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

471–480 of 572 posts

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#471

Post by nemo44x »

shanusmagnus wrote: post #468
nemo44x wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s called the iron law of oligarchy.[1] All democratic organizations decay into oligarchies - a minority group of elites that are in control. So the question becomes who gets to join that elite and how do people get cycled out of it. When there isn’t a sufficient cycling (people who shouldn’t be a part any longer remain - nepotism etc; people that don’t deserve to be a part are invited - diversity for diversities s…

I'd never heard of this, and it's already proved a fascinating rabbit hole. Thanks!

It’s worth looking into Vilfredo Pareto and Gaetano Mosca, both from the Italian school of elitism. The overruling theme being a well connected, organized minority will always rule over a disorganized and disinterested majority.

Machiavelli too had many interesting ideas, in particular how the elite moved through the various forms of government. A monarch decays into a despot and is eventually overtaken by an aristocracy of nobles which decays into democracy over a few generations which has a very short life and takes on the darker side of “rule by few” as an oligarchy. Eventually they become so decadent that a populist government (rule by many, the darker side of democracy) overtakes them and soon after a new prince, or monarch “of the people” is born and the cycle continues possibly over many hundreds of years.

Looking at America I think we are in the oligarchical phase and pushing hard towards a populist whom will reform the government dramatically.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#472

Post by blibble »

fnord123 wrote: post #373
raincole wrote: post #211

Luddites in the age of AI don't exist. Until at least some data centers get burned down to the ground, comparing the current anti-AI movement to Luddites is just ridiculous.

Are you aware that the Writer's Guild of America were striking for 4 months against AI doing their jobs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Writers_Guild_of_America_... There are also many law suits against AI works: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/20/books/authors-openai-laws... You really require that they resort to physical violence when they know fully that data in one DC will be backed up elsewhere so it will ha…

if it puts a billion people out of work I don't think that having a few hundred data centres will help even slightly

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#473

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

nojvek wrote: post #466
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sort of backwards. First they came for the writers and illustrators, and I did nothing because I'm not a writer or an illustrator. Then they came for the musicians, and I did nothing because I only listen to music. Then they came for the text-dependent professional classes, and I did nothing because I'm not one of those people. They they came for the programmers, and the plumbers sat around laughing saying "and you t…

If AI can truly reason and build complex applications - I.e it has mastered composition and causality, then AI would have a full mental map of how commercial and residential buildings work. How every pipe fitting links to each other. In that case plumbers aren’t needed for small things since a user could state their problem to a smartphone and AI could guide them to the correct fix as it debugs the users house. Same…

The one thing that is clear from your comment is that you've never done much plumbing or electrical work. I don't mean to be rude, but your idea that the problem is to build "a full mental map of how commercial and residential buildings work" is just absurdly far off the mark. I mean, that is an important part of the work, but its just a necessary and utterly insufficient aspect.

> The whole point of AI is to build cheaper labor that follows instructions, never sleeps, never forgets, replaceable if broken.

How utterly tedious, boring and unimaginative.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#474

Post by nico »

FrustratedMonky wrote: post #444
nico wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 wel…

And who said anything about capitalism vs communism?

Seems like you are just arguing with yourself there

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#475

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

andsoitis wrote: post #461
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an assertion made, necessarily, without evidence. It's also value laden in terms of what is considered "costly", and who should make the judgement.

Maybe if we look at the opposite assertion, that technological regress would improve humanity, we can arbitrate which is likely more directionally correct. There’s also a third assertion which can help our thinking, and that is that we have just about the right amount and type of technology, so we should halt now (vs regress or progress). So the question then is: which of these three assertions are likely correct?

The fact that moving from A to B is a net negative does not imply that moving "back" from B to A is a net positive. All 3 scenarios (net positive, net negative, neutral) are entirely possible.

"The right amount of type of technology" is again a value judgement, tied into ideas about what a good life involves. It is also complicated by long term side effects, as we are seeing with the use of fossil fuels - there was a fairly good argument for their use 120 years ago, but it turns out that whether that argument was or wasn't correct, planning to continue to use them "forever" is not only infeasible, but utterly detrimental.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#476

Post by creer »

hnfong wrote: post #286
creer wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. Fo…

> There is nothing inevitable about the dollar store putting the grocer out of business. I recently came across this, and I think it does a good job explaining the problem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQpUV--2Jao

Great new video on how Dollar General operates and the impact, positive or negative on the area. I had seen something similar ages ago but this is a good one too. Or it's the same video, reheated.

