Yep, I missed the double negative. Of course more real-life-usable knowledge is needed instead of the useless fluff.
Of course more real-life-usable knowledge is needed instead of the useless fluff.
Are you sure about that? Useless fluff gets you lots of fame and money from social media and reality TV.
AJ
Useless fluff gets you lots of fame and money from social media and reality TV.
Which is worth nothing except for the ego's of some celebrities and to give lunatics a place to sprout their bile. Social media could have been a great thing if it was only used for closed groups of family and friends.
Note that the average IQ is declining
"I see a lot of incredibly stupid comments on social media and also hear them in person on occasion. It made me wonder if people are becoming less intelligent or if people have always been this ignorant, they just now have more avenues to showcase their stupidity because of the internet and myriad social channels.
While it's probably a combination of the two, studies confirm that IQ levels are in fact dropping. It seems counterintuitive. Because of the internet, we now have more information at our fingertips than ever before. Maybe people feel that because so much information is readily available, they don't need to learn or retain as much.
For decades, people were getting smarter, as measured by their IQ level. This was known as the Flynn effect. It was named after the researcher who discovered that average IQ scores had been rising about three points per decade since World War II. That all changed with people now in their 40s.
The drop in IQ is generally thought to have begun with those born in the mid-70s and has not reversed itself. Research shows the IQ scores of young people are now dropping by seven points every generation. Seven points is a lot, especially when the average IQ score in the United States is 98, according to World Population Review. Singapore and Hong Kong have the highest scores at 108.
An analysis of about 730,000 IQ tests by researchers in Norway a couple years ago is one study that documented the lowering of intelligence levels. Other studies have shown similar results.
Scientists point the finger, in part, at the difference in the way math and languages are taught in schools. Other possible culprits include poorer education systems, ubiquitous technologies that consume peoples' attention, and a change in diets and nutrition — people are eating less fish, and fish makes people smarter. One study found that kids who eat fish at least once a week scored 4.8 points higher on IQ tests.
Adding to the problem of dropping intelligence levels is the fact that people who are not very smart actually think they are. We all know people who fit this description. Known as the Dunning-Kruger effect, named after the psychologists who documented it, in scientific speak it's a cognitive bias that causes people to overestimate their knowledge or ability.
This is why, for example, people who aren't good in math think they are. By contrast, people who do have advanced math skills say they're not good in math. That's because the more people know, the more they realize how much there is to learn.
It can be argued that IQ scores are not a predictor of success or happiness in life, and therefore not truly meaningful. However, on a broad scale, the average IQ score of a country's population has been linked to the country's economic growth and innovation, so intellect does have a value.
It's possible that the studies showing lower IQ scores are flawed because they used too small of a test pool or that IQ tests haven't been updated to measure people's current intelligence. But I think the studies are reflecting the sad reality that our collective intellect is dropping.
Brett Martin is a community columnist who's been a Shakopee resident for over 15 years."
Measuring intelligence only by mathematical ability or rote knowledge is a mistake imo.
The ability to learn, and process what knowledge a person has is a better judge of intelligence.
Measuring intelligence only by mathematical ability or rote knowledge is a mistake imo.
The ability to learn, and process what knowledge a person has is a better judge of intelligence.
No dispute there, but the decline exists, no matter how it's measured:
In addition to this decline in the average level of intelligence, which is even disputed, there is also the impoverishment of language. Numerous studies show a narrowing of the lexical field and an impoverishment of the language. It is not only a question of the decrease in the vocabulary used, but also of the subtleties of the language that allow for the elaboration and formulation of complex thought.
(emphasis mine)
I don't disagree with the decline. I just recently sat for a P.E. exam.
Compared to what I took in the late 70's, It's been dumbed down severely.
I have no intention of leaving retirement, but I did want to benchmark current standards. Their hurt feelings from failing must be more of a problem than collapsing buildings or bridges.
Their hurt feelings from failing must be more of a problem than collapsing buildings or bridges.
Haven't you been paying attention? There is no greater catastrophe than hurting a snowflake's feelings.
The 'feminist bridge' in Florida is a prime example of that. lots of promotion of women and diversity in engineering until it collapsed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_International_University_pedestrian_bridge_collapse
The 'feminist bridge' in Florida is a prime example of that. lots of promotion of women and diversity in engineering until it collapsed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_International_University_pedestrian_bridge_collapse
A lot of that has subsequently been buried. Even some of the early reporting has been scrubbed. Several links I had saved are now dead ends.
Fortunately I printed off several of them at the time I read them.
Note that the average IQ is declining
It was my understanding that the average IQ, by definition, is always 100.
It was my understanding that the average IQ, by definition, is always 100.
No, that would be the median IQ.
It was my understanding that the average IQ, by definition, is always 100.
But the 100s in some decades are more equal than others ;-)
AJ
It's not perfectly post-scarcity, but Al Steiner's A Perfect World is getting there, at least the post-Martian Revolution parts of the story.
Maybe I should try to read it again. From what I could tell, it seems to ask for not only a belief in post-scarcity, but also a fundamental change in human nature. If so, not helpful for my pondering. Am I wrong?
There is an old SF book - A For Anything, by Damon Knight. The premise is that multiple copies of a device, called a gizmo, appear throughout the world. The gizmos can create exact copies of anything (including people), thus ending scarcity. As I recall, about the first half of the book is ok, and then it kind of falls apart. It's available for sale as an ebook at the usual sources.
There is an old SF book - A For Anything, by Damon Knight. The premise is that multiple copies of a device, called a gizmo, appear throughout the world. The gizmos can create exact copies of anything (including people), thus ending scarcity.
Can a gizmo copy itself?
It's probably 40 years since I read it, so I don't remember. Maybe it can. If you read the story you might find out.
Business as Usual During Alterations by Ralph Williams is the original sci-fi work on that, from the 1940s. Replicators appear all over the planet. they can make new replicators. its been used as an economics class think piece for decades. Ideas covered:
Money is now worthless, credit accounts are going to be the only means of paying for transactions (Blockchain in paleo form?).
Floor stock & warehousing is obsolete when you only need one sample and can make instant copies for immediate delivery. (Print on Demand).
Duplicating will be a violation of copyright & patents, but screw that its run with the tide and work it out later (Napster, YouTube, etc).
when there is no scarcity then possession of one off, hand made works will be a sign of affluence (Etsy & other art platforms). its a fun read and should be out of copyright, so have a search on the web for a copy.
Business as Usual During Alterations
Thanks, hadn't read that before. Must have influenced Knight's A For Anything.
Thanks! I'll look for it!
Would the gradual, then faster and faster pace of the current change process make the social dynamics different?
If I am reading you correctly, this fits your criteria
https://storiesonline.net/s/15078/paradise-found
