In the study the people read for four hours before sleeping. I love reading as much as anybody, but is this a realistic scenario? I'd be more interested to see the sleep disruption from 30 minutes to an hour of reading on light-emitting screens before sleeping.
Who wants jobs?
Seriously, who wants to commute 5 days a week and work 8+ hours a day doing something they'd rather not?
Let AI take all the jobs it can. As it does so, shorten the work week, provide more benefits to the people, and before long we're living in a utopia where more time is ours to work on our hobbies and spend time with our families and friends. Of course, we'd have to prevent private industry from owning all the robots and AI, less they become the de facto new government.
My thoughts on this is that an arrangement could be made where private industry has to pay a monthly fee to the government - what amounts to a small salary - which goes towards benefits/income to the masses. Private industry gets work done through AI and robots at less than what it would cost to employ someone, and that money goes to the benefit of the people.
Of course, it's more complicated than that, and that's just one possible scenario that could work. But the point is - the goal isn't more jobs, but a better life.
From a life of nerdiness and people-watching, I have learned this:
Every superiority complex has an inferiority complex beneath it.
Arrogance is the expression of a superiority complex. It's a coping mechanism, to preserve your self-worth when you feel less than others in some way. Generally, with nerds, this inferiority complex is social. It's more difficult for most of us, and growing up you see evidence of that failing every day in school, while we huddle together with other socially-awkward nerds. But feeling inferior sucks, so we take what we're naturally good at - coding, reasoning, some technical specialty, and judge others against that, and it doesn't hurt so much. We reject them before they can reject us.
At their base, the two complexes are more alike than not. Feeling superior and inferior both separate us from others, and it's that social connection that we miss. Nerds want to be liked and accepted just like anyone else. We're social creatures.
My thoughts are that there is no superiority complex without an inferiority complex beneath it. I myself experienced this in my teens. Superiority compensates for the feeling of inferiority. They are both divisive in the same way - separating a person from others. When a joke shows a stupid person, you can feel "humor" because it reveals the gap in the hidden assumption that you are inferior. This is a sad kind of humor because it reinforces the divisiveness of your beliefs. It's the same kind of hollow humor that a bully feels when putting someone down. (insert Nelson's "HA-hah")
In the "funniest joke", there is a clash of perspectives in which the hunter is shown to be a dunderhead. It's universally funny because it's unexpected, and additionally funny to Americans because of the superiority aspect of it.
The European preference for off-beat, surreal humor shows an appreciation of creativity, and is a much more self-assured sense of humor. Like two friends making up an increasingly bizarrely hilarious situation, each adding humorous elements to it - it's a humor that brings people together.
My commute and everyday errands don't even require highway travel, so a max speed of 45 MPH would be sufficient.
It seems that the solution to this would be communal ownership of the androids and machinery of industry. The profits from such automation would go to fund government programs and perhaps at some point could eliminate taxes. Or the goods could be priced at cost, meaning cheap living expenses. People would be free to pursue arts, music, science, research, any sort of thing they're interested in. That's the ideal, at least. We're notoriously good at screwing things up.
That's so 'Oughts.'
I prefer the term "Naughties", which I heard from Adam Savage on Mythbusters.
That it's a potent neurotoxin is well known. That's why the UN is considering a ban. For the sake of argument let's say an arbitrary small amount of mercury exposure does damage to
We know it's dangerous, and we're clever enough to find ways around using it in mass-produced consumer goods, so why not do it?
There's a lot of crazy people in the world. Every little thing we can do to remove neurotoxins from the environment is a good step.
Next: do the same thing with lead. I'm sick of seeing it in all my christmas light plastics.
Enlightenment is another example, in the case of ascetics who forgo material wealth entirely.
So it can be done.
Perhaps they should join the armed forces?
Nuclear power brings with it the potential for nuclear disasters, makes it possible to build nuclear weapons, and creates nuclear waste which is getting buried all over the place and will take eons to become safe again. Radioactive material poisons our world, and I'd be glad to see an end to its production.
Worst case scenario - energy needs overreach energy production and the cost rises, leading to new generations of low-power electronics, more efficient buildings, and a scramble for more efficient renewable energy technologies. THAT sounds like going in the right direction.