Live data from Hacker News

Self-driving trucks threaten one of America's top blue-collar jobs

latimes.com

111–120 of 148 posts

Re: Self-driving trucks threaten one of America's top blue-collar jobs

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My great grand mother gave birth to 16 children, who had healthy childhoods and good educations. My family was not wealthy. Nowadays only the wealthy could afford to raise 16 children, with good childhoods and good education. If people now are more affluent than they were in the past, then why is it more difficult to raise children? For those who wish to have large families, it seems obvious that the last 100 years h…

In the 1800's, having children was a net asset because they were put to work as soon as they could walk. This is not so in today's society, where they are unemployable and do not contribute economically until 22 or 23. Also, my grandparents came from families with 8 or more children, and many of them died as children. This was normal for those days.

"In the 1800's, having children was a net asset because they were put to work as soon as they could walk"

You are expanding upon my example without explaining it. My point remains: has the standard of living gone up? If people could do productive work at the age of 10, but now they have to wait till they are 25, then what metric do you use to prove that the standard of living has gone up? If you want to argue that leisure has expanded, can you prove that the expansion of leisure is entirely experienced as a positive thing? Are young men happier now that they can't find good paying work till they are in their late 20s, rather than finding such work in their late teens?

It remains true that it was easier to raise children 100 years ago than it is now. Is there a metric that shows this as a decline in the standard of living?

My point is that there is a lot that is left out of these metrics. A simplistic look at median wage and the Consumer Price Index suggests that the male median wage peaked in 1973 and family income peaked in 1999. But if you were to measure those factors that are specific to raising a family, the decline in the standard of living, for families, would show up earlier than 1999.

As to the "half the children died" argument, the steepest part of the decline in childhood death was 1850 to 1900. Of the 16 children my great grandmother gave birth to, 15 lived till at least their 18th birthday.

Re: Self-driving trucks threaten one of America's top blue-collar jobs

#112
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the barriers to entry are low because you can buy self-driving software off-the-shelf for $20,000 then profits will be low In the beginning. Then due to economy of scale (and government regulations), it will be controlled by two huge companies, owning all IP, making any inroads close to impossible. Think of when the newest major computer manufacturer was founded.

Well wait no. If it is the case that anyone can buy off-the-shelf software for self-driving cars for a price of $20,000, then a person could just buy a rig, fit it out, develop a relationship with a set of farmers or whatever, and be in business. How would one of the conglomerates stop that besides competing on price or erecting regulatory barriers?

Because he's going to buy it for $20,000. The conglomerate can sell it for $15,000. Who's going to buy it from him.

It's a commodity market (so little "customizing" benefit), crazy IP with feedback loop (Google and Tesla have more street data than anyone else, so they can perfect their algorithms. As their algorithms are better than anyone else's, people buy there hardware, which gives them more data, ad infinitum. Breaking into such a market will be getting harder and harder for that reason), and quite likely some kind of (strict but bureaucratic) safety regulation.

Re: Self-driving trucks threaten one of America's top blue-collar jobs

#113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the 1800's, having children was a net asset because they were put to work as soon as they could walk. This is not so in today's society, where they are unemployable and do not contribute economically until 22 or 23. Also, my grandparents came from families with 8 or more children, and many of them died as children. This was normal for those days.

"In the 1800's, having children was a net asset because they were put to work as soon as they could walk" You are expanding upon my example without explaining it. My point remains: has the standard of living gone up? If people could do productive work at the age of 10, but now they have to wait till they are 25, then what metric do you use to prove that the standard of living has gone up? If you want to argue that le…

Polio wasn't conquered until the 1950's.

> what metric do you use to prove that the standard of living has gone up?

Average height, longevity, infant mortality are good proxies. Median wage doesn't mean much as it doesn't say what you can buy with it.

Have you ever been to Disneyland? Yellowstone? Traveled internationally? Only the rich could do that in 1900. People didn't even brush their teeth until after WW1. Few my age would have any teeth.

No birth control, no living together before marriage. Would you be happier with that?

No radio, no TV, no Hackernews, no movies, no stereo, no Beatles, no disco (!), are you sure you want all that?

Re: Self-driving trucks threaten one of America's top blue-collar jobs

#114
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well wait no. If it is the case that anyone can buy off-the-shelf software for self-driving cars for a price of $20,000, then a person could just buy a rig, fit it out, develop a relationship with a set of farmers or whatever, and be in business. How would one of the conglomerates stop that besides competing on price or erecting regulatory barriers?

