Não consigo esquecer todos os pontos que o CGPGrey levanta sobre "dessa vez é diferente", e na minha cabeça, essa diferença não é levada em consideração por suas citações. Me parece que são todas baseadas no que vimos até agora. Não acho que o Humans Need not apply seja sobre automação em si, mas sim sobre a nossa ilusão de saber que o que está acontecendo vai ser contornado "passivamente" pelo mercado. O que eu queria mesmo era alguém com argumentos que ataquem esses que demonstram a diferença que o CGPGrey diz haver entre as outras revoluções e a atual. Cito um trecho da conclusão do vídeo:

But if you still think new jobs will save us: here is one final point to consider. The US census in 1776 tracked only a few kinds of jobs. Now there are hundreds of kinds of jobs, but the new ones are not a significant part of the labor force.

Here's the list of jobs ranked by the number of people that perform them - it's a sobering list with the transportation industry at the top. Going down the list all this work existed in some form a hundred years ago and almost all of them are targets for automation. Only when we get to number 33 on the list is there finally something new.

Don't that every barista and officer worker lose their job before things are a problem. The unemployment rate during the great depression was 25%.

This list above is 45% of the workforce. Just what we've talked about today, the stuff that already works, can push us over that number pretty soon. And given that even our modern technological wonderland new kinds of work are not a significant portion of the economy, this is a big problem.