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

The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 247 posts

Re: The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation

#111

Post by 2sk21 »

wvenable wrote: post #36
edblarney wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"We currently don't have a social understanding for navigating a world where little human labor is required" Yes we do. The industrial revolution had far greater impact on labour than any of this mysterious AI will ever have. The first 'machines' powered by coal etc. instantly 'unemployed' hundreds of people per unit. Go ahead and look at the productivity/capita charts for the early 19th century - UK citizens were mu…

> tell me which people you know, in which industries, have outright 'lost their jobs' due to some AI or machine? As software developers, it's literally our jobs to put people out of work. My software is specifically designed reduce the need for increased labor as the company crows. In my industry, legal, entire departments (like night word processing) no longer exist. The fact is you cannot extrapolate from 100 years…

Same here. I work on conversational systems and our explicit goal is to enable our customers to replace humans with our systems.

Re: The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation

#112

Post by Kurtz79 »

edblarney wrote: post #21
torpfactory wrote: post #12

I think we are destined for a future of political and social instability in the world if we continue to define labor and its compensation as we do now. We currently don't have a social understanding for navigating a world where little human labor is required. The resentment of the winners (capital owners) by the losers (jobless masses) may lead to great upheaval, to be harnessed by willing politicians of short-sighte…

"We currently don't have a social understanding for navigating a world where little human labor is required" Yes we do. The industrial revolution had far greater impact on labour than any of this mysterious AI will ever have. The first 'machines' powered by coal etc. instantly 'unemployed' hundreds of people per unit. Go ahead and look at the productivity/capita charts for the early 19th century - UK citizens were mu…

I don't think the issue is whether automation and globalization are able to create more wealth in absolute, but whether the resulting wealth is distributed fairly (or effciently).

If a company is able to automate its facilities to achieve 2X profits with half the workers, you'll have an higher overall GPD, but the created wealth will be shared by a reduced number of people.

People struggling to make a living won't give a damn whether TV has 3 channels or 300, they can travel cheaply around the world and there is a new smartphone model every year.

This has been sustainable up until technological advancement still allowed for enough decently paid unskilled jobs, but it's clear we are past this point.

We are running out of, as you say, "things for people to do".

I don't think these trends can or should be reversed (because they have undeniable benefits), but how to deal with the consequences is a real challenge.

Re: The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation

#113

Post by [deleted] »

edblarney wrote: post #21
torpfactory wrote: post #12

I think we are destined for a future of political and social instability in the world if we continue to define labor and its compensation as we do now. We currently don't have a social understanding for navigating a world where little human labor is required. The resentment of the winners (capital owners) by the losers (jobless masses) may lead to great upheaval, to be harnessed by willing politicians of short-sighte…

"We currently don't have a social understanding for navigating a world where little human labor is required" Yes we do. The industrial revolution had far greater impact on labour than any of this mysterious AI will ever have. The first 'machines' powered by coal etc. instantly 'unemployed' hundreds of people per unit. Go ahead and look at the productivity/capita charts for the early 19th century - UK citizens were mu…

[deleted]

Re: The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation

#114

Post by jhoechtl »

torpfactory wrote: post #12

I think we are destined for a future of political and social instability in the world if we continue to define labor and its compensation as we do now. We currently don't have a social understanding for navigating a world where little human labor is required. The resentment of the winners (capital owners) by the losers (jobless masses) may lead to great upheaval, to be harnessed by willing politicians of short-sighte…

The 25 hour day might we well around

https://myprivate42.wordpress.com/2016/12/19/lets-shift-to-2...

as well as the obligation to consume, otherwise savings will be invalidated. Dystopia ahead.

Re: The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation

#115

Post by 2sk21 »

twblalock wrote: post #5

It's interesting that many politicians, including Trump and Sanders, want policies to prevent jobs from leaving the US, but have no policy proposals around automation. If you want manufacturing jobs to stay in the US, regulating automation would be far more effective than trying to prevent companies from outsourcing jobs. (Incidentally, a lot of jobs that have been outsourced probably would have been automated if out…

A Butlerian Jihad perhaps? Frank Herbet was really on to something in his Dune series.

