Live data from Hacker News

The rise of the useless class

ideas.ted.com

111–120 of 125 posts

Re: The rise of the useless class

#111
post #2

My first reaction when I saw (ted.com) after the link was that this would be an essay about ted speakers. I should have known that it would be more chatter about machines making people obsolete.

I should have known that it would be more chatter about machines making people obsolete.

It has the potential to be a very vexing problem, actually. That may condemn literally hundreds of millions of people to poverty, feelings of uselessness (if not outright despair and depression). And very likely be contributing to higher suicide rates, among the newly obsolesced.

In that vein, it seems rather callous to describe earnest attempts to get a handle on the problem as "chatter".

Re: The rise of the useless class

#112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I'm sure it would be very difficult to hold on to beliefs devoid of reason in that case..." No offense but I literally laughed out loud when I got to that part. Reminds me of what people said about the internet. Doesn't that comparison lend credence to the notion that greater access to information might often lead to a retreat into comforting echo chambers? That greater ease of communication might often increase the…

To be fair, we are still fairly early on with this stuff. Yes, folks have their echo chambers. But alternatively, perhaps we simply teach the new generation better critical thinking skills, introduce uncomfortable viewpoints, and how to better not fall for tricks such as "fake news". Just because we have problems with echo chambers now doesn't mean that we will in the future. Heck, in a way, the internet is teaching…

Ideally, I agree with you. The other part of me sees humanity in a transition period of having all of this amazing information at its fingertips but not the smarts to use it, at least for the common person. We need a brain boost to keep up and that could just be the AI we merge with at some point or some genetic/biological enhancement or combination of those, otherwise, I just feel we peaked as a world and will just go up and down until that happens.

Re: The rise of the useless class

#113

This is short-term pessimism, inline with the common dystopian future of sci-fi. It is really difficult to predict human behaviors and technology in the long term. Humans have the ability to steer things to their advantage so interesting things can happen. Just for kicks here's a more hopeful approach that I've heard...merge AI with the brain like Kurzweil was predicting. Imagine if everyone was a genius and telekine…

> Just for kicks here's a more hopeful approach that I've heard...merge AI with the brain like Kurzweil was predicting Shouldn't this be the ultimate goal anyway? I know Elon Musk sees the future where there is a merging of man and machine to enhance what he sees as man's limited upload bandwidth (talking, writing, gesticulating, etc.)

Yes, I hope it is. I just was writing it in a style of a possibility rather than a prediction as its the same thing to be very positive or very negative, at least in terms of making errors into the future.

Re: The rise of the useless class

#114
post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the designation of the people as useless is based on the fact that part of our value to society is measured by the utility that provide to society and with continuing automation of human tasks it will be harder for us to find way for all the humans in the world to provide utility at the same level as they are now. Now I agree with you that this (valuing people by the utility they provide) is a shallow and i…

I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying, but I think I'm talking about something slightly different. First, I think that what you're pointing out in your first paragraph, while wildly accepted, is completely unproven. Second, I don't think valuing people by utility is necessarily shallow, but the way I worded my original post might lead you to believe that. Here's what I'm getting at (and failing horribl…

Yes, I agree that the idea that with continued automation humanity's role on earth will become un-necessary and superfluous (the useless that I believe you are referring to) is hogwash and not a concern.

The reason for the automation revolution (I just coined that phrase) is allow humanity to become a better citizen of the planet and not to discarded.

Re: The rise of the useless class

#115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I find the excitement for UBI concerning. People seem to have already tossed up their hands and said, "well, I'll be useless in the future, I guess I can't work now!". I wouldn't quite characterize the excitement as giving up. I see it as a form of liberation. Although I doubt society is ready to take such a mental/psychological leap, work/labor does not have to be the primary way in which one derives a sense of se…

> I wouldn't quite characterize the excitement as giving up To clarify, the excitement comes from knowledge workers who think they have something in mind that will satisfy displaced laborers. I don't think most laborers would be excited about not working for a lifetime and relying on government payments. I think they'd be concerned about getting scammed at some point down the road. > work/labor does not have to be th…

> Money is just a paper form of trust.

