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

Mechanical Turk Stations for the Urban Poor

chrismaury.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 160 posts

Re: Mechanical Turk Stations for the Urban Poor

#71

Post by greyish_water »

tomjen3 wrote: post #14
shingen wrote: post #4

What this article is effectively advocating, but can't or won't say outright, is that America needs the ability to pay people less than the minimum wage. Someone working all day at mechanical turk, is likely to fall below the federal minimum wage rate in terms of what they're pulling down per hour. Is it ok for companies to utilize mass scale labor at what becomes in reality a sub minimum wage rate? Particularly if m…

First of all, the payment is about seven dollar according to the article that is slightly above minimum wage. It may be below some states wage but it is clearly close. What mechanical turk does allow companies (and individuals) to do however is to hire people for a very short term (a few seconds) for, literally, pennies. And assuming that enough work was available we should expect the rate to increase since there wil…

the payment is about seven dollar according to the article

This is unrealistic in practice. The Simple Dollar article cited describes making >$7 in an hour, but $6.55 of that comes from writing an article on email autoresponder marketing and writing a review of an unspecified service. Those aren't the kind of tasks that anybody can accomplish in a timely and competent manner, nor is the supply of those tasks reliable.

Re: Mechanical Turk Stations for the Urban Poor

#72

Post by whateverer »

cornell532 wrote: post #65
pron wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a market for everything: human organs; hit-jobs. But you know what, I'm not even arguing the merits of the free market. I'm simply amazed at the fact that most comments here simply discuss the efficiency of the process, as if this were an algorithm or a development methodology, rather than something involving real living people, and not any people, but the weakest in society. I'd like to suggest that instead…

Libertarianism would say that hit-jobs (and stolen organs) involve coercion. That is, it's not "2 consenting adults", but rather a market for doing harm on to other people and creating a "externality effect" of harm. This is similar to dumping pollutants into our air or oceans. Yes it might appear "free", but it actually does harm to 3rd parties. In fact, I think the market for human organs is an interesting analog.…

Yeah... that would get really morbid as desperate people start to sell their organs to secure the welfare of their loved ones. Sometimes rational actors acting in their best interest is the least important part of how you model a problem.

Re: Mechanical Turk Stations for the Urban Poor

#73

Post by underwater »

wavephorm wrote: post #26

This resonates a lot with Henry Ford's innovations of conveyor belt assembly lines. Ford found out how to humans into an early form of robot, and once technology caught up these jobs inevitably were replaced with actual robots. Even if this Turk Station idea works, how long will it be until AI replaces any need for Mechanical Turk? About 10 years I'm guessing? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assembly_line#Ford_Motor_Com…

The point of Mechanical Turk is to decouple the workers from the task being done. As computing advances there should always be some kind of task that requires human effort.

Re: Mechanical Turk Stations for the Urban Poor

#74

Post by prawn »

Half-baked adaptations:

Combine with a Vegas pokie/slot machine. Complete menial hits in exchange for a few more cents to play.

Or combine with vending machines. You want that can of Coke? Pay by categorising 30-40 photos quickly.

Re: Mechanical Turk Stations for the Urban Poor

#75

Post by tnuc »

Mechanical Turk takes up to 30 days to approve payment for any task, so instant payment is out of the question.

Having a terminal where someone can sit for hours on end being the same place as a cash dispenser isn't the best idea. The users would probably be better off breaking into it. They need to be separated.

Perhaps a better solution would be to start a sweat shop full of terminals where the sweatshop owner pays them on approved tasks, after taking a cut.

Re: Mechanical Turk Stations for the Urban Poor

#76

Post by cornell532 »

pron wrote: post #69
cornell532 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Libertarianism would say that hit-jobs (and stolen organs) involve coercion. That is, it's not "2 consenting adults", but rather a market for doing harm on to other people and creating a "externality effect" of harm. This is similar to dumping pollutants into our air or oceans. Yes it might appear "free", but it actually does harm to 3rd parties. In fact, I think the market for human organs is an interesting analog.…

Well, I think that the problem with what you're saying is the definition of "consent". Suppose there existed a part of society that was born to people of means, or at least - connections. Then, suppose there was another part that was born to generations of neglect, and even abuse by the other part (I think that in the US, abuse had taken some extreme forms at various times in history). Now, I'm not so sure that a per…

Ah, now we arrive at the real nut of anti-Libertarianism: paternalism. The notion that somehow adults are not capable of making their own decisions. This is our fundamental disagreement. To me, impoverished, indigent people struggling to make ends meet are fully capable of making their own decisions. People fondly recall stories of their immigrant ancestors working hard and struggling in order to provide a better life for their children. Why do we want to curtail the ability of today's poor from making the same decisions? You're deciding for them that it's better to stay poor than whatever alternative they might choose for themselves (in an effort to climb out of poverty) because you know better than them.

I will admit, there are roles for government regulation in the marketplace. I simply do not know enough about the chicken I buy at the grocery to make an informed choice. I appreciate the health inspectors, organic labels, and other regulations that facilitate a free, fair, and efficient marketplace in which I do not need to know the farmer to be confident my chicken will not poison me.

However, I do not think lack of open (and understandable) information is the issue in this particular case.

