[15] [The following is reprinted from the Volume 4 number 4 issue
of the Amateur Computerist.]

     The Impact of the Computer on Society: Two Views The Future
                                             Trond Andresen
                                             ta@itk.unit.no

If I should discuss "the future", I would take, not a 10-20 year
perspective, but a 200 year perspective. I would ask myself: What
is the real LONG RANGE trend in the economy, and what sort of
real LONG RANGE target is made possible by that? Having decided
on a 200 year perspective, I would use that projection as a
premise for the course I would want society to follow in the more
near future (0-10 years).

What then is the fundamental trend in the economy, seen from the
perspective of 200 years? The answer is of course trivial: An
immense increase in productivity. And I will say: We have just
seen the start of this, what with automated manufacturing,
process control, expert systems, and in the not-so-near-future,
Artificial Intelligence. I disagree with environmentalists saying
that increased productivity is impossible because of
environmental constraints. I agree with their mental alarm about
the constraints, but I think that automation, robots, and so on
will make us a better society for all, at the same time REDUCING
the strain on the environment.

Now comes the next point, which is not trivial at all: What sort
of society should we strive for in the light of the enormous
technological potential that a lot of us agree on?

Here is my scenario: A society where a small percentage of the
population oversees automatic processes in administration,
manufacturing and commerce. The industry will be running nearly
without human work-hours. So what do the other 95% do? Before I
answer that question, some thoughts about "the meaning of life".
Why do we need industry? Is it an end in itself? (Listening to
politicians and industrialists in the media, one is led to
believe that.)

In my view, industry is only a means TO GIVE PEOPLE MORE TIME FOR
WHAT THEY REALLY WOULD LIKE TO DO. The remaining 95% of the
workforce in my future society would have the following jobs:

- Kindergarten teachers and nurses, 2 adults per 5 children.
- Teachers, in classes with less than 10 children in each class.
- Sailplane instructors, scuba-diving instructors, football
  trainers.
- Teaching kids mountain-climbing 
- Rearing horses. 
- Drama instructors, singing instructors, actors, singers,
  musicians, painters, etc. - Health personnel, one doctor per 50
  persons. Free hospitalization for everybody. 
- Researchers in anything from flowers to chess to astronomy to 
  historical masks of the South American Indians. A very big part 
  of the population in university-level education and research
  ecologically sound agriculture and animal husbandry, which, by
  the way, may be MORE labor-intensive than today's 
  industrialized attack on the environment. 
- Ecological managing and rebuilding of the world. Reforestation 
  is one important example.

OK, you can see where I'm going. And I would also stress:
Mandatory work-hours in this society are in the range of 2 - 4
hours, if they are mandatory at all. But people will be on the
job a lot more, because they will LIKE what they are doing. No
problem.

This far future scenario has the following consequences for
shorter-term policies:

- Automation is a good thing.  
- Higher wages which lead to more automation is a good thing.  
- Shorter work hours accompanied by job-sharing is a good thing.  
- Less people in industry and more people in education/health care/culture
  is a good thing.
- More people employed taking care of other people - and this cannot and
  should not be "automatized" - is a good thing.

In countries with publicly financed health care and education,
like my own country, this means the public sector taking a BIGGER
piece of the GNP. This, in my view, is a sign of an advanced
society, and I therefore find the persistent wailing from
industry, finance and the political right against growth in the
public sector totally reactionary and lacking any long term
perspective. 
----------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Reprinted from the Amateur Computerist Vol 12 No 1, Winter 2003/2004
The whole issue or a subscription is available for free via email.
Send a request to jrh@ais.org  or see  http://www.ais.org/~jrh/acn/
----------------------------------------------------------------------