Although it's impossible to know with 100% accuracy, a lot of historians believe that the origins of money tied up in the creation of empire and slavery.

As you say, smaller societies didn't need money and worked on favors. As armies began being created, soldiers wanted something concrete up front, because they could die before you repaid the favor. So they settled on precious metals and eventually coins. Someone has to mine for these metals and mining is backbreaking work. The solution was to take conquered people and turn them into slaves. This is the vicious cycle of empire...armies need to get paid, so you need to plunder and conquer people, you have more territory which requires more soldiers which requires more coins which requires more slaves and on and on.

Re: The rise of the useless class

#116
post #84
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can think of cooking as an example of a surprisingly complicated job. OTOH i can think of many supposedly "creative" jobs that are already ripe for disruption. Anything that has to do with visual arts for example, architecture, industrial design, medical, law etc. These jobs may not be fully automated, but the human supervisor will be relegated to a secondary role.

https://www.logojoy.com/ seems surprisingly close to this. If I were starting a small business I'd probably just get my logo from this type of automated service.

That's super cool! The only complaints I had was that it seemed to need more training, or it did relatively poorly at the training than desirable; And I wanted the ability to move around symbol and text more than it allowed. It needed to be smarter and learn faster. But still, even in its rudimentary stage it's very useful!

Re: The rise of the useless class

#117
post #46

This has already happened. That's why Trump won. Check out Detroit or the Rust Belt, or most towns under 5,000 people not near a major population center.

I disagree. It isn't really that folks don't have their old job. With that job went their livelihoods. Houses, jobs, medical insurance. Bills get late and suddenly finding food becomes an issue. Others just have very stagnant wages, so they work harder but can't stretch their paycheck as far anymore. Do you think Trump would have still been elected if we had a proper safety net and social support for folks?

This is so true. As someone who's had the misfortune to be on unemployment twice in my career, and food stamps once, I can tell you our "safety net" is bullshit. Unemployment maxes out at $450/week and takes months for the checks to start arriving. Try making ends meet in that scenario, and better hope you get a couple months of severance. Food stamps work fairly well, but you've got still got the slow and inefficient government albatross in the mix. Long story short: we spend a ludicrous amount of money on a safety net which provides zero safety for anyone.

Re: The rise of the useless class

#118
post #90

I can't help but be skeptical of things like this... historically speaking, humans tend to underestimate just how many things we do that require full "general intelligence" to make "common-sense" decisions. Despite recent advances in machine-learning (i.e. adding more layers to neural networks, i.e. adding more columns to a matrix), we don't really have anything that even approaches an artificial general intelligence…

Here's the thing: let's say that AI never advances past its current level of sophistication (circa March 2017), but it does continue to get cheaper and more ubiquitous. It seems clear to me at this point that even this may already be enough to replace many agriculture jobs, transportation jobs, manufacturing jobs, retail jobs, and perhaps even some higher level jobs in healthcare and law. Even though it's "just" neur…

Women nearly doubled the workforce within a couple of generations, but the sky never fell. And that shift was largely precipitated by technological advances, such as the washing machine, reduced infant mortality, and birth control.

In as much as doubling the workforce is similar to halving the number of jobs in pre-existing categories, I don't see the sky falling. Like with women joining the workforce, the shift to more automation will stimulate new kinds of labor demand. And it's similarly likely to make education even more important and relevant.

That said, women joining the workforce is perhaps the single largest contributor to long-term stagnant wage growth. Such shifts are unlikely to prove the end of labor, but they do create significant displacement that requires serious attention. Nothing about the "free market" guarantees that the economy and labor system will adjust quickly enough within timespans relevant to maintaining the well-being of the individuals displaced.

I don't really think there'll be anything particularly challenging about the next shift. In simple terms I don't see how it could be much more problematic than the addition of women to the domestic workforce immediately followed by hundreds of millions of Chinese laborers joining the global industrial economy. We just don't appreciate how disruptive those historical events were because, despite the weak U.S. response (as compared to Germany), even unassisted the labor economy did a decent job of treading water. It's quite amazing in retrospect.

