I don't see any compelling reasons that the next 1000 years will even have the social structures that largely defined the previous 1000. This is because production has never been completely automated in history. Humans have always had to play a direct role in production, so society has always had to structure itself in a way that is conducive to maintaining at least subsistence levels of it.
I think the next 1000 years of society/social relations between people will be more directly defined by human nature itself rather than actual material conditions, because some of the major constraints on how society can function will be lifted.
I would argue that production right now is "functionally" completely automated, when compared to 1000 years ago.
A single typical center-pivot irrigated field has an area of about 125 acres. For most crops, this can be planted, fertilized, and harvested by a single person driving a specialized, mostly autonomous machine. A single family can effectively farm dozens of such fields with the right equipment, totaling thousands of acres.
1000 years ago, the average family farmed about 12.5 acres each and had time for little else.
> I would argue that production right now is "functionally" completely automated
Sorry, but that couldn't be further from the truth. Humans work significantly more today than compared to 1000 years ago. Most humans don't even have cushy office jobs on this planet, they labor in factories, fields, mines, forests, farms, etc... so "functionally" it's about the worst that it has ever been. Maybe the work looks different, but it's still work.
Among things that humans were producing 1000 years ago, if you look at the quantity of output per unit of human effort input, it is many orders of magnitude larger. Food, textiles, lumber, mining...all of these things are so mechanized and automated these days, that doing things the "old" way has become a "hobby" that some people do for enjoyment. In terms of a means of production, the effort of a single human is no longer relevant.
Yes, we have come up with new jobs to be done as the old ones are automated away. I think we will continue to do so.
Yes, capital (machinery, raw materials) does make up a much greater proportion of the over value added to items as compared to labor, but it's still not automated enough to let go of the requirement of human labor, not anywhere in the world. You can only say that it's fully automated when no more people are involved meaningfully in the process of production.
Ergo, it is not "functionally fully automated", because humans still work.
> Yes, we have come up with new jobs to be done as the old ones are automated away. I think we will continue to do so.
There is no basis for this. We're already struggling to find meaningful, productive employment for many people as a society. This is the same as "it will be X in the future because it was always X in the past".
> Having to hire a photographer seems like a bigger disadvantage than just lowering your standards: it costs money.
The opportunity cost of entering a relationship with someone lower in your ranking system is to forego a relationship with someone higher in that system down the line. It makes sense to err on the side of picky if there's a tangible 'gain' to it, purely strategically speaking.
My first thought. I’m surprised it’s not everyone’s first thought. Everyone in the bay that I know uses that for parties. Clearly every tech company is aware off the ubiquity of that app at least
Great point! I hope all those Americans who can't afford basic necessities in this so-called 'developed country' can take solace in the existence of Chinese censorship. Now they can even take solace in the expansion of American censorship!
In the end, what was the real revolutionary propaganda that the American establishment is afraid of? True cost of living statistics.
Actually I think you missed the point. The point wasn't that Americans can talk about anything we want; it's that the Chinese can't talk about the "bad" things that have happened in their country, and many (most?) don't even know about it. If you log into Rednote and ask "What happened on June 4th," you're going to get banned by Chinese censors.
Whereas most Americans know that health insurance is some babyback bullshit that might have worked at one time but doesn't work anymore; and that cost of living is too high in certain cities. The fact that we're sitting here typing at each other about it is proof positive.
> The point wasn't that Americans can talk about anything we want
Did you even read my comment?
> it's that the Chinese can't talk about the "bad" things that have happened in their country
Wrong / highly misleading. Do you really think a country of 1.4 billion people can raise themselves out of poverty and overall dramatically raise the living standards for the masses without having a government that listens to the concerns of the people all across the country?
> If you log into Rednote and ask "What happened on June 4th," you're going to get banned by Chinese censors
I bet you the entire GDP of Canada that you don't know "what happened on June 4th".
What you are describing here, anti-establishment propaganda, is precisely the reasoning cited for the TikTok ban to begin with, and exactly the reason China has their firewall. So... uh... yeah?
Also VPN's are widely used in China so it really doesn't support your claim.
> Whereas most Americans know that health insurance is some babyback bullshit that might have worked at one time but doesn't work anymore; and that cost of living is too high in certain cities
Exactly! This proves how structurally powerless American freedom of speech is to enact real change. How is it that there were able to secure social services and unprecedented poverty reduction, or even had the political desire to?
> The fact that we're sitting here typing at each other about it is proof positive.
This proves precisely zero things. This isn't even related to anything you said.
"The fact that we're discussing how broken healthcare is proves everything is fine!"
There's plenty more evidence out there that answers your other questions. That's just to refute the main concept of a 'fish in a barrel' style massacre that's been fed to us. Media also don't tell you that the protests were largely due to economic inequality and corruption that came as a direct, predicted result of economic liberalization from Deng. Consider also that the masses were literally JUST mobilized to seek out capitalism and destroy it violently during the cultural revolution when suddenly the elites in their society opened up to capitalism and even participated. They also don't tell you about the soldiers who were burned alive or shot by protesters, prior to any gunfire. Of a million there, between 300-600 protesters and plenty of soldiers too, wheras the media pushes the narrative that thousands were slaughtered like fish in a barrel in the middle of the square. Overall a tragic event and why social stability is so important, but it's not the "spirit of an oppressed people" that we're always told it is, they're just building the pretext for a "war of liberation" or other hostilities.
This is active propaganda. You think the Gov spends billions on propaganda overseas and they make no effort internally? I mean think about it for a moment.
> The latter makes Google and Apple insane amounts of money though so of course they're not going to do anything about them unless their hand is forced.
Similarly, they avoid drawing attention to their shenanigans by keeping the vibe clean
