Live data from Hacker News

Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization

qz.com

81–90 of 140 posts

Re: Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization

#81
post #53
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think it is a really good idea to start accumulating capital, even at today’s valuations. This is an interesting take. The alternative to individually trying to each become capitalists, is grouping together and making sure we all have access to the proceeds of automation.

Becoming a capitalist has a long history of being successful. The other way not as much.

Gonna run out that clock when there’s no more natural world to exploit ruthlessly

Re: Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization

#82
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Most of the employees I come into contact with have jobs that could be automated with a few days or weeks of programmer effort." After looking at some of the business processes at my company I am not so sure about this anymore. There are a lot of jobs that are pretty mundane but when you look a little closer most of the processes have a lot of exceptions where the employee makes decisions that don't follow the proce…

This is often a process issue more than anything else. For instance, our finance team spends insane amounts of time dealing with a variety of invoices with varying information and structure.There are a number of exceptions, rules and etc. However what's often ignored,is the fact that we are much bigger than any of our supplier and it would be pretty easy to convince them to invoice us the way we want instead the way…

While that would eliminate jobs within your organisation, it would clearly create development work in your suppliers.

On balance I would guess you would create work overall rather than reduce it.

Re: Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization

#83
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay... so now also include in your statement the quality of those new jobs. Not how many electronic gadgets people can buy compared to 50 years ago, but how stressed they are and how they fit into greater society. Also include how useful many jobs feel to those working in them - reference to "Dilbert jobs" (or Wally jobs, if you like and how common the feeling seems to be that ones job is useless (I myself certainly…

Sorry, but you should look at what jobs used to be like. Back-breaking work on the farm. Mind-numbing and body-destroying assembly line work that could cut off your hand. Construction work without any of the safety standards we now have. Alcohol consumption and tobacco smoking was sky-high. Any way you slice it, the quality of jobs today is tremendously higher than in the past, and people are not being paid less. Tru…

> Any way you slice it, the quality of jobs today is tremendously higher than in the past, and people are not being paid less.

Really? What about 40 years ago? Jobs were a lot easier, and you could buy a house and raise a family on one income. Why do you ignore that period of time, when workers had it good?

Re: Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization

#84
post #75
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution is to keep your scripts private, automate your job, and work on whatever you want while making sure you always look busy when your boss walks by.

If you roll over like you suggest and let your boss tickle your belly, what do you say to yourself when you look in de mirror?

"Mmm. I look good. I mean, really good. Hey, everyone! Come and see how good I look!"

Re: Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization

#85

Given that the global poor gaining jobs are statistically much worse off than those losing them, I'd say it's inhumanely slow...

That's just factually untrue. First-world workers aren't losing jobs in aggregate at all. They're not statistically worse off at all. (Unfortunately median income hasn't been improving , but it certainly hasn't been getting meaningfully worse .) While the global poor are experiencing massive benefits lifting them out of poverty. I fail to see what is inhumane here.

You misinterpret. I'm not claiming that the effect of globalization is making the global poor worse off than they were before, or the first-world workers better off than they were before. I am saying the global poor are starting much worse off and, even after benefiting from globalization, remaining worse off than first-world workers.

Re: Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization

#86
post #19

Jobs are an undesirable side effect of a business, not the goal. With or without globalism, that is and always will be true.

Maybe to the business. But jobs are a very desirable side effect for the nation state that makes the laws that make a business possible.

Re: Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization

#87
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Becoming a capitalist has a long history of being successful. The other way not as much.

Gonna run out that clock when there’s no more natural world to exploit ruthlessly

That will never occur, fortunately. There is no end to the natural world. The natural resources that are most critical on Earth are infinite for all practical purposes in relation to human demands. This is especially true given the population growth curve for the next century.

If we somehow exhaust the mineral deposits on Earth in the next few hundred years, we can and will mine the solar system.

In the absolute worst case scenario, the rest of the natural world off of Earth is available for ruthless exploitation by our Capitalist ways for thousands and thousands of years to come. The clear bet is that it will be exploited eventually, probably by whatever we replace ourselves with.

Re: Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization

#88
post #2

I remember reading Average is Over and A Fairwell to Alms just when I first started working. They convinced me that labour power was going to decline precipitously. I stared saving 60+% of everything I made and putting it into index funds. Anyone making a good salary should attempt the same. Much of white collar work is extremely amenable to automation, much more than even truck driving: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wi…

Just make sure you diversify. Quality land, managed rental units, and other assets will still hold some value even if stocks and bonds take a massive hit. Regardless of the state of the economy, people still have to live somewhere.

Re: Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization

#89
post #2

I remember reading Average is Over and A Fairwell to Alms just when I first started working. They convinced me that labour power was going to decline precipitously. I stared saving 60+% of everything I made and putting it into index funds. Anyone making a good salary should attempt the same. Much of white collar work is extremely amenable to automation, much more than even truck driving: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wi…

That's individually a smart move, collectively a dumb one. That strategy won't work for most people. Even the successful white collar workers, especially the ones who are married with children, are financially stressed already and can't save much.

You know, if 5% of the workforce follows that strategy, but things go to hell for 50% because of these trends, then we will have rioting in the streets, maybe a revolution with a nasty government installed, that is what history shows usually happens. And then the new government will go after the successful people like you.

Some problems can be dealt with only through responsible collective action.

Re: Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization

#90
The people most worried about AI are the ones not working on it. We don't know how to initialise a simple feed forward neural network yet let alone train it efficiently. It will be centuries before the theory catches up with the proctice. Until then we might as well be monks cross pollinating plants worried about genetic modification.
Post reply on HN