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

421–430 of 572 posts

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#421

Post by topaz0 »

makeitdouble wrote: post #385
creer wrote: post #264

The luddite example is one of suddenness: The owners see the massive advantage of mechanization and move in fast. The workers are blindsided - they don't have the time and spend all the time they do have in a ludicrous war. The regions are somewhat mono-industry which completes in making a giant mess. All in all the exact quandary not to get caught in. Now that they have demonstrated it, long ago, do we really have t…

Well put. To note, luddites' issues were not just losing their job. Let's remember that the earlier machines were very crude, safety was absolutely not in their design, and a worker life's also didn't have much weight. So, the early days of machine assisted production were in inhumane conditions, people losing limbs, kids getting killed in them (less skills needed also meant kid labour was a viable option) etc. So ye…

To add to your note: iirc the Luddites were also concerned because the quality of the cloth produced by the machines was worse than the handmade stuff, beyond all of the labor abuses and job losses. Another parallel to the AI age.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#422

Post by VHRanger »

kdmccormick wrote: post #374
tibbydudeza wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember the mantra of some in the tech field of "no problem - just learn to code" when blue collar jobs in the manufacturing in the US was on the wane as production moved to cheaper locations overseas.

I think that is a good point to bring up, but it is orthogonal. Production moving overseas is not the same as technological advancement. One can be against outsourcing but in favor of domestic technological progress.

It is in fact the same from the economic point if view.

You are replacing labor input with capital input, whether it's buying a machine or offshoring the work. Workers offshore can be thought of as a machine.

Not that it's bad either way! But the labor economics are the same.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#424

Post by throwuwu »

__loam wrote: post #404
0dayz wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but not everything needs to analyzed politically. Nor making a political assumption about someone.

[flagged]

The alternative is to oppose the political class that has been manipulating popular opinion for a hundred years now in order to maintain their positions of power. Our current form of representation, although it’s a joke to call it that now, has been obsolete for decades. Examine the principals upon which it’s based, they make no sense with modern communication technology.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#425

Post by sandworm101 »

creer wrote: post #264

The luddite example is one of suddenness: The owners see the massive advantage of mechanization and move in fast. The workers are blindsided - they don't have the time and spend all the time they do have in a ludicrous war. The regions are somewhat mono-industry which completes in making a giant mess. All in all the exact quandary not to get caught in. Now that they have demonstrated it, long ago, do we really have t…

>> to recognize a looming availability of human workforce which might be useful for some (other) business opportunity.

In other words: a cheap labor force of people now desperate enough to accept lower compensation that their previous employment. If these later employers were able/willing to pay a similar wage, they would have already been doing so. Predicting a forthcoming a wave of despite people as a business opportunity, a chance to pay people lower wages tomorrow than you would have to today ... that is a dark sentiment. I think twitter is going to fail, but I'm going to wait on launching my new startup until the market is flooded with x-twitter employees willing to work for peanuts. Dark.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#426

Post by myth_drannon »

jampekka wrote: post #352
mullingitover wrote: post #138

Counterpoint to fears of losing the drudgery we're entitled to: once the value of labor has evaporated, and we still have the masses controlling the ballot box, we may finally achieve Fully Automated Luxury Communism[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fully_Automated_Luxury_Communi...

And we have the, mostly commercial, propaganda machine controlling the masses. And regardless, if the masses would try to use the ballot box to make moves to something like FALC, it would be taken away, by force if necessary. This has been seen countless times. Looking at how wealth, capital and power are concentrating, we are well on our way to some sort of new feudal system.

How do we know we are not in feudal system right now? Propaganda machine is telling us we are in a democracy, but all I see is oligarchy controlling the system.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#427

Post by heavyset_go »

adasdasdas wrote: post #38

> Luddism stood not against technology per se but for the rights of workers above the inequitable profitability of machines Being against the inequitable profitability of machines is just as dumb as being against technology, especially outside of a socialist context which this definitely was. It's basically crying that someone else is doing something better than you. In fact, I think being against technology wholesal…

> It's basically crying that someone else is doing something better than you.

That "someone else" used state power to beat you, imprison you and starve your family if you dared to organize with other workers.

Meanwhile, literal conspiracies of factory owners had full legal protection and the ability to write laws, including laws that gave the death penalty for machine breaking.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#428

Post by livrem »

jampekka wrote: post #356
justanotherjoe wrote: post #246

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.

The better of countries have already reached the point where increase in GDP doesn't increase wellbeing, and wellbeing is actually in decline.

This is probably one of the reasons why there is finally talk in some countries of moving on to a four-day week.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#429

Post by Ensorceled »

JohnFen wrote: post #79
Ensorceled wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google "wage theft US" ... I think some people treat people well, but I've met too many small business owners who bristle at paying minimum wage.

Big businesses, too.

For sure! But there are sooooo many people who think that the majority of small business owners are good people who take care of their employees like they're family.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#430

Post by heavyset_go »

ImHereToVote wrote: post #410
zone411 wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Athletes might be an example. But yes, once robotics advances, there won't be that many left.

Athletes only really have a job because of advertising money. Why advertise to homeless people?

The rich will pay to watch the poors fight each other.
Post reply on HN