Because he's going to buy it for $20,000. The conglomerate can sell it for $15,000. Who's going to buy it from him. It's a commodity market (so little "customizing" benefit), crazy IP with feedback loop (Google and Tesla have more street data than anyone else, so they can perfect their algorithms. As their algorithms are better than anyone else's, people buy there hardware, which gives them more data, ad infinitum. B…

er "it", is the software to run your own autonomous vehicles. It is the hypothetical cost of capital. If it is widely available, then people can sell transit services to other businesses.

Re: Self-driving trucks threaten one of America's top blue-collar jobs

#115
post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with this conclusion, and I tend to disfavor the PCE. The argument is that employers are spending more on benefits, therefore pay has not actually fallen. However, the largest component of the difference between the PCE and CPI is based on employer-provided healthcare; in the US, healthcare spending has been growing at faster than inflation for decades, and medical costs are one of the main avenues of weal…

The conclusion isn't that everything is hunky dory. What he does conclude is that labor's share of income hasn't much changed. What has changed is the distribution of income between laborers. As has been noted in about a million places, gains have increasingly been going to those at the top. Your chart implies some sort of breakdown between productivity and income but does not demonstrate that productivity gains have…

Median income remaining flat is entirely consistent with productivity being absorbed by the high end.

Re: Self-driving trucks threaten one of America's top blue-collar jobs

#116
Automation is also going to hit white collar jobs. Tax attorneys, paralegals insurance agents and many such jobs will be effected. Self driving cars and trucks are just the tip of he iceberg because of Google more people are aware of it but machine learning and automation now is going to start hitting white collar jobs not just blue collar jobs.

Re: Self-driving trucks threaten one of America's top blue-collar jobs

#117
post #94
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haven't people been asking this for the past few hundred years? And yet we're better off in life than we ever have been. Robots do things cheaper. This allows prices to fall. Also, if a business has nobody to sell to, then they themselves are in trouble. That they remain profitable is a sign that things are fine. Humans are adaptable creatures and we find other things of value to do. People from some industries will…

> Haven't people been asking this for the past few hundred years? And yet we're better off in life than we ever have been. I don't think everyone--in this time or others--would agree with this. I certainly don't believe in being "better off", I think that's an illusion born out of minimization of our greatest fears. Just because you aren't about to die of tetanus does not mean your quality of life has improve at all.

People writing stuff like this should spend a year in a disease prone third world country away from all modern technologies like electricity and internet. Then you'll understand whether you really have a higher quality of life or not.

Re: Self-driving trucks threaten one of America's top blue-collar jobs

#118
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haven't people been asking this for the past few hundred years? And yet we're better off in life than we ever have been. Robots do things cheaper. This allows prices to fall. Also, if a business has nobody to sell to, then they themselves are in trouble. That they remain profitable is a sign that things are fine. Humans are adaptable creatures and we find other things of value to do. People from some industries will…

My great grand mother gave birth to 16 children, who had healthy childhoods and good educations. My family was not wealthy. Nowadays only the wealthy could afford to raise 16 children, with good childhoods and good education. If people now are more affluent than they were in the past, then why is it more difficult to raise children? For those who wish to have large families, it seems obvious that the last 100 years h…

People peddling arguments like this are being incredibly obnoxious. There are billions of people alive today who don't have access to modern medicine/electricity/internet. You claim with a straight face that your quality of life is not better than them?

Re: Self-driving trucks threaten one of America's top blue-collar jobs

#119

I always have a question about this stuff: when the robots take all of our jobs (or the jobs of a critical mass of the human population), who is going to buy all this stuff the robots make if the humans who are supposed to buy the stuff are broke because they lost their job to a robot? Has anybody tried to do some kind of study/educated guess about this impact? At the end of the day, while robots can do our jobs bett…

In a word, redistribution. With a rising share of income going to robots (capital) rather than humans (labor), there needs to be a stronger social safety net. This means guaranteed health insurance, health care, retirement benefits, and even a minimum income. That safety net will have to be paid for via some combination of taxes on wealth, profits, and investment income.

You're making an assumption here that no higher level jobs would arise. History tells us that is a fallacy. In 1800s more than 70% of the workforce was engaged in agriculture. Today it's 1-2% in the US. However, the others are not just sitting on their asses. There are jobs available today which simply were not conceivable back then (programmer, animation designer yadda yadda).

Re: Self-driving trucks threaten one of America's top blue-collar jobs

#120
All the Luddites arguing here that quality of life hasn't really increased in the past 200 years due to technological revolution should spend a year in a third world country away from modern medicine/electricity/internet. Also your viewpoint is incredibly patronising towards billions of people alive today who don't have access to these.
Post reply on HN