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

What’s The Secret Behind Diapers.com Success? A Kiva Robot Warehouse

singularityhub.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–66 of 66 posts

Re: What’s The Secret Behind Diapers.com Success? A Kiva Robot Warehouse

#61

Post by pbiggar »

cmelbye wrote: post #56
pbiggar wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assume that the logical conclusion of robots doing people's job is that nobody will have a job. Since that means that nobody will eat (or buy the things that the robots are making), we will need to at some point separate the acts of earning money from doing work. Put another way, we should aim for a world in which nobody works, as the robots are doing all the work.

That's not what this is, though. This is just factory workers that put a box on a cart for 70 hours a week losing their jobs because a robot can do it more efficiently. We're far off from robots creating robots that do things like that, so there are always going to be other jobs until then. They can find other jobs that are actually productive and worthwhile. This is why I find redistribution of wealth so ridiculous;…

This is the start of people being moved out of jobs to be replaced by robots. Think 50 years into the future.

> This is why I find redistribution of wealth so ridiculous

I don't think HN is the place for socialist vs capitalist debates. The loaded language you are using, such as 'stealing', completely ignores a massively complex debate. The correct balance of 'stealing' vs 'starving in the street' has eluded the world's smartest people for decades; I wouldn't expect to solve it in this comment box.

Re: What’s The Secret Behind Diapers.com Success? A Kiva Robot Warehouse

#62

Post by pbhjpbhj »

ars wrote: post #60
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See my other comment: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1429494 Provided the nappies get re-used, you have a moderately good washing machine and don't tumble dry all the time then cloth are better - it's a very detailed study. In addition if one has an A+ rated washer always line dries, reuses nappies for a second child (eg we bought ours 2nd hand on ebay and reused them and will sell them on or use them as clean-u…

If trains use 90% less energy, then why aren't they 90% cheaper? I mean the cost to run a train is almost entirely fuel, and the same is true for an airplane. (There is some staff, but it's about the same for both.) So without even reading the study I'm already sure it's wrong. And I found it - they assumed a load factor of 100% for trains, but 72% for airplanes. When actually in the real world airplanes are pretty f…

>And I found it - they assumed a load factor of 100% for trains, but 72% for airplanes. When actually in the real world airplanes are pretty full and trains are not - but they run them anyway. And trains will probably use more fuel if they were full, so their entire study is worthless.

Fair enough, I can't be bothered to check your analysis, just like I cherry picked the citation. However assuming that the trains are full and aeroplanes aren't isn't really a problem here. Most long distance trains I've been on here are standing room only (except in 1st class). I've been on a few half full flights though most of the budget airlines are pretty good at getting full capacity.

There is a lot of competition in internal flight routes here but none on train routes. Train routes are monopolies. They do very strange things with train pricing - sometimes my MiL can get to us cheaper (via London, about 750km as the crow flies, 1 ticket) than we can visit the next town (about 20km, 4 tickets). Flights are priced using a scarcity model that makes early bookings almost the same as the taxes and later bookings as much as traditionally priced airlines.

Re: What’s The Secret Behind Diapers.com Success? A Kiva Robot Warehouse

#63

Post by pbhjpbhj »

ars wrote: post #59
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From http://publications.environment-agency.gov.uk/pdf/SCHO0808BO... > The average 2006 disposable nappy would result in a global warming impact of approximately 550kg of carbon dioxide equivalents used over the two and a half years a child is typically in nappies. The global warming impact from disposable nappies use has decreased since the previous study due to manufacturing changes and a 13.5 per cent reduction in…

Why focus just on global warming? Water shortage is a far far far larger problem. I know it's not you, but this obsession with global warming is horrible. There are far worse problems. And landfill space is infinite. The earth is enormous. There are just political objections to landfills so they keep them in short supply. For example you could fill old coal mines with landfill and never run out of space. You could un…

The linked analysis is really good and considers water usage. Water is also used to create disposable nappies as well as irrigating cotton plantations.

>And landfill space is infinite. The earth is enormous.

Landfill pollutes, run-off kills wildlife and poisons water supplies. Methane produced, as well as other decomposition gases (eg mercury bearing or radioactive gases) makes close habitation a problem. Of course methane is currently related to adverse global climate change and landfill is one (if not the?) largest source of human-produced methane.

Topsoil is certainly not limitless either, good topsoil is costly; it takes time and a proper mix of organic matter to make. You can hide your non-degradable plastics and heavy metal contaminant laced electronics under as big a heap of topsoil as you like, they're not going to magically turn into soil nutrients.

Re: What’s The Secret Behind Diapers.com Success? A Kiva Robot Warehouse

#64

Post by pbhjpbhj »

shard wrote: post #57
gmack wrote: post #11

Wait, they fly airplanes full of diapers to the West Coast!? I wonder what quantity of jet fuel exhaust gets spewed into the atmosphere, just so you can get diapers the next day . Even with the increased per-worker efficiency, is the overall environmental impact worse or better than cloth systems, or simply getting them from the corner store?

The lowest-environmental-impact choice is obviously no diaper at all: http://diaperfreebaby.org/

It may be, but it's not obvious. For example you may have to clean a lot more clothing and effects than with a diapered baby that is being taught EC. If diapers were used for a brief time they'd be reusable for many more children and thus have a lower impact per user.

I'm not disagreeing just that these analyses are always extremely complex.

Re: What’s The Secret Behind Diapers.com Success? A Kiva Robot Warehouse

#65

Post by ars »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #63
ars wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why focus just on global warming? Water shortage is a far far far larger problem. I know it's not you, but this obsession with global warming is horrible. There are far worse problems. And landfill space is infinite. The earth is enormous. There are just political objections to landfills so they keep them in short supply. For example you could fill old coal mines with landfill and never run out of space. You could un…

The linked analysis is really good and considers water usage. Water is also used to create disposable nappies as well as irrigating cotton plantations. >And landfill space is infinite. The earth is enormous. Landfill pollutes, run-off kills wildlife and poisons water supplies. Methane produced, as well as other decomposition gases (eg mercury bearing or radioactive gases) makes close habitation a problem. Of course m…

There are no mercury or radioactive gases from a landfill. Cattle is a larger source of methane. And there a LOT of it released naturally, human sources are very small in comparison.

And none of the other things you mentioned prevent making landfills. Every landfill has those problem. People talk as if we are going to run out of space - we aren't.

Use the exact same methods we use now to make a few extra landfills. They aren't even that expensive.

Of all the things you can do to help the environment, not filling landfills is the least effective.

Re: What’s The Secret Behind Diapers.com Success? A Kiva Robot Warehouse

#66

Post by GFischer »

natrius wrote: post #40
houseabsolute wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably if robots ever become that productive there will be no need for most people to work, since the robots will produce plenty of goods for everyone. Jobs are not an end unto themselves. Work is required to consume only because of scarcity. In the world you're imagining, that won't exist for most of the things people need to live. So it will be provided for free.

Somebody will own those robots and their output. Either robot owners will have to give away goods, or the government will have to forcibly redistribute it for your conclusion to hold. I actually don't think either of those are very unlikely, but it's still going to be a major change that makes the current political discourse about "socialism" seem quite trivial.

I'm worried about the population always growing to match (or exceed) whatever the robots (+human) output can be.
Post reply on HN