"If each human worker has a personal crew of agents which helps them produce more work, economic abundance could follow..." Even if we imagined that we're anywhere near technically capable of doing thing, this is an absolutely preposterous thing to suggest How tf are broke humans under capitalism supposed to have apersonal crew of agents Absent massive changes to our economy and an abandonment of capitalism literally all this would plausibly do is further concentrate all the wealth into the hands of the precious few who control everything. It's also obviously not seriously this person's proposition because if it was then what VC in their right mind would fund something that would render capital irrelevant ? All they care about is an exit and how exactly is that supposed to happen when you've achieved post-scarcity ?

I worry also that people vastly underestimate how much Rs dislike/hate Hillary

It's not hard to imagine Donnie v Hillary where people get out to vote against Hillary (and down-ticket candidates) while the ones who would have voted for Bernie stay home or if they do get out, they don't vote for her.

Way too many people are way too certain that there is no way Donnie will have a chance, and I fear they're shooting themselves, the country, and the world in the foot because of that.

Not to say that real ones don't exist, but I've long been skeptical about the super-misogynistic Bernie Bros and (without getting overly conspiratorial) they've just felt false-flag to me.

Reading this makes me wonder if I wasn't just being silly thinking that.

Regardless of that and whether or not it has anything to do with the story, I follow a few pro-Clinton people who seem to have an almost clinical compulsion to attacking Bernie (ironically typically about how negative he and his supporters are)

Just adding another "me too".

I'd agree with you but those were both fixed in Java 5.

About the only thing I'm aware of that Java is really missing relative to C# is LINQ (not that that's by any means a small thing)

Maybe you're not from the US but here we haven't paid people in anything directly transferable for gold (or anything else in particular) since 1971

What you're suggesting is essentially what I'm saying and what we do now - people get paid for the value of their work. The exchange rate between US dollars (or Euros or Yen) and work units is just your hourly rate (or your effective hourly rate based on your salary).

There is really no reasonable way to exchange units of labor other than something on the spectrum that lies between the value of what your labor produces and directly converting between quantifiable amounts of work (be it time or energy expended or something similar). What we do now is somewhere in between and since you're not arguing that we should switch to the extreme of exchanging effort for effort, we're already there (at least to a first approximation).

Not an intentional misunderstanding at all.

If you're basing currency on work units then how can you assign different values to your time and my time? If you assign different values to our times then you're just relabeling currency as "work units" and the process for assigning value to them is interchangeable with the process for determining our hourly rates.

Not exactly graduate level economics.

The same thought occurred to me and I really hope that's the case. I guess that time will tell.

So if I work for a thousand hours alphabetizing papers and you work for an hour writing a script that eliminates the need for my job, I should be paid 1000x more than you?

Seems like a great plan.