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

441–450 of 572 posts

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#441

Post by creer »

sandworm101 wrote: post #425
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 oppo…

You can call it dark, or you can hire the many fine software people laid off from the twitter ridiculosity. Your choice.

The job market is strange currently. Low unemployement rate (in part because of how many people withdrew). Businesses complaining they can't find people (some in part because they offer too little money). Many perenially underemployed. Absurd hiring processes (because of perceived cost of hiring the wrong person rather than nobody at all.)

My point is that simply "calling it dark" is not helpful to any of the participants.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#442

Post by Joker_vD »

creer wrote: post #434
hef19898 wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even more cynical, small kids were sent into said machines to conduct maintenance while the machine was running !

Yes to this chain. Noticing this absurd lack of machine safety and doing something about it would have helped everyone. And the government reaction to the whole thing was equally absurd.

> the government reaction to the whole thing was equally absurd.

It, however, would later give Marx a nice example of how the government is the tool that the ruling class uses to oppress the working classes and get their way: because when seen from this angle, the reaction was entirely reasonable.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#444

Post by FrustratedMonky »

nico wrote: post #224
FrustratedMonky wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies are people, but not free from duress. Duress of having to eat, having a mortgage, having tuition, debt. Everyone has a boss, and a budget to hit. It is the Banality of Evil. US corporations are full of layers of Middle management made of "Eichmann"s. Be it violating environmental laws on dumping, covering up sexual abuse, or sending people to ovens. It happens, has happened, and will get worse. And yes, it…

Are you then suggesting that it doesn’t matter? That we should just shrug and give up? Or that we should just allow for any group of people to do anything to another group of people, because it just happens, it’s just human nature, so whatever? I guess that’s kind of the way the US has been going for a while now

Nothing I said even hinted at giving up.

Just because humans tend to create systems that tend to reward evil doesn't mean we can't try to be better.

The problem isn't capitalism or communism. Both are run by humans who could choose to be better.

I don't know how to improve humans. I know it isn't religion given it's tendency to just become another system that rewards evil.

Maybe it is just groups, humans don't do well in large hierarchies.

But not saying to give up, maybe just saying, stop arguing about capitalism versus communism, since they both can be good or bad depending on the humans that make it up.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#445

Post by creer »

tibbydudeza wrote: post #371
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…

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.

It turns out manufacturing is actually doing fine in the US as an industry. Just very different and probably employing higher skilled machinists (and at CNC machines).

But meanwhile Denmark has been making a go at a constructive, thought out, response. Perhaps let's look at how that works - who retrains for what? (Which I don't know in detail.)

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#446

Post by andsoitis »

jschveibinz wrote: post #361
Modified3019 wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conversely, a country that allows AI to replace too many jobs will find itself buried in masses of angry people with little to lose except their devalued lives.

Both of these comments are excellent. However, countries don’t make decisions. Individuals (that are mentally capable) make decisions, within their economic framework, and the result emerges at the national or global level. Individuals will decide how to respond to AI, and we will see what happens. My guess, based on past adoptions of work-saving technologies, is that anyone capable of using AI to make their job easi…

> countries don’t make decisions. Individuals (that are mentally capable) make decisions, within their economic framework, and the result emerges at the national or global level.

The economic framework, including rules, regulations, incentives, and penalties, amongst others, are set by government (“the country”).

Also, if government decides to employ and find AI, that already pushes things in a certain direction.

So yes, while individuals decide how to use AI, it is very much governments that have tremendous capacity and interest to bend and accelerate or decelerate its adoption patterns.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#447

Post by tap-snap-or-nap »

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...

"Masses controlling the ballot box" is far more complicated than most people understand.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#448

Post by glimshe »

Joker_vD wrote: post #442
creer wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes to this chain. Noticing this absurd lack of machine safety and doing something about it would have helped everyone. And the government reaction to the whole thing was equally absurd.

> the government reaction to the whole thing was equally absurd. It, however, would later give Marx a nice example of how the government is the tool that the ruling class uses to oppress the working classes and get their way: because when seen from this angle, the reaction was entirely reasonable.

While originating in Marxism, this thought is also exposed by Libertarians in their critique of government. Giving too much power to the government is basically the same as giving power to elites and thus it is a move against freedom.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#449

Post by creer »

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's exactly the same. It was a sudden upheaval of the established way to make a living. Not even very sudden. And responded to in the usual low-thought primary manner (except for a few places like Denmark). Few frames got broken, but lots of strikes no doubt contributed to accelerate the process even in cases where it shouldn't have been economically optimal.
Post reply on HN