Objectively intelligent.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Totally. But I think Sebby's argument is that they create a small number of good jobs, relatively, and possibly a large number of crappy jobs (maybe not Google, but Amazon warehouse workers and Uber drivers), and that they eliminate a lot more jobs that are better than the crappy jobs the bring.

To take Google, for example, Sebby is also missing that there are benefits to targeted advertising. If you run a B&B in a small town, Google ads are a much better way to reach people who might want your services than buying traditional broadcast or print ads. The reason why Google is so dominant is that its ads perform so well. If newspaper ads were nearly as good, newspapers wouldn't be going out of business left and right.

I just would like to understand how the rise of e-information cost jobs. To say Amazon created jobs, but then brought in robots to eliminate them, that isn't so clear to me.