Sort of, says Andrew McAffee, but leaves us wanting more reasons or examples about why it’s not as bad as it looks.

Points:

  • Wrong question: Is technology replacing workers?
  • Projected demand for workers is less than projected growth of available workers.
  • Technology will continue to increase in its ability to take over functions traditionally associated with uniquely human skills.
  • Even generalists and creatives may be at risk.
  • Future economy won’t need that many human workers.
  • We can still be optimistic about utopian, not dystopian, futures. Why?
  • Religion, empire, and intellect haven’t mattered much. Technology development has been the engine of social change, a repeat of Kurzweil’s singularity idea.
  • Technology is benefiting the bottom of the economic pyramid. Technology therefore has the potential to reduce poverty, misery, and drudgery even more significantly in the future.
  • Technology will also lead to a much smaller ecological footprint.
  • Because technology is taking our jobs today, we will be free to do new things tomorrow.