Live data from Hacker News

Amazon rolls out machines that pack orders and replace jobs

reuters.com

61–70 of 511 posts

Re: Amazon rolls out machines that pack orders and replace jobs

#61

"That would amount to more than 1,300 cuts across 55 U.S. fulfillment centers for standard-sized inventory." ... "removing at least 24 roles at each one, these people said. These facilities typically employ more than 2,000 people." I'm surprised that number is so low. There's only a couple dozen people out of 2000+ that actually put orders in boxes?

The machines aren't going to operate perfectly at first. This is likely a trial run on very specific types of goods (dimensions, weights, etc).

After 6 months or a year, the lessons learned about what worked and didn't will get rolled into the next round of automation, or an entirely different approach will be taken instead.

I used to work at a water filter factory, and this is exactly what happened there. One production line used the old, 7 person crew, and a new, more automated one was brought in for a different filter size that needed only 2 or 3 people. The ways that the two lines could cause batches to fail varied, and the company gave it some time to figure out which line ended up being more cost effective over X investment payoff period.

I didn't stick around long enough to see which one "won" out, but the automated process wasn't a clear winner by the time I had left.

Re: Amazon rolls out machines that pack orders and replace jobs

#62

This sounds like good news. I've read lots of negative stories about the working conditions in Amazon warehouses. It would be great if all the jobs could be automated.

Sure, it's good news, just not for the people you're thinking of. Think about people who work in Amazon warehouses despite those conditions. Why do they do that? Because the alternatives are worse. This just removes these jobs and leaves them to face those alternatives.

I think HN's tune would be quite different if someone came up with a technology that eliminated half of all programming jobs. Not quite so many people would be saying, "This is great! I for one look forward to technological advancement."

I do think the future should involve more automation, I just think we should be -- I dunno, a little less gleeful about it and think about the people it's impacting.

Re: Amazon rolls out machines that pack orders and replace jobs

#64
post #2

Something tells me people will find a way to complain about this. And that those people will be the same people that think Amazon's warehouse policies are oppressive.

Of course, and with good reasons. Before you wrote your comment, did you stop to think why people work inside Amazon's warehouses if the working conditions are so oppressive? It's because the alternatives are still worse. And now they'll lose those jobs and have to face those alternatives. Of course those of us who perceive this as an injustice will complain. The complaint is not directed at Amazon only, it's at the…

The American working class won't do anything because they hate to be identified as a working class, they prefer to think of themselves as millionaires in the making

Re: Amazon rolls out machines that pack orders and replace jobs

#65
post #2

Something tells me people will find a way to complain about this. And that those people will be the same people that think Amazon's warehouse policies are oppressive.

Automation isn't the problem. These jobs being lost are terrible and no one should do them. The problem, as always, is capitalism. Amazon wouldn't be where it is today without its massive workforce, including its army of factory workers. None of the people losing their jobs will benefit from this increase in productivity, though. Those gains will go only to the people at the top. Meanwhile, there will be more competi…

> The problem, as always, is capitalism

So other economic systems aren't interested in efficiency gains and exponential growth?

Re: Amazon rolls out machines that pack orders and replace jobs

#66

About time! I visited either YYZ4 or YYZ3 a few months ago and I was incredibly disappointed. For a technology company, their warehouses were anything but sophisticated. Their storage robots were surprisingly lackluster, their outbound/cubiscan conveyor belt was incredibly slow and often stopped. Of course, I am just an outsider looking in, and I have no visibility into the underlying software that optimizes these pr…

Any article that you suggest for knowing more about JD's fulfillment tech?

Re: Amazon rolls out machines that pack orders and replace jobs

#67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, it's good news, just not for the people you're thinking of. Think about people who work in Amazon warehouses despite those conditions. Why do they do that? Because the alternatives are worse. This just removes these jobs and leaves them to face those alternatives.

I think HN's tune would be quite different if someone came up with a technology that eliminated half of all programming jobs. Not quite so many people would be saying, "This is great! I for one look forward to technological advancement." I do think the future should involve more automation, I just think we should be -- I dunno, a little less gleeful about it and think about the people it's impacting.

UBI. Then we can be gleeful about more automation.

Re: Amazon rolls out machines that pack orders and replace jobs

#68
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that as we move forward and keep automating this will become a major issue in our society. I'm not sure if I support automation tax but it makes me uneasy. I work at a manufacturing company. We are slowly chipping away at data entry, manual processes. It only improves efficiency now, but eventually we will need less people.

I am in the same boat with my unease of the situation. Entitlements are already putting the US in crippling debt, however, I am worried that automation will destroy so many jobs that we need a universal basic income. Which I am personally not advocating. I am unsure of how I feel about it.

Universal basic income seems to be the only viable way forward. So far I have not heard any other good solution to the societal problems automation is causing. The other alternative would be to slow the progress, but that’s even worse. We need to let people learn new skills, and universal basic income makes that possible. There will be obviously freeloaders, which is the main issue with this approach. This is extremely difficult problem to solve, and the current political climate makes it even more difficult to find acceptable solution Are there any other viable alternatives? How can we help people who don’t have marketable skills get back to work and contribute to the society?

Re: Amazon rolls out machines that pack orders and replace jobs

#69
The fact that rising automation is an issue bothers me. Automation is miraculous! Its has steadily been removing the necessity for humans to engage in drudge work.

The solution is simple and obvious. Most people no longer need to work. This has probably been true for decades and is only becoming moreso. With automation, a small number of people can provide the food / water / electricity / etc. for 1000's. Everyone should be provided with the food, shelter, etc. they need for free. Thats it.. The actual problem here is remediating our obsolete society and cultural values so they are once again practical in the light of these automation developments.

I'm not saying it'll be easy, there will be plenty of wrinkles, some people (eg. farmers) will still need to work. Do they get more? Do people take turns? But these are just wrinkles.

Overall its very clear what the actual problem is and what we need to do.

The fact that so many people now are still slaving away engaged in pointless bullshit white collar jobs is a tragedy. Such a waste of potential happiness. Also we are wasting massive amounts of resources carrying out all this pointless work, and furthering the destruction of the environment for no reason.

Re: Amazon rolls out machines that pack orders and replace jobs

#70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, it's good news, just not for the people you're thinking of. Think about people who work in Amazon warehouses despite those conditions. Why do they do that? Because the alternatives are worse. This just removes these jobs and leaves them to face those alternatives.

I think HN's tune would be quite different if someone came up with a technology that eliminated half of all programming jobs. Not quite so many people would be saying, "This is great! I for one look forward to technological advancement." I do think the future should involve more automation, I just think we should be -- I dunno, a little less gleeful about it and think about the people it's impacting.

> I think HN's tune would be quite different if someone came up with a technology that eliminated half of all programming jobs.

We could easily eliminate half of all programming jobs if we just stopped creating work for ourselves. As it stands, we're the gatekeepers, our work is so opaque that no outsider could accurately estimate how much time we are wasting.

Luckily for us, markets aren't very good at eliminating this kind of inefficiency, see "Bullshit Jobs" by David Graeber.

Post reply on HN