> Mechanisation/Mechanization of farming basically put 99% of farm-workers out of a job.

Stats like this get thrown around a lot but it's worth considering that the ABSOLUTE numbers might not actually change that much over time.

With agriculture specifically, we can make some rough estimates that, before mechanization (say, 1760-1800 period), there was maybe 10^9 people on Earth and they were all employed in agriculture. So ~10^9 farm-workers.

As of 2024, FAO estimates of global agricultural workforce put the total at about 892 million; call it ~9x10^8. [1]

So, more precise (but perhaps not much more accurate) to say that mechanization put 10% of farm workers out of a job, not 99%.

Now, it certainly IS true that mechanization allows (or forces, depending on your perspective) 90% of the population of Earth to do something other than farming, which is the real point you were making - Technology DOES have a way of disrupting what we've been doing for generations.

[1] https://www.fao.org/statistics/highlights-archive/highlights...

>Banking apps closed 99% of high street banks (here in the UK at least).

I don't believe this is true. High street banks are still common. 99% closed means we previously had 100 times as many, which would be absurdly high. It's probably closer to 50% closed.

And microwaves put housewives out of business (or …into it)

Risky move making a point that relies on made-up numbers.

At least in the US, there are roughly the same number of bank branches today as 20 years ago. And I think you would have to compare to hundreds of years ago to find anything like a 99% decline in farm laborers.

> Amazon is basically destroying the shopping high streets.

A lot of people that I know would strongly prefer to go to some brick and mortar shop. The problem is: most of items that I buy on the internet (e.g. on Amazon) are simply not easily available in a shop in my town (and I am not living in a small town).

For example:

- lots of obscure scientific books that are written in German or even English (I live in Germany)

- similarly: lots of rather niche belletristic books (think into the direction: some obscure novel recommendation on HN) often in various foreign languages

N.B. It is true that an important reason why Amazon got big among early computer enthusiasts in Germany in the 90s is that it was one of the few ways for easily getting computer science textbooks delivered from the USA - though with long delivery times.

- 3D printing supplies (why doesn't there exist a brick an mortar store for this?)

- very niche indie games (they are by now basically all sold on Steam, GOG, Epic Store or itch.io)

- very specific parts for Maker projects

- ...

So, the situation is not that people necessarily want to buy on the internet or specifically Amazon, but rather that there exists barely any way to get what they want in a brick and mortar store in even large cities.

And people unthinkingly went along with it.

Technology, like AI, is a force multiplier. A lever.

It's not "technology did this or that", humans did using technology.

Selling stuff to people without them understanding the consequences is a technology, too.

I think there's another variable missing in this historical comparison. Farm workers were working hard, with very few affordance (tool, medicine) for subsistence. It's somehow justified to want to rise above sea level. Less so today. We're not struggling to survive to the point of needing yet another full skin shedding.

It's good to reduce pain, but not to kill everything. At least not in one fatal fell swoop.

All of those shifts you exaggerate here involved an accumulation of many technological and non-technological factors that spanned decades or more, occurred to different degrees in different places, and may not even prove a wholly stable and permanent change (at least in the case of consolidated e-commerce).

Society does indeed evolve over time, but it's only in 8th grade history surveys that it can be presented so simply as you take for granted above.

> Amazon is basically destroying the shopping high streets.

Yet Ikea, H&M, etc are thriving. COVID was supposed to be the deathknell for brick and mortar retail but I'm fairly sure it's bounced back. Buying a lot of stuff will just always be better in person.

> Personally I'm trying my hardest to adjust, as I don't want AI to "happen" to me, by learning the skills that I can only predict will be important.

Since you're so certain of this impact "AI" will have, what "skills" do you "predict" are required on the human end of this?

I have to admit that's a rhetorical question to demonstrate the absurdity of your stance. Don't make my eyes roll out of my head by insisting that "AI is indeed an absurd change, but we must acknowledge... (blah blah)" or whatever and double down.

We've had years of these silly takes and we're all fed up with the mass-plagiarism machine. It's not science fiction. It's a big lookup table for sale and wrapped in lies, and no it's not equivalent to other computation by definition. I'm sure you could run some people out of business that way, but not all. When the job is done did we really achieve "AI", or just ruin the economy by taking advantage of the feeble minded?

Any politician has a massive opportunity here to enforce the law. It's only a question if they'll keep pretending to be blinded by the science.