It would probably require 15-20 years if automation does reach the scale to have macro-level effects on employment. By that time China's economy will be 2x-3x bigger than it is now with GDP per capita around 30k USD. China would essentially be a developed country at that point.
It's easy to assume and take for granted that the US will create all the automation technology. However, I think it's more probable that China will move up the value chain and be the ones to own and develop these technologies, especially in manufacturing as China already has a super strong manufacturing ecosystem and talent (think Silicon Valley and Software).
If China owns the technology, the wealth would be in China so less will be available to spread around for basic income in developed countries like the US.
Completely agree with you on the author being an arrogant hipster elitist. I was surprised this article was upvoted onto the front page.
Cherry picking the major technology achievements of a span of 100 years and comparing it against current startups in Silicon Valley is simply ridiculous.
> By accepting the app, Apple is implicitly allowing the use case of using the phone as a scale.
This may be a bigger issue than just concern that customers might ruin their screens (and blame Apple.)
Scales (for commercial use) are regulated, and devices marketed as scales but intended for only non-commercial use are explicitly labeled "not for us in trade"; Apple probably doesn't want to be seen as marketing or endorsing the iPhone as a scale, even implicitly.
That plus the fact that the sensor is probably not reliably calibrated between phones and may degrade with age. Apple doesn't want to deal with complaints about how their phone is doing a crummy job at weighing things.
The main point is missing the forest for the trees. The main benefit of self-driving cars is improving efficiency and productivity. It is productivity that makes us all much richer.
Which business model self-driving taxi operators go by is pretty irrelevant; the free market will settle on the best way. The productivity increases will benefits the entire society should be the most important part of any analysis.
But the article is about self-driving taxis. There is little productivity gain there for the users, since they are already free to spend their time in the car working or doing whatever they like, driver or no driver. Likewise, self-driving cars won't make everyone richer, taxi drivers will definitely be on the losing side.
> It is productivity that makes us all much richer.
It is productivity that makes the owners of the productive assets richer, not "us all" (whether that somehow reaches others is dependent on factors other than the productivity boost itself.)
Nope even if you don't own assets you still benefit from increased productivity. The average person don't own airliners, but still benefit from cheap air fare tickets.
With a free market and self-driving taxis, the price of transportation will collapse which will benefit everyone. The wealth that used to be spent on transportation can be used to by other goods, which will make everyone richer.
This is incorrect. In order for the asset owner to gain from an increase in productivity they to interact with customers, workers and suppliers who in turn interact with others. This ends up sharing much if not most or even all of the gain with others. You are correct that many factors will determine how the gain gets allocated but only in exceptional circumstances does the owner keep all the gain.
When you factor in the safety features of self-driving cars, the automated traffic management/reduction in the number of private cars, and the ability of less-well-off people to get to work in less time and make it home to see their families... seems to benefit everyone.
If we can reduce the cost of transportation (even through subsidies) for the poorest, that opens up opportunities.
It's easy to assume and take for granted that the US will create all the automation technology. However, I think it's more probable that China will move up the value chain and be the ones to own and develop these technologies, especially in manufacturing as China already has a super strong manufacturing ecosystem and talent (think Silicon Valley and Software).
If China owns the technology, the wealth would be in China so less will be available to spread around for basic income in developed countries like the US.