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

Rethinking the Luddites

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 572 posts

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#241

Post by creer »

lolinder wrote: post #51
coolhand2120 wrote: post #14

People are happy to use tech like wix to build a web page because building web pages is hard. Virtually every designer, artist, writer, and musician, were all very happy to use wix even though it cost the jobs of legions of developers. “Finally I can do what these nerds can do without their help”. I really don’t see the difference.

When a dollar store moves into an area, it provides most products for cheaper than an independent grocer possibly can, inevitably putting the local grocer out of business. It's sad for the grocer, but surely it's for the benefit of the community as a whole, right? Everything is cheaper! Except that the dollar store doesn't sell produce, and it just put the store that did out of business. I see a similar trend with au…

I don't think that reasonning is correct. There is nothing inevitable about the dollar store putting the grocer out of business. The grocer doesn't have to insist and try to sell the same things the dollar store does. There are many other things that need retailing, and there are many other services that need providing. For example everywhere I look, farmers markets are doing great - while surrounded by megamarts. For another example, the alleged king of megamarts is doing a truly shitty job and giving a free ride to Amazon. It's not that Amazon or Target are winning but that it was Walmart's opportunity to not win and they are valiantly going at giving everyone else a chance. The grocer can absolutely "not even try" but that doesn't prove a whole lot. Granted that once that grocer has let both the dollar store and the online marketplaces take over, well now they have to get truly creative and adapt to two generation steps at once. And then again, surrounded by megamarts and free advice web sites, stores dedicated to wine with advice, or dedicated to cheese are all over Europe. Their job is retail and they found a need and a customer base that neither the megamarts nor amazon could manage.

You mention the web designer and that's again a good example - but not supporting the direction you want, I think. Web design is a field that's easy to enter (because does not require tens of years of experience or expensive in house server farms or expensive tools or license or large corporate team). It's not obvious for a busy small business to find a not-sold-out but good web designer but only because of near full employment. Probably that web designer should be more and more aware and agile using lower level tools (including generative AI and lower wage countries), but there is no reason supply and demand can't still meet each other in web design. Even in the age of Wix and such. They are different kinds of offerings which do compete with each other so that the boundary fluctuates but do not replace each other. Wix only displaces web designers that only do what Wix does. And even then only marginally so: a web designer can use Wix - just better than the customer - and have a service to sell.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#242

Post by SamoyedFurFluff »

raincole wrote: post #220
paxys wrote: post #170

It's telling that this anti-automation and anti-AI movement is finally reaching its crescendo now that creative and white collar jobs are under threat. These same people writing books about the evils of AI sat back over the last few decades as countless factory jobs, farm jobs, retail jobs and even "lower class" intellectual jobs (like bookkeepers, travel agents and telephone operators) were automated away. "It's jus…

> It's telling that this anti-automation and anti-AI movement is finally reaching its crescendo Is it? I just fail to see how it "reaching its crescendo". Luddites DID destroy machines. Where are the anti-AI people buring data centers down? If anything I will say there is barely any anti-AI movement happening around the world right now. There are millions of vegan people choose to not eat meat as their lifestyles. Do…

Tv and Hollywood writers in one of the most culturally exported countries in the world striked for several months with specific anti AI demands, which were then capitulated to today.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#243

Post by eru »

paxys wrote: post #170

It's telling that this anti-automation and anti-AI movement is finally reaching its crescendo now that creative and white collar jobs are under threat. These same people writing books about the evils of AI sat back over the last few decades as countless factory jobs, farm jobs, retail jobs and even "lower class" intellectual jobs (like bookkeepers, travel agents and telephone operators) were automated away. "It's jus…

> These same people writing books about the evils of AI sat back over the last few decades as [...]

What makes you think so? People in eg their 20s or even 40s writing books today, haven't been around long enough to do much of anything 50 years ago.

And hand-writing about automation stealing jobs does have a long and storied history.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#244

Post by pixl97 »

hexage1814 wrote: post #136
HDThoreaun wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

90% of people ever to exist were only looking out for themselves. The luddite claim that the industrial revolution made their life worse was absolutely not wrong, even if their actions were selfish.