However, it sells the boring usual cliché on how DG stores kill the local food stores: Dollar General sells the stuff they carry for far less. Well of course they do! Duh. While in the same video it is also shown that the local food store sells lots of things the Dollar General doesn't. Stop expecting to make a living by things you can't compete on. That just does not make sense. And the solution is NOT to get the other guy outlawed - that's tempting and seems easy but that only works in the short term. Shuffle prices around, carry other things, add services, change hours, do something! A potential issue could be that a tiny town may only be able to support so much retail activity. I don't think this one is in play. The stores of a small isolated town have a moat: their customers would have to drive at least 20 minutes, bus at least 40 perhaps, to get to the next store. And the small retail stores that persist all over Europe do NOT do so by selling the same stuff for more money. THAT is just dumb.

Another example shown in this video is 69 DG-equivalents within 10 miles of a downtown (all carrying the same things). There is plenty of buying power in that otherwise poor area. There should be space for other stores, probably for inexpensive fresh food and for more specialized stores. At least until Amazon figures out the fresh food issue. But obviously there isn't space for smaller stores trying to make a living selling the same things! Obviously?

For that matter, the video also describes the working conditions and salary of the DG-equivalents: minimum wage and employees who don't care. Another area where other stores can compete: by having a slightly more engaged workforce.

I would love to find videos discussing people who "actually did something rather than sit on their asses" and either it worked or failed. Pointers anyone?

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#477

Post by shanusmagnus »

nemo44x wrote: post #471
shanusmagnus wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd never heard of this, and it's already proved a fascinating rabbit hole. Thanks!

It’s worth looking into Vilfredo Pareto and Gaetano Mosca, both from the Italian school of elitism. The overruling theme being a well connected, organized minority will always rule over a disorganized and disinterested majority. Machiavelli too had many interesting ideas, in particular how the elite moved through the various forms of government. A monarch decays into a despot and is eventually overtaken by an aristoc…

I'm really interested in these views that view these human systems almost as physical systems, with semi-legible dynamics and complex (but comprehensible) interactions, and even implications. Thus the irons laws.

I'm also very taken with the idea of systems propagating themselves. Formally, this is called "autopoiesis" and is its own fascinating and related rabbit hole.

The coolest thing this morning, prompted by your comment, is the "self-licking ice cream cone" [1]. This paper [2] is particularly intriguing. Thanks again.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-licking_ice_cream_cone

[2] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234554226

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#478

Post by fatherzine »

adwn wrote: post #455
zlg_codes wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many things twisted like this in our living memory and it irritates the hell out of me. How do we deal with it aside from endlessly correcting people? Indeed, Luddites weren't against technology. The McDonald's hot coffee lady case wasn't frivolous. "The customer is always right..."? Yeah, "... in matters of taste." It means you don't sell a customer who wants a green car a red one. The "welfare queen" stor…

> The McDonald's hot coffee lady case wasn't frivolous. No, this isn't "twisted in our living memory". The people who think that the lawsuit is frivolous haven't forgotten that the coffee was hotter than other fast-food coffee, or rather, it has no bearing on their assessment. Coffee is a hot beverage, and it's in your personal responsibility not to put a flimsy cup containing a hot beverage between your legs, especi…

I would encourage you to read the facts, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restaura...

They sold 180–190 °F coffee, with a lid, to a 79yo lady at a drive-through window. She was sitting in her car and spilled the coffee in her lap while trying to remove the lid. I don't have an opinion on the legal ramifications, but the setting has 'horrific accident waiting to happen' written all over it.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#480

Post by avgcorrection »

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…

Under the current regime jobs can be automated away and the businesses will reap 100% of the profit unless there is a union standing in its way: AI could be used on footage of a day's work some actor and recreate their likeness forever. Paid for one day, then the derived work is owned by the business forever.

We could for example say that 90% of jobs get automated away. The benefit for the businesses are astronomical as all those jobs get turned into direct profit. Meanwhile the workers get the change to... upskill? Yeah, so they just have to “upskill” forever while the businesses get free profit because they sit on the means of automation. (Remind me how the businesses have to put in work, here? Seems like they only get the upsides while the workers get all the downsides.)

Until there is nothing to upskill into anymore because only 12% of the labor pool is needed for actual work.

The notion that workers and employers are anywhere near to being peer competitors is bizarre.

Post reply on HN