Live data from Hacker News

Amazon rolls out machines that pack orders and replace jobs

reuters.com

261–270 of 511 posts

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

#261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bu there's no penalty if this target are not met.

Aren’t the tax breaks often tied directly to the number of jobs? I believe that’s how the incentive structure for Amazon’s new NoVA headquarters works for instance. If the company doesn’t create the job, the tax break is reduced by a certain percentage per job.

> Aren’t the tax breaks often tied directly to the number of jobs?

Usually, no, though the public justification for the tax breaks is usually in terms of expected jobs.

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

#262
post #113

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.

Honestly the best proposal I've seen for slowing down such automation is to add a tax on these machines. That'll make the cost-benefit equation less obvious. These machines won't pay for themselves in a year and then be practically free. They'll continue to cost a lot. This kind of tax would help slow the progress of such automation to a speed where society can better adjust. And I say this as someone who absolutely…

The best proposal is a more accessible social safety net that includes things like free higher education (or technical training) and healthcare. I don't think automation should be slowed, but the US is not equipped to handle the ensuing job displacement. Chop up the foreign invasion and domestic spying budget and reallocate toward uplifting the average worker.

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

#263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a platitude that is said often, but there is no evidence to support it. There is no law of the universe that says whenever a job gets automated, a new type of work pops out of the aether to employ displaced people. It is wishful thinking at best.

Well, if you look at history it keeps happening. Imagine if you said in 1900 that almost all farm jobs would be eliminated in 100 years. The future would be almost unimaginable, but we've turned out okay. However I think the problem is we're at a point where things are churning so rapidly that many are being left behind. Your 50-year-old truck driver is not in a position to learn a new skill every 5-10 years to stay…

It doesn't "keep happening", it's happened exactly twice, in the two industrial revolutions, in each case the new type of work that needed millions of human hands was obvious. There is no guarantee that it will happen again, especially given that new industrial inventions require no human intervention at all.

To fall back on an example that is not my own, imagine a conversation in 1900 between two horses:

Horse 1: I'm worried about these new automobile things, they might take our jobs

Horse 2: Don't worry, every technological development that displaced horse work in the past has led to more newer and better jobs for horses, there will always be work for us. Just look at trains, we don't have to pull big loads anymore, now we just draw carts and support riders, who knows what great jobs are just around the corner.

The world's horse population peaked in 1915, and is now down by 70% in the US.

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

#264
A couple weeks ago, I toured the Amazon fulfillment center in Tracy, CA. Some observations:

It was very impressive. Watching the yellow plastic tubs flying around on conveyor belts, being sorted into different tracks automatically. It reminded me of the scene in "Monsters, Inc." where are the bedroom doors are flying around on different tracks.

Work was divided into different stages:

1. Taking delivery from supply trucks, checking that contents were correct and in good shape. Contents placed into tubs that were conveyed to multiple different areas of the warehouse.

2. Storing items. Tubs of incoming items were delivered to a storage station. Robots brought storage pods (6-7 feet tall) with many cubbies up to the station. Different pods had different sized cubbies. A storage worker would scan each item from the tubs, and choose some cubby to put the item into. It looked like a camera watched which cubby they stored into to record it. cubbies could hold multiple different items. Apparently they are careful to never put two similar items in the same cubby, to make it easier for the next stage:

3. Picking items from storage. When an order needs to be fulfilled, the robots would bring a line of pods up to a person who would pick the needed item out of the correct cubby of each pod. All the items would go into a tub, to be conveyed to somewhere else for packing.

4. Packing the items for shipment. A person gets the items out of the tub, puts them in the correct sizes box, adds the air pockets for protection and seals up the box, which is then conveyed to another machine that weighs them and labels them for shipment.

5. Outgoing shipping distributed to different trucks based on geo location to ship to.

We walked around the warehouse with a few guides, and headphones to be able to listen to them. Our guide was excellent in being able to explain things and genuinely enthusiastic about the whole process. At the end they gave us branded water bottles too.

I asked our guide what he thought would happen as they began to automate more and more of the jobs. He said that they would shift people over to new roles and gave an example of a time in the past when they automated some job and instead split up roles to have a separate person do QA / checking of orders where before the same person had to fill an order and check it. He also spoke of another fulfillment center in Southern California where they automated a job, then later reversed course and went back to all manual because the people at that center decided that it was done better that way for them. I was surprised that decisions over automation were made locally at each center.

We hung around the building afterward, and bought lunch from a taco truck outside, and ate at some picnic tables where many employees also ate. I talked to some of them to try to get a less biased perspective from the employees. When I asked them how they liked working there, the most common answer I got was "It's a job." They said that expectations were high and they had to work hard. Some shifts were more desirable than others. One man said that it was tough, but he was very loyal because a year before Amazon had chosen to pay for his cancer treatment and he said they didn't have to. I left with a positive impression of the operation.

