Stuff You Like: Advantageous

Ursa talks Snake People/Millennials, the inevitable revolution where robots take all our jobs, and a movie about women in a quiet, dystopian future where everything done got screwed up.

About Sursum Ursa

Ursa presents Stuff You Like, where fangirls + analysis + awesome examples of media = good times for all.

7 comments

  1. Ha! I’m a programmer — more robots means more jobs for me. And a chance to sneak n a patch or two and slowly gain world domination!
    Although I think internet reviewers would be hard to repoace with robots. Well played, Ursa. Well played.

  2. Have you seen “Humans”? It addresses many of the same issues of automation and alienation (teen daughter goes on a rant about how useless it is for her to do anything, because by the time she’s studied enough, they’ll be a robot who could do it better). It kind of loses is way by the end of the Season, but it seems like the sort of thing you’d like (or maybe you have it as episode 200 of SYL!).

  3. I don’t like being a Millennial. Ugh. -_- Yeah, since I’m in my last quarter of college, I am very nervous about not getting a job. I may check this out… maybe.

  4. I feel like this film could be a story cut from the film Robot Stories. I’ll have to watch the whole thing to be certain.

  5. Sadly it probably will look like this still considering the way things are going now. Like I’m sure you’ve heard about what is going on with disability benefits and how many people are being told they need to get jobs and then die really quick after. I think the body count is around 4,000 people now? As someone who is too sick to work and out of treatment to try I am not very hopeful for the future where people think I actually -deserve- to live. I’ve been told otherwise to my face before. Useless cripples aren’t even worth as much as a dog.

  6. Honestly, this film seems like a “STOP REPRODUCING, SERIOUSLY, STOP IT!” warning. And it should be. There’s a lot of job pools that are being shrunk to the point of being obsolete (along with entry level jobs that are essential for people just starting out), that honestly having more than one child is an excess. Hell, having ONE kid per couple is an excess considering ridiculous overpopulation levels.

    People are still in the mentality of “we need to reproduce kids because that’s what we should do” when in reality we need LESS kids and people in general. Years before, overpopulation was controlled by natural disasters, disease, famine, or war. Nowadays, we’ve conquered or found ways of mostly surviving/evading these problems, so we have too many people. We don’t live in an era where the more kids you have the better off you are since they can divide up the back-breaking work and might die of infant mortality disease/famine. We live in an era where the LESS children we have, the better since robots/software do backbreaking jobs and less people means less resources are used and there’s not a 1-10 job to people ratio (and I think I’m being generous here).

    I love this review and will check it out :)!!! But I also think that there’s a difference between Katniss and Gwen (not just in attitude… although Katniss DOES have a “I and mine will survive, the rest can go hang” attitude it’s just that she’s been roped into a revolution by accident/trying to survive). Katniss said in the first book/movie that she DOESN’T want to bring children into a world like Panem and condemn them to a life of constant oppression and hunger and danger. Gwen chose to have Jules, so she has to take responsibility for the life she condemned to this crappy world, that means working WITH the institution.

  7. Ah, the automation issue. As productivity raises, less and less people are needed to do the same thing, and then some. A terrible perspective for the future of people… of the nineteenth century. Yeah, it’s actually a two centuries old issue… No need to imagine a worrying future, we can simply look at the past. And you know what? We solved it. No really. Around a century and a half ago we solved that issue we’re now terrified of for some reason. It wasn’t even that hard: working time reduction. Boom. Done. Dystopia avoided.
    Oh, it may not be enough ultimately, when work time get so low we can’t actually reduce it any further, but frankly, we’re not anywhere close to that.

    And while I’m at it, I will also answer Ume just above: overpopulation may be an issue, but not on the unemployment front. You seem to think their is a fixed amount of jobs (or at least a relatively rigid amount), while it’s actually relative to population size. The more people they are, the more work there is to be done, the more job there is. Population level is irrelevant to unemployment, though population changes do affect unemployment… in the opposite way you seem to think it does. A growing population create more jobs, as new demands and opportunities arise, the opposite happens when population decrease.
    Actually, historically one of the main factor of economic growth has been population growth (one of the many reasons why economic growth is a questionable tool).
    That doesn’t mean overpopulation isn’t an issue, but it is because of limited resources on Earth, not because of some “job to people ratio”.

Leave a Reply