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

561–570 of 572 posts

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#561

Post by zlg_codes »

kevinventullo wrote: post #81
zlg_codes wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given what the "top" of society looks like currently, the Luddites were correct to be skeptical of technology, and accusations of "Luddite" at the slightest hint of not being 100% on board with the latest fad technology make this discussion seem in bad faith. Most techies I know do not have a skeptical eye for technology, even though IMO they should. This shit is being used to spy on and manipulate us with the data t…

My view of the culture says techies never say no to new shiny The only people I know who remotely care about things like data privacy and GDPR are techies. I personally will never install a “smart home” device.

Yes, one must generally be technically inclined to be one of the careful ones, but as we both know, that brand of techie isn't as common.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#562

Post by zirgs »

val314159 wrote: post #347
zirgs wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did anyone care about welders who got replaced, because robots are much better at welding car frames together? Only now when "prestigious" white collar positions are being threatened people are starting to freak out.

check out 80's movies. The dying steel town was a trope.

Yeah, but was there a campaign against products that were assembled with robots?

Like there are anti AI art campaigns on Artstation and elsewhere.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#563

Post by devilbunny »

topaz0 wrote: post #538
devilbunny wrote: post #465

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> quality of the cloth produced by the machines was worse than the handmade stuff Yes, it was, but it was far cheaper. You can still get extraordinarily good fabrics today, extremely well-made hand-sewn leather goods. But a standard size carry-on suitcase made of high-quality leather in the US will run you around $1000-1500. You can buy a crappy mass-produced plastic one of the same size for around $100, or a well-ma…

Yes, it was cheaper. And lower quality. What's your point.

Sometimes, you don't actually need good quality, and price is the only thing you care about. Without the machines, even the low-quality stuff is expensive.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#564

Post by yterdy »

tibbydudeza wrote: post #379
kdmccormick wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

We all want our cheap TV's at Walmart but sadly people in general don't think of the bigger consequences of wanting low bargain basement prices for consumer good or paying low to little tax. Yet they complain about joblessness and how the education system and their neighborhood/towns are going to the balls.

"We all want"

Let me push back on that. We are all TOLD to want, using psychologically manipulative tactics. Advertising as corporate/Capitalist propaganda.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#565

Post by kortilla »

supertimor wrote: post #530
kortilla wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Profit can easily be redistributed. It’s better to have a machine that makes 100 cakes for 100 people with only 2 people working than to employ all 100 people without the machine to make 4 cakes.

But historically, profit has NOT been redistributed. Why would this time be any different? The people who make the profits have the power to influence legislation to benefit themselves and keep from sharing in their profit. This is one of the fears that actually gave rise to the Luddite movement, and so far history has only proven that there is merit to this fear. When workers brought up these concerns, the factory o…

> But historically, profit has NOT been redistributed. Why would this time be any different?

What are you talking about? Taxation has been around for a very very long time.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#566

Post by fnord123 »

ytoawwhra92 wrote: post #545
fnord123 wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> From my pov, they are using the violence of the legal system to stop/slow AI. Luddites used extra-legal methods to try to accomplish their goals, so I don't think the comparison really works.

I'm not a historian but I think luddites need to be seen in the context of the history of trade unions. Unions at the time existed but didn't have the power they developed in the 1900s. So extra legal means seemed to be all that was available to them; while nowadays people can work more effectively inside the law.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#567

Post by pauldenton »

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…

60% of the population used to work in Agriculture. Now that's more like 2% Do you think the 6/10 classmates who had career choices they wouldn't have otherwise "benefited from Agricultural Automation"? Even if they didn't own any farms or Agricultural Manafacturing stocks. Their labour being freed up for other uses helped them no?

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#568

Post by pauldenton »

DonHopkins wrote: post #312
DonHopkins wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.” -- Douglas Adams

And from the opposite, lunatic, racist, misogynistic, narcissistic end of the Adams spectrum: "If Joe Biden is elected to the White House, there’s a good chance you will be dead within the year." "Republicans will be hunted, police will stand down." -- Scott Adams "Based on the current way things are going, the best advice I would give to white people is to get the hell away from Black people. Just get the fuck away.…

The January 6th committee has been Democrats hunting Republicans. And we don't draft women or children to the military, and we put them on the life boats first.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#569

Post by zlg_codes »

ImHereToVote wrote: post #336
zlg_codes wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when can a computer come up with a novel idea? Do not be fooled by GPT, it's a fancy Markov chain hooked up to training data. It cannot come up with anything that wasn't already in its data set.

Can you?

Yes, I think most people can come up with a somewhat novel idea. A lot has been done, so there are fewer novel ideas than there were 10000 years ago, but I see little reason why a human cannot come up with a novel idea.

It's not even the ideas that are valuable, it's making them happen. I can think up tons of things, but lack the resources to make any of them happen.

Re: Rethinking the Luddites

#570

Post by zlg_codes »

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…

Is it also personal responsibility when a rollercoaster fails? They knew the risks, allegedly.

This is a dim moral view of humanity. Basically nobody is liable to you, even if they fuck up? That's not how morals and ethics work.

I'm convinced those that beat the drum of personal responsibility are simply conservatives that want everyone to lead a shit life. There is only so much one can do to avoid the damage that others cause. But of course, no personal responsibility to the businesses hurting people, right?

Dead giveaway of conservative, backwards outlooks. You would not be able to build a community with those values.

What are your thoughts on sexual assault?

Post reply on HN