I'd recommend taking the tour if there's a fulfillment center nearby. You need to register in advance for a time, but it's all free.

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

#265

I'm surprised that Amazon still uses boxes. They have the market power to insist manufacturers comply with amazon-specific packaging requirements. Why not just insist that all products be packaged in postal-compatible packaging? Then the amazon warehouse robot need only slap a label on the product and throw it in the shipping bin. Another answer would be to have products packaged in standard, or at lease square, boxe…

I think doing away with the warehouses isn’t compatible with conquering the last of retail; same day delivery. Even next day is cost prohibitive for drop shipping as it requires UPS or FedEx.

Amazon goal is same day delivery using low paid, Uber type contractors.

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

#266
post #15

Video of the CarltonWrap mentioned in the article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1yw05mWnXw It's actually pretty neat - creates boxes to size on demand. Doesn't seem like this would be possible with humans at a store, and could really cut down on box inventory.

Absurd how most of the items on the belt are already in a cardboard box. Seems so wasteful.

Part of it could be privacy too. I ordered a computer monitor that was in its own cardboard box. However, that box had clearly printed "Gaming Monitor" on the box. This item was sitting on my porch for a few hours before I got home.

Amazon put it in one of their boxes, which did not have any labels about the package contents. Thieves are more likely to steal a box that says "expensive computer part" versus an unlabeled box.

Not to say that's always the case, but it depends on what the products box is like.

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

#267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mentioned two processes that have been in place with Amazon Vendors/Manufacturers for many years. 1. Amazon Direct Fulfillment (dropship): Order is shipped directly from the manufacturer to the customer. Amazon pays for the shipping label and contractually "own" the item once it leaves the MFR doors. Amazon incentivizes Manufacturers by paying the freight and loosening shipment deadlines. [1] 2. Ships In Own Cont…

> Ships In Own Container (Amazon SIOC) certification puts the responsibility on the manufacturer to certify their products can be shipped without extra packaging. Sorry, but how can this be a good idea? I'd hate if I ordered something expensive, for example a digital camera, and every porch pirate (or shady parcel delivery subcontractor) immediately sees "this thing is worth a couple grand", compared with the usual A…

This box of rubber gloves is SIOC and hopefully isn't too attractive to porch pirates: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01JGLWP3S

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

#268
post #244

I'm all for this as soon as we change the laws so companies pay payroll taxes on automation commensurate to the number of paid positions taken by the equipment. Automation is what we should be striving for, but only if workers and society see material benefits from it. ("Your labor potential can be reallocated to a position of higher need"/"You now have the opportunity to retrain" isn't a material benefit.)

Tax on labour (or housing) is quite weird if you look at it with fresh eyes. Don't we want to support people working and living in a house? Then why tax those? Is it a relic from the past? Thought experiment: what if we (only) tax pollution? All taxes end up being paid by the consumer anyway. But this get the incentive straight to deliver products/services "cleanly". Just a thought...

"Taxing housing" isn't weird at all. We don't tax housing. If you rent, you pay rent to your landlord and that's it. You don't also pay taxes on that rent to the government. I'm guessing what you actually mean is that we tax property. This seems inherently fair to me. Why should you get to squat on a piece of land for free in perpetuity, especially when for most land, the value of the land is inherently improved by government-provided services?

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

#269

This is going to be a shock to all of those people who were willing to give tax incentives for Amazon to build distribution warehouses in their city in exchange for "jobs." Though, this is only the beginning. A few thousand jobs now, the majority of them later.

How do you know overall jobs will decrease?

It's also totally possible that each warehouse will be made twice as efficient per employee... but also deliver twice the merchandise... maintaining the same total number of jobs.

Kind of the same way that automation of the past 100 years across the economy has still resulted in record-setting employment right now.

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

#270

I'm all for this as soon as we change the laws so companies pay payroll taxes on automation commensurate to the number of paid positions taken by the equipment. Automation is what we should be striving for, but only if workers and society see material benefits from it. ("Your labor potential can be reallocated to a position of higher need"/"You now have the opportunity to retrain" isn't a material benefit.)

That seems tough to determine. Does an autonomous bulldozer count as one employee because you would have had one person driving it? Or does it count as five employees because you run it 24/7? Or does it count as five hundred employees because that’s how many people you’d need if they were using shovels?

Similarly, this also leaves open a big loophole - if you implement a tax on jobs eliminated, the incentive shifts to starting companies that that don't have jobs in the first place. Then you quickly arrive at the sub-contracted functions shell game where a company pays for a service rather than for specific workers to avoid the automation tax, and the fulfillment companies shuffle around as new automation tech allows them to eliminate more jobs.

I don't think taxation on automated labor really gets us anywhere. Wealth tax makes a lot more sense with fewer loopholes.

Post reply on HN