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

No Recent Automation Revolution

overcomingbias.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 368 posts

Re: No Recent Automation Revolution

#221

Post by [deleted] »

radu_floricica wrote: post #101
Barrin92 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ted Chiang made a similar point a few years back. (well not that phallic, but also about psychological projection as a reason for the AI fear) "This summer, Elon Musk spoke to the National Governors Association and told them that “AI is a fundamental risk to the existence of human civilization.” Doomsayers have been issuing similar warnings for some time, but never before have they commanded so much visibility.[...]A…

I usually stay away from this kind of topics, but this rubs me the wrong way and I have five minutes to burn. Probably because I expected better from him. The mistake here is the nature of capitalism. In reality, when you see a bunch of companies beginning to turn everything into "a field of strawberries", something is going extremely right. Why? Because capitalism is working based on needs, and it means it found a w…

[deleted]

Re: No Recent Automation Revolution

#222

Post by som33 »

shadowfox wrote: post #204
mc32 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair enough, so not capitalism, not communism. What political system might be capable of meeting these requirements? Is it the political equivalent of unobtanium or vaporware? Im not trying to be a smartass; I want to know what the answer might look like. It doesn’t have to be a treatise. Just something consistent with a chance at succeeding with non-ideal people.

> Fair enough, so not capitalism, not communism. > What political system might be capable of meeting these requirements? Capitalism isn't really a political system, even though people seem to elevate it to one. Different political systems/policies combined with capitalism can produce very different societies and structures. For example, see social democratic systems in many parts of Europe.

>Capitalism isn't really a political system, even though people seem to elevate it to one.

It is you need a giant violent state to create a culture of sophisticated property rights. AKA capitalism requires a state and legal system, it doesn't exist without one. Things like copyright and Intellectual property are pure man made cultural political fictions, they do not exist in the natural animal kingdom.

How is it possible to own large tracts of land the size of small cities or entire provinces without a state/army to enforce it? AKA before populations got big there was plenty of "common" land that wasn't anyones. Property rights are a cultural invention.

Re: No Recent Automation Revolution

#223

Post by toasterlovin »

kaybe wrote: post #169
Zaskoda wrote: post #10

Due to the Covid-19 lock down, my company was forced to accelerate our automation program. We did in months what we had originally planned to do in years. As we are able to open our operations center further, it's clear that we'll be providing fewer jobs than we did before. At least some part of that is the result of automation. I can't help but think this same pattern is playing out at other companies right now.

It really makes me sad that jobs are seen as inherently valuable. The way you phrase it, 'provide jobs', feels like jobs are something needed. Of course, in the current setup, this is true, but there are so many boring and hard jobs (worked by people who are yet poor) that we shouldn't mourn once we manage to get rid of them. I want an economy where we can celebrate automation and distribute the profits evenly.

FWIW, my take away from the recent US riots is that funding a class of idle people is a really bad idea.

Edit: Just to clarify, the class of idle people I’m talking about are all the people on (relatively) generous unemployment as a result of Coronavirus shutdowns.

Re: No Recent Automation Revolution

#224

Post by barrkel »

wolfram74 wrote: post #200
barrkel wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unearned income is unfulfilling and the people who think they earned it resent it being taken from them, even if it's only particularly large because there's a big market to sell into and a big winner effect in the market structure. I don't know the answers here but they don't look like free market capitalism or redistributive socialist utopia, and actually I think this axis or spectrum is an actively harmful frame f…

If unearned income is unfulfilling, we should raise the estate tax, why should the children of the poor be so blessed to need to work while the children of millionaires and billionaires be saddled with the curse of ennui?

You might think you're being facetious, but many wealthy people don't want their children's lives to be wasted on consumption, and so limit their inheritance: enough to do anything, but not enough to do nothing.

The most meaning in life comes from doing things for other people - not necessarily for money, but for other people.

I'd love if we could try and figure out a social, institutional, structural technology which doesn't require taxes (and thus politics and government) for this. Government slowly but surely gets captured by people with the biggest pockets, until populists take over and everything falls apart with simple wrong answers, or worse, kleptocracy.

Re: No Recent Automation Revolution

#225

Post by kspacewalk2 »

toasterlovin wrote: post #223
kaybe wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really makes me sad that jobs are seen as inherently valuable. The way you phrase it, 'provide jobs', feels like jobs are something needed. Of course, in the current setup, this is true, but there are so many boring and hard jobs (worked by people who are yet poor) that we shouldn't mourn once we manage to get rid of them. I want an economy where we can celebrate automation and distribute the profits evenly.

FWIW, my take away from the recent US riots is that funding a class of idle people is a really bad idea. Edit: Just to clarify, the class of idle people I’m talking about are all the people on (relatively) generous unemployment as a result of Coronavirus shutdowns.

They do tend to start looking for easy targets to justify getting their paycheck, zeroing in on minorities and the poor.