>The luddite claim that the industrial revolution made their life worse was absolutely not wrong So what? How is this even relevant? ATM machines also made the lives of bank tellers worse cause they lost their jobs. As well as the countless automations that happened. "Oh, better stop all technological progress to ensure I have a job", it doesn't work like this, it never did, and anyone who tried this failed miserably…

>So what? How is this even relevant?

Because when the luddites were kicked off their fiefdoms, there was no social safety net to ensure they didn't starve.

This is the point the gun ho capitalists tend to completely forget about while bitching that taxes are too high. When people are given the option of 'starving in the street' or 'burning your factory to the ground' they'll choose the later. If you setup a society where losing your job is not losing your life, for example by providing retraining, you the rabid free market fiend will have a safer life.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#245

Post by eru »

w_for_wumbo wrote: post #3

There's plenty of rhetoric about whether technology advancements will be a good thing or not. But I think that distracts from the core message, that the most important matter is not whether we use technology, but how we treat our fellow humans. By replacing labour with robots and not compensating them, you're sending a clear message that you don't respect people and the value that they bring. We have a mandate for us…

> By replacing labour with robots and not compensating them, you're sending a clear message that you don't respect people and the value that they bring.

Huh, what? When you get a glass of fresh water from your tap, do you send a dollar to the displaced water carriers of yesteryear?

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#246

Post by justanotherjoe »

from a maximization point of view, it's clear that there is some kind of maximum point in human welfare graph. It doesnt go up and up and up forever. At some point, we'll reach (reached?) the maximum and furyher progress will lower rather than increase the human experience. It's no surprise. But I think it's ultimately just local maxima. I dont see how this tech wont benefit us in the grand scheme of things.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#247

Post by eru »

TerrifiedMouse wrote: post #225
JohnFen wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By replacing labour with robots and not compensating them, you're sending a clear message that you don't respect people and the value that they bring. Companies already send that clear message even without AI. That's why there's fear here: we expect companies to behave as they always have, and that is with a level of contempt for human workers.

They have a contempt for the cost of human workers and, frankly, just cost in general.

Getting more bang per buck is exactly how material progress works.

Reducing costs is really, really important, and nothing to be ashamed about.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#248

Post by mm263 »

Gigachad wrote: post #96
lolinder wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you completely missed the article's thesis. It's not about whether people lose their jobs, it's about whether people lose their livelihoods. Millions of lost jobs is inevitable, but millions of ruined lives is unacceptable. > In the era of A.I., we have another opportunity to decide whether automation will create advantages for all, or whether its benefits will flow only to the business owners and investors l…

I don't think AI and automation actually matters here. You just have a strong welfare safety net so anyone is caught regardless of how they got there. And then you don't have to do wacky accounting about jobs replaced by AI.

AI is already here. Advancements in the next 5-10 years are going to be unprecedented. Will we be able to spin up a safety net at the same pace?

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#249

Post by eru »

heavyset_go wrote: post #237
danuker wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By replacing labour with robots and not compensating them, you're sending a clear message that you don't respect people and the value that they bring. I see many problems with this statement: - Is a new robot-only company fairer than firing humans at an old company? - Should we as a society forego the benefits of automation, because it makes some people unemployed? - Should there be a robot tax? What is a robot? Is…

> - Should we as a society forego the benefits of automation, because it makes some people unemployed? We as society aren't the beneficiaries of automation, those profits go to private owners. Given that price points exist, the benefits of lowering costs of production are captured by increasing profit margins. After those profits are captured, we as society have to shoulder the burden of caring for potentially thousa…

> Given that price points exist, the benefits of lowering costs of production are captured by increasing profit margins.

Historically, that hasn't held true for long: competition catches up.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#250

Post by eru »

SoftTalker wrote: post #177
danuker wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My worry exactly! Ideally we should need no jobs, and machines should do all the work.

Have you seen what people do when they have nothing to do? Be careful what you wish for. ChatGPT notwithstanding, we're a long way from a Star Trek post-scarcity world.

People find things to do.
Post reply on HN