A Quote by Margaret Thatcher

There might be new technology, but technological progress itself was nothing new - and over the years it had not destroyed jobs, but created them. — © Margaret Thatcher
There might be new technology, but technological progress itself was nothing new - and over the years it had not destroyed jobs, but created them.
When the industrial revolution happened there was the Luddistic movement, and there was a fear that machinery would replace all the labor. Whenever we had a technological revolution we had this fear. So if you look backwards, these fears were not justified, and I think they were driven by our very human inability to visualize what new jobs will be created by this new technology.
In the past, we've always come up with new jobs for humans to do and so it's always benefitted us, technological progress, but now we're not really creating enough new jobs to replace the jobs that are being automated.
We cannot escape that Hollywood is in the middle of a wave of technological change. The current angst over all the implications of new entertainment technology is nothing new.
You can't just stop technological progress. Even if one country stops researching artificial intelligence, some other countries will continue to do it. The real question is what to do with the technology. You can use exactly the same technology for very different social and political purposes. So I think people shouldn't be focused on the question of how to stop technological progress because this is impossible. Instead the question should be what kind of usage to make of the new technology. And here we still have quite a lot of power to influence the direction it's taking.
Every time you think all the technology that had been created already, all you have to do is look around and then there's someone new who's born with a new idea.
We might expect intelligent life and technological communities to have emerged in the universe billions of years ago. Given that human society is only a few thousand years old, and that human technological society is mere centuries old, the nature of a community with millions or even billions of years of technological and social progress cannot even be imagined. ... What would we make of a billion-year-old technological community?
New investments in cyber security and the modernization of our military will spur substantial new job creation in the private sector and help create the jobs and technologies of tomorrow. It's what we have to do. America must be the world's dominant technological powerhouse of the twenty-first century, and young Americans - including in our inner cities - should get these new jobs!
These new investments in cyber security and the modernization of our military will spur substantial new job creation in the private sector and help create the jobs and technologies of tomorrow. It's what we have to do. America must be the world's dominant technological powerhouse of the twenty-first century, and young Americans - including in our inner cities - should get these new jobs!
President Franklin D. Roosevelt had to find a way to help the American people. In 1933, he created a relief program known as the New Deal. Two years later, he expanded the New Deal by adding the Works Progress Administration, which was renamed the Work Projects Administration in 1939.
Our colonizers have taught us to believe that our health has improved because of Western medicine, Western foods, and Western technology. In a society that values progress, our colonizers taught us that conditions in the world are perpetually improving, that with each new technological advancement, each new discovery, each new way to utilize resources, each new way to alter the environment, that the world is getting better, that it is advancing. These are all lies.
Anyone who has studied the history of technology knows that technological change is always a Faustian bargain: Technology giveth and technology taketh away, and not always in equal measure. A new technology sometimes creates more than it destroys. Sometimes, it destroys more than it creates. But it is never one-sided. The invention of the printing press is an excellent example. Printing fostered the modern idea of individuality but it destroyed the medieval sense of community and social integration.
Once computers can program, they basically take over technological progress because already, today, the majority of technological progress is run by software, by programming.
Every step in human progress, from the first feeble stirrings in the abyss of time, has been opposed by the great majority of men. Every valuable thing that has been added to the store of man's possessions has been derided by them when it was new, and destroyed by them when they had the power. They have fought every new truth ever heard of, and they have killed every truth-seeker who got into their hands.
In a changing world, some jobs disappear and new ones are created. That's how it has been for hundreds of years. When jobs disappear, the vast majority is not because of global trade, but because of technical advances, robotization and so on. So, we - and in particular, EU member states - have to invest more in training and education so that people will have new opportunities if their jobs are cut. The EU can also better utilize its investment and social funds to protect its citizens from swift changes.
The over-all point is that new technology will not necessarily replace old technology, but it will date it. By definition. Eventually, it will replace it. But it's like people who had black-and-white TVs when color came out. They eventually decided whether or not the new technology was worth the investment.
I don't think that artificial intelligence means doomsday, and I think many new jobs will be created, too. However, it is becoming increasingly unlikely that these new types of jobs will favor low-income demographics. We need to address the needs of those who will be left out of the new job market.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!