Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

As sewbots threaten Asia's sweatshops, we need to decide who will benefit

boingboing.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 72 posts

Re: As sewbots threaten Asia's sweatshops, we need to decide who will benefit

#21

Post by danielhooper »

sedachv wrote: post #19
milesskorpen wrote: post #14

I appreciate most of your comment, but really don't appreciate the aside in your last paragraph.

To appreciate the aside you have to understand Lululemon's seminal role in the athleisure trend and the market impact it (making leggings acceptable pants) has had on the apparel industry. Also important to note is the sewing process required for leggings - coverstitch of very stretchy knit fabric - is something that requires a lot of sewing machine operator skill and is difficult to automate.

To appreciate the aside you have to be a creepy guy.

Re: As sewbots threaten Asia's sweatshops, we need to decide who will benefit

#22

Post by dragonwriter »

danielhooper wrote: post #21
sedachv wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To appreciate the aside you have to understand Lululemon's seminal role in the athleisure trend and the market impact it (making leggings acceptable pants) has had on the apparel industry. Also important to note is the sewing process required for leggings - coverstitch of very stretchy knit fabric - is something that requires a lot of sewing machine operator skill and is difficult to automate.

To appreciate the aside you have to be a creepy guy.

Well, you have to be okay with the objectification of women -- which may make you creepy on some level, but doesn't require you to be a guy (though, statistically, its more likely that way.)

Re: As sewbots threaten Asia's sweatshops, we need to decide who will benefit

#23

Post by colanderman »

Animats wrote: post #17

The article comes from a study by the International Labor Organization.[1] All this seems to come from one startup, Softwear Automation, which has just some lab demos and can't put a whole garment together.[2] First of all, the textile industry has been mechanized for a long time. It was the first industry to mechanize, over 200 years ago. Everything from picking to weaving was mechanized in the developed world by 19…

What makes T-shirts and jeans more complex than other shirts and pants?

Re: As sewbots threaten Asia's sweatshops, we need to decide who will benefit

#24

Post by sedachv »

danielhooper wrote: post #21
sedachv wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To appreciate the aside you have to understand Lululemon's seminal role in the athleisure trend and the market impact it (making leggings acceptable pants) has had on the apparel industry. Also important to note is the sewing process required for leggings - coverstitch of very stretchy knit fabric - is something that requires a lot of sewing machine operator skill and is difficult to automate.

To appreciate the aside you have to be a creepy guy.

What is creepy is when you are so uncomfortable with your sexuality that you think people watching on the street is objectification.

Re: As sewbots threaten Asia's sweatshops, we need to decide who will benefit

#25

Post by dragonwriter »

sedachv wrote: post #24
danielhooper wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To appreciate the aside you have to be a creepy guy.

What is creepy is when you are so uncomfortable with your sexuality that you think people watching on the street is objectification.

Watching on the street may or may not be (or involve) objectification.

Publicly expressing gratitude to a clothing manufacturer for the pleasure you receive watching on the street, OTOH, is clearly objectification.

Re: As sewbots threaten Asia's sweatshops, we need to decide who will benefit

#26

Post by hactually »

colanderman wrote: post #23
Animats wrote: post #17

The article comes from a study by the International Labor Organization.[1] All this seems to come from one startup, Softwear Automation, which has just some lab demos and can't put a whole garment together.[2] First of all, the textile industry has been mechanized for a long time. It was the first industry to mechanize, over 200 years ago. Everything from picking to weaving was mechanized in the developed world by 19…

What makes T-shirts and jeans more complex than other shirts and pants?

It's the fact that they're composed of multiple differently shaped pieces and need to be combined carefully.

I've tried putting a robot together myself as I find it silly that we haven't already automated it and... yeah, harder than i thought.

Re: As sewbots threaten Asia's sweatshops, we need to decide who will benefit

#27

Post by jbicha »

dmix wrote: post #8
chrischen wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's get rid of the factories for cars, silicon, and electronics while we are at it. Efficiency is not conducive to jobs and prosperity. Workers must unite to protect livelihoods! (end sarcasm).

And ironically the capitalists always get blamed by the left for this unholy union between the state and upper class. There's a reason many pro-market people want smaller gov and it's not just personal selfish gain to save a few dollars in taxes but to prevent the predictable selfish incentives of the power players from exploiting the absolute power of the state for the benefit of a limited few. No wonder there is a…

How does smaller government help with sweatshops or unemployment or income inequality?

Re: As sewbots threaten Asia's sweatshops, we need to decide who will benefit

#28

Post by sliverstorm »

boznz wrote: post #2

"Who will benefit from automation?" Easy answer the companies profits and the automation machine manufacturer and support companies. Additionally the "Made in good old USA" sticker or wherever you happen to be brings up images of a local using timeless traditional methods making the garment, apart from a very few very expensive items that image is obviously a joke but it certainly works for sales and marketing to man…

Actually, that's interesting to think- the more automated the factory, the less sense it makes to overseas for low labor costs. (tarriffs and other legal structures are a different matter) So, other pressures (like being near raw materials, or near the end market, become stronger factors.

Re: As sewbots threaten Asia's sweatshops, we need to decide who will benefit

#29

Post by dragonwriter »

dmix wrote: post #8
chrischen wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's get rid of the factories for cars, silicon, and electronics while we are at it. Efficiency is not conducive to jobs and prosperity. Workers must unite to protect livelihoods! (end sarcasm).

And ironically the capitalists always get blamed by the left for this unholy union between the state and upper class. There's a reason many pro-market people want smaller gov and it's not just personal selfish gain to save a few dollars in taxes but to prevent the predictable selfish incentives of the power players from exploiting the absolute power of the state for the benefit of a limited few. No wonder there is a…

> And ironically the capitalists always get blamed by the left for this unholy union between the state and upper class.

The reason is that capitalists (the economic class, not "advocates of capitalism"; the two have substantial overlap, but aren't identical) tend to be the power behind both business and government in capitalist systems.

Re: As sewbots threaten Asia's sweatshops, we need to decide who will benefit

#30

Post by afarrell »

dmix wrote: post #18
good_gnu wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or we could keep the factories, accept unemployment as a result of technical progress, realize that the total amount of goods created has not diminished at all and stop tieing the right to consume to participation in the production process. The "human in the production process" paradigm is doomed to fail as technology progresses anyway.

All the more reason basic income makes economic sense. When the alternative is inefficient and costly human labor.

We should figure out a way create some sort of dividend that skims some money off of the benefits of automation and adds it to social security income.

I'd say we should distribute it across age groups, but this lets you use the existing Social Security Infrastructure. Plus, young people don't vote in legislative and local elections, so that wouldn't be as useful for preserving the freedom to automate.

Post reply on HN