Re: The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation

#116

Post by dvtv75 »

alkonaut wrote: post #98

I'm not sure what everyone is so afraid of? There will be tensions and a political problem about redistribution if "simple" jobs dry up, sure, but isn't automation a good thing regardless? It means we make more stuff withuot putting in more effort. Automation and industrialization over the last 150 years already meant we went from 120h weeks on farms to 40h weeks in offices and factories, while living standards incre…

Four years ago, I was working full time. That job was automated away, but I found another part-time job that paid minimum wage for fewer hours, so my income dropped dramatically. That job was automated away, and I was very lucky to find a job (that ended up being around double full-time hours, but only paid for half of them, so legally I was paid about half of minimum wage), which went away. Now, I'm working one third of a full time job, for minimum wage. That doesn't even cover living costs, and it's looking like it'll be automated away in the next few months.

As working hours drop and wages tend toward minimum, we do indeed end up in a bad situation.

Re: The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation

#117

Post by xbmcuser »

edblarney wrote: post #44
xbmcuser wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The global market was still expanding so all efficiency gains from industrial revolution and the internet revolution were absorbed. Where as today the global economy is stagnating. The efficiency gains in the next decade are expected to be a few times the rate of market growth which would put many people out of work making the global market contract further. This cycle could accelerate very quickly. reply

"Where as today the global economy is stagnating." The global economy is in good shape. Western economies are stagnating - but there are 5 billion people who were not even on the economic radar just 50 years ago. They were earning basically 'nothing'. But now they are earning 'something' and it's growing fast. There are more than 40 countries with growth over 5% GDP growth in 2015. [1] There are 5 billion people who…

The top 15 economies in the world are 75% of the world economy. Most are in the West. The growth of the other 25% is not going to help much if these 15 combined do not grow more than the efficiency gains from automation.

Re: The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation

#118

Post by forumuid »

torpfactory wrote: post #12

I think we are destined for a future of political and social instability in the world if we continue to define labor and its compensation as we do now. We currently don't have a social understanding for navigating a world where little human labor is required. The resentment of the winners (capital owners) by the losers (jobless masses) may lead to great upheaval, to be harnessed by willing politicians of short-sighte…

little human labor is required,but much more human doctor are required. How to make human labor to human doctor? Education is just result,not methods.The key is that Capital is not the pursuit of money, but the pursuit of a higher level of human nature.

Re: The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation

#119

Post by lhopki01 »

api wrote: post #52
the_duke wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Japan has second oldest population world-wide with 27.28% over 65, after Monaco, which doesn't really count (retirement home for rich people). http://www.nippon.com/en/in-depth/a01001/

... and economic stagnation. It's basically a permanent liquidity trap.

If you adjust GDP for population growth Japan is actually doing quite well. The fact that it has a growing economy and a shrinking population shows that productivity is going up. Countries like the US have historically had high population growth which is reflected in higher GDP growth.

Re: The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation

#120

Post by barrkel »

cm2187 wrote: post #88
wvenable wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> tell me which people you know, in which industries, have outright 'lost their jobs' due to some AI or machine? As software developers, it's literally our jobs to put people out of work. My software is specifically designed reduce the need for increased labor as the company crows. In my industry, legal, entire departments (like night word processing) no longer exist. The fact is you cannot extrapolate from 100 years…

It is your work to increase productivity. As tedious tasks are automated, you can deploy people doing new things. As you lower the cost of the product you manufacture or service you provide, you enable more people to afford it. That's how new industries are created. I am not to worried about the amount of work available as a whole. I am more worried about the nature of the work available, which will be increasingly s…

"I am not to worried about the amount of work available as a whole. I am more worried about the nature of the work available, which will be increasingly skilled."

This is the same thing, FWIW. Opportunities to use skilled labour rely on the existence of skilled labour capable to fulfil it. The reason is that skilled labour shortages push up the price of labour, and that reduces the viability of businesses that use it as an input, and thus reduces the number of opportunities advertised.

Post reply on HN