Theoretically we could learn from our past mistakes and not only adjust but come out ahead in terms of income growth and equality. OTOH, we could not learn from our past mistakes, and our current issues would only be compounded. On this I'm much more pessimistic. When the electorate and political culture still pine for a labor economy that is 2 or 3 epochs in the past (i.e. ancient history!), that doesn't bode well for their ability to commit to the demands of the future.

Even worse is the fact that the intellectual class seems oblivious that history is merely repeating itself. The books about robots and labor literally have almost identical titles to books I read in the 1990s in college seminars discussing the implications of women, China, the information economy, and of course the rise of robots. Some of them were written in the 1980s. One famous book, "The End of Work" (Jermey Rifkin, 1994) could probably be re-published today with nary an edit. People would find it just as timely and insightful as they did then, and it'll prove just as irrelevant 25 years from now as it is today. We saw neither the dystopia nor the paradise he envisioned, but rather (as always) a slow, systematic, and largely hidden reorganization of the labor economy that became evident, if at all, only in hindsight.

Re: The rise of the useless class

#119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> supermarket cashiers Why do you think they're useless? They certainly aren't currently [1]. Someone has to do their work, either paid employees or unpaid volunteers (i.e. customers). [1] at least until that Amazon fantasy-land store becomes a practical reality, if it ever does

Half the cashier's job is automated (tallying is managed by scanning in the items, payment is handled by using the customer facing CC machine; they only handle cash, checks, and manual entry of produce). Bagging is often handled by cashiers, customers, or dedicated baggers. Baggers are cheap, the only skill required is to know not to put eggs beneath a half-gallon of milk (though many seem not to know this anymore).…

Your point is spot on but only disproves the likelihood of any coming calamity. Understood in the way you describe, automation making human labor input redundant has been pervasive and relentlessly constant for at least 100 years. This sort of technological progress is precisely what accounts for improved economic productivity.

Interestingly, productivity has plateaued these past few years at the same time we're supposedly entering a golden period for applied machine learning. There are a million ways to explain that away, of course, but it's a reality people should really consider carefully before reflexively dismissing as transient.

In any event, if productivity improvements were to kick into high gear tomorrow we could expect more of the same--increasing displacement but not an overall, calamitous reduction in jobs per se. The increase in the unemployed labor force will open up new opportunities for businesses built around human services, while the reduction in prices for consumer goods will allow people to spend more money on those new services.

Things can totally get worse, especially in terms of wage inequality. But the laws of supply & demand make it almost impossible for a complex labor economy to simply fall off a cliff in the ways that overly imaginative "futurists" and "thinkers" would have us believe. In terms of basic economics, nothing about machine learning is substantially different from historical disruptions.

If you were to teleport somebody from 100 years ago to today, and then to 20 years from now, the relative differences in automation and computer intelligence between today and 20 years in the future would likely be indistinguishable from his perspective when comparing either of those time periods to 100 years ago. And yet without a doubt the contemporary and future economies would be far stronger, wealthier, and even more "equal" compared to the time period he came from. All precisely _because_ of that automation, not despite it.

Re: The rise of the useless class

#120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wouldn't quite characterize the excitement as giving up To clarify, the excitement comes from knowledge workers who think they have something in mind that will satisfy displaced laborers. I don't think most laborers would be excited about not working for a lifetime and relying on government payments. I think they'd be concerned about getting scammed at some point down the road. > work/labor does not have to be th…

> Money is just a paper form of trust. Although it's impossible to know with 100% accuracy, a lot of historians believe that the origins of money tied up in the creation of empire and slavery. As you say, smaller societies didn't need money and worked on favors. As armies began being created, soldiers wanted something concrete up front, because they could die before you repaid the favor. So they settled on precious m…

Money enables you to exchange goods without worrying about having the exact thing your neighbor is looking for. Shiny rare metals were money for awhile, and I guess the thing that people tended to value most, gold etc., ended up representing the universal trading platform.

Arguing that the creation of money was tied to the creation of armies sounds like a political view that someone might push alongside the promise of peace on earth.

Yet, animals fight over food. If humans didn't have money, we'd fight over that or something else that maintains our health and well being.

Post reply on HN