Regarding your last point, I agree with you. The more interesting aspect here is not the implementation details, but rather the questions you're raising of free enterprise, the freedom to work, and the freedom to engage in free & fair commerce of your choosing.

Re: Mechanical Turk Stations for the Urban Poor

#77

Post by cornell532 »

whateverer wrote: post #72
cornell532 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Libertarianism would say that hit-jobs (and stolen organs) involve coercion. That is, it's not "2 consenting adults", but rather a market for doing harm on to other people and creating a "externality effect" of harm. This is similar to dumping pollutants into our air or oceans. Yes it might appear "free", but it actually does harm to 3rd parties. In fact, I think the market for human organs is an interesting analog.…

Yeah... that would get really morbid as desperate people start to sell their organs to secure the welfare of their loved ones. Sometimes rational actors acting in their best interest is the least important part of how you model a problem.

What do they do now? You make it sound like there's a better alternative currently available!

The reason they would consider selling a FUTURE interest in their organs is because it would be the best option on the table. Since it's not currently available as an option, they must be choosing considerably worse option now (which is the best currently available option).

How is your alternative more just, more fair, better?

---------------- EDIT ----------------

Imagine YOUR loved one received a liver/heart/kidney in this manner, thereby saving his/her life. And in so doing it DID improve the welfare of someone loved by the donor allowing him/her to get a better education, get better housing, or something else worthwhile.

What is so horrible about that? Your insurance company would cover it and it would make the world a BETTER PLACE for everyone. By the way, the surgeon gets paid a lot of money for a complex procedure like organ transplant; what's wrong with a donor getting a tiny fraction of that for his/her contribution providing the amazing, wonderful gift of life?

Re: Mechanical Turk Stations for the Urban Poor

#78

Post by Natsu »

hooande wrote: post #66
shingen wrote: post #4

What this article is effectively advocating, but can't or won't say outright, is that America needs the ability to pay people less than the minimum wage. Someone working all day at mechanical turk, is likely to fall below the federal minimum wage rate in terms of what they're pulling down per hour. Is it ok for companies to utilize mass scale labor at what becomes in reality a sub minimum wage rate? Particularly if m…

I was under the impression that "by the piece work" was currently not subject to the minimum wage. For example, if you pay someone $1 per apple that they pick, you aren't required to pay them a minimum amount per hour. Is there anyone familiar with labor law who can provide some perspective?

That's a good question. The law is pretty complex and I don't pretend to understand it all, but the basic answer as I understand it is that piece work rates have to be calculated in such a way that you'll get the "prevailing wage rate" -- http://www.dol.gov/elaws/esa/flsa/14c/18e.htm

There are also exceptions for people with disabilities, special minimum wages (you can actually pay the disabled less than minimum... sometimes), etc.

So, I think the basic answer is that you still have to respect minimum wage, but how you do that is pretty complex.

Re: Mechanical Turk Stations for the Urban Poor

#79

Post by pron »

cornell532 wrote: post #76
pron wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I think that the problem with what you're saying is the definition of "consent". Suppose there existed a part of society that was born to people of means, or at least - connections. Then, suppose there was another part that was born to generations of neglect, and even abuse by the other part (I think that in the US, abuse had taken some extreme forms at various times in history). Now, I'm not so sure that a per…

Ah, now we arrive at the real nut of anti-Libertarianism: paternalism. The notion that somehow adults are not capable of making their own decisions. This is our fundamental disagreement. To me, impoverished, indigent people struggling to make ends meet are fully capable of making their own decisions. People fondly recall stories of their immigrant ancestors working hard and struggling in order to provide a better lif…

Sorry, buddy. What you're describing isn't libertarianism. Libertarianism must first of all advocate true liberty, including liberty from exploitation, and if it's not the government's job to enforce this freedom, then you must advocate the exploited's right to fight the exploitation, even through violent means, because exploitation is a form of violence as well. That people under extreme duress do not really have the option of a truly free choice is not paternalism - it's a fact.

What you're describing isn't libertarianism. It's simply a way to preserve power in the hands of those who already possess it. You can't condone the government's right to legislate laws that permit economic exploitation but prohibit violent opposition.

Re: Mechanical Turk Stations for the Urban Poor

#80

Post by whateverer »

cornell532 wrote: post #77
whateverer wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah... that would get really morbid as desperate people start to sell their organs to secure the welfare of their loved ones. Sometimes rational actors acting in their best interest is the least important part of how you model a problem.

What do they do now? You make it sound like there's a better alternative currently available! The reason they would consider selling a FUTURE interest in their organs is because it would be the best option on the table. Since it's not currently available as an option, they must be choosing considerably worse option now (which is the best currently available option). How is your alternative more just, more fair, bette…

Well, without regulation it won't necessarily be the _FUTURE_ interest in selling an organ. As I said, desperation can make a person do crazy things, and there's more to consent whether there's a contract involved and no guns pointed to anyone's head.

And while it creates an incentive to donate organs, it also allows wealthier people to hoard them. Remember that the circumstances which allow the organs of a person to be successfully extracted for transplant are pretty rare[1], they essentially have to die in a hospital of brain death with their organs intact, so even if more people are willing and legally bound, offer may still fail to satisfy demand, only this time it will be mostly a matter of who has more money. And that's not exactly fair.

1. http://www.organtransplants.org/understanding/death/

Post reply on HN