Re: No Recent Automation Revolution

#226

Post by barrkel »

EGreg wrote: post #188
barrkel wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unearned income is unfulfilling and the people who think they earned it resent it being taken from them, even if it's only particularly large because there's a big market to sell into and a big winner effect in the market structure. I don't know the answers here but they don't look like free market capitalism or redistributive socialist utopia, and actually I think this axis or spectrum is an actively harmful frame f…

Things become more fulfilling when you see everyone else doing them, such as raising kids. There are so many things people could be doing which are not compensated by the market and corporations. “Leaning in and earning $1 instead of 70c” is a meme that corporations use to get more humans to trade quality time with parents and kids for them. [1] Why don’t we ask about “Leaning out and spending more time with our fami…

> You've been CONDITIONED

I haven't been conditioned, thanks.

Large corporations enable efficiencies of scale which in turn enables modern living. We can't live at our current standards with artisan search engines, hand-crafted phones and home-made cars. But the same scale which enables modern living alienates workers from their labour. In most companies, all but a select few at the top have very little agency. They mostly get told what to do and they often don't even see the customer that benefits from the value they create. And the people with agency at the top get the vast majority of the profits.

The result is a society with a lot of inequality and poverty, and a mass of alienated consumers trying to purchase those things which are missing in their lives: narrative, stories which connect their consumption with humanity. Hand-made this, small batch that, experiences you can share with other people., the personal touches which weave a life into a broader more meaningful tapestry.

And raising children, of course. But that's somewhat bitter-sweet, knowing the world they're going out into, unless you have some assurance they're going to be among those with agency.

Re: No Recent Automation Revolution

#227

Post by m12k »

toasterlovin wrote: post #223
kaybe wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really makes me sad that jobs are seen as inherently valuable. The way you phrase it, 'provide jobs', feels like jobs are something needed. Of course, in the current setup, this is true, but there are so many boring and hard jobs (worked by people who are yet poor) that we shouldn't mourn once we manage to get rid of them. I want an economy where we can celebrate automation and distribute the profits evenly.

FWIW, my take away from the recent US riots is that funding a class of idle people is a really bad idea. Edit: Just to clarify, the class of idle people I’m talking about are all the people on (relatively) generous unemployment as a result of Coronavirus shutdowns.

FWIW my takeaway is that underfunding a whole class of people, especially when it comes to education and healthcare, so they have a much harder time succeeding in the job market and tend to die or go bankrupt if they get sick, is a really bad idea.

Re: No Recent Automation Revolution

#228

Post by wayoutthere »

jtbayly wrote: post #220
wayoutthere wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very much so; the current wave of automation is taking semi-skilled middle-class jobs and replacing them with low-skilled minimum wage jobs that can be filled with gig workers. High-skill jobs are still there, but the middle is rapidly being hollowed out. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the middle class is shrinking as a result.

That’s an interesting take on Uber that I don’t think I’ve seen before. I know Uber’s end-goal is automation such that taxi drivers aren’t necessary. What I didn’t realize is that it is route planning automation that allowed them to move from dedicated drivers to gig drivers.

Yeah, I recall an article about London taxi drivers having to memorize the labyrinth of streets in and around central London to get a taxi license. They were paid very well and the jobs were stable as a result — until Uber / Waze came along. Then the market was flooded by recent immigrants working for much less who were able to navigate unfamiliar streets with GPS and the job became way less stable.

Re: No Recent Automation Revolution

#229

Post by tharne »

omginternets wrote: post #192
mc32 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think it has a chance of happening in Vietnam or North Korea under communism?

No, the parent poster does not have Vietnam, nor North Korea, nor even communism in mind. You know this, and we know you know this.

Maybe they don't have Vietnam or North Korea in mind, but that's one possible end.

The comment "...distribute the profits evenly.Not going to happen under capitalism." strongly implies a communist or socialist solution to this very real issue around automation.

It's trendy to bring up socialist solutions and then re-label them or put the ever-cleansing phrase "democratic" in front. But it's important to note when talking about redistribution as a solve, that for every Sweden or Denmark, there's a Cuba or North Korea.

Re: No Recent Automation Revolution

#230

Post by ajuc »

Retric wrote: post #210
ajuc wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I want an economy where we can celebrate automation and distribute the profits evenly. In such an economy there's no incentive to work on further automation. In particular if there's a part of world where profits aren't distributed evenly - the innovation and manufacturing will move there.

It’s a question of implementation. Consider say a 10% dividend on the economy, in the US that’s 6,300$ per year per person. Which does not sound like much to live on, but historically represents a significant income. Not that the US would adopt such a system, but it could by cutting back other spending like social programs. A tiny group might try to live in it, but more would see seasonal jobs as enough. As automatio…

10% of billions of dollars is plenty enough to cause the companies to move to some tax heaven. You can fight that with tariffs, but the end game is being outproduced by orders of magnitude and losing any influence over global market.
Post reply on HN