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

'Hey Number 17 '

404media.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 168 posts

Re: 'Hey Number 17 '

#41

Post by some_random »

ryandrake wrote: post #37

What I'd love to know is: Assuming the founders pitched this idea for feedback to many people before getting this far, including to friends and family, didn't a single one of those people pull them aside and say: "Wait a minute, maybe stop and think about what you're actually creating here..." Could they find nobody in their circle of advisors who are able to empathize with low paid factory workers or at the very lea…

In much of the world, working slowly as "number 17" was is viewed as a personal moral failing. Just as you might view a rude manager being chewed out as just, the founders here and their circle view the humiliation of this factory worker as correct and good.

Re: 'Hey Number 17 '

#42

Post by GuinansEyebrows »

beepbooptheory wrote: post #29

You could stick to your guns and defend the company your supposed to be supporting, you could not fund these people to begin with, or you could admit a mistake and be honest that it was one. To not do any of these seems like the absolute worst. Morality aside, you'd think YC would at least enough money to hire a good PR person to respond to a reporter with something at all for moments like these! You gotta really won…

It should come as a surprise to nobody that a venture capital firm is Bad, Actually.

Re: 'Hey Number 17 '

#43

Post by uoaei »

LoganDark wrote: post #16
uoaei wrote: post #10

I think we should have a reckoning as a society regarding the prevalence and predilections of sociopaths. Patric Gagne is a PsyD with diagnosed sociopathy (technically anti-social personality disorder, I think ) who writes and speaks about her experience and she makes a number of good points. One is that we often can't conceive of sociopaths as anything but the stylized depictions we get in media where they are often…

> One is that we often can't conceive of sociopaths as anything but the stylized depictions we get in media where they are often portrayed as violent animal abusers or serial killers. This is psychopaths!!! Sociopaths are different. Sociopaths just lack empathy, they do not necessarily want to do anything with that . Psychopaths are the ones who intentionally cause harm. Psychopaths can have empathy and simply choose…

As I understand, the terminology has evolved since the time that Dexter was still being released.

The DSM-V does not list either sociopathy or psychopathy, so any definitions ultimately have no authority and are merely colloquial.

That being said, I remember an effort to discourage the use of "psychopath" and to move them under the umbrella of "sociopath" since it was more of a condition affecting social behaviors than psychology per se.

Re: 'Hey Number 17 '

#44

Post by theamk »

Etheryte wrote: post #15

This is exactly why we need regulations that prohibit this. The upcoming EU regulations [0] seem to at least partially cover this, as employment is one of the high risk categories for AI systems. What that means in detail is still to be seen, but at least the groundwork is already there. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43152937

Will those regulations help with non-AI version of the same?

If you want plot a worker's performance graphs (and fire them for underperformance), you don't need any AI or vision or even a computer, just a supervisor who manually counts the workers' outputs.

"Hey number 17, how come you made only has 10 boxes this morning, while number 16's has made 25 boxes already. Work harder!"

Unlike AI stuff, it will only be daily/twice-per-day; but that is still enough for the dystopia that is described in the article.

Re: 'Hey Number 17 '

#45

Post by mattgreenrocks »

I believe there's a bright future for software that enhances and amplifies our humanity in different ways. What form would that take? If I knew, I'd be working on it, but I sense a lot of opportunity in un-disenchanting technology for various demographics.

As for this tech: it should die in a fire. If the creators read this, they should understand that they are potentially inventing the shackles that they themselves will be bound in (albeit later).

Re: 'Hey Number 17 '

#46

Post by o11c »

ryandrake wrote: post #32
speak_plainly wrote: post #7

Imagine if they had read something like Out of the Crisis by W. Edwards Deming. Instead of creating a digital whip for shallow (or even outright harmful) managers, they could have developed a QA tool grounded in real, deep thinking—one that respects proven principles of manufacturing. There’s still time to course-correct, and embracing some of the foundational literature on the topic could make the difference.

When anyone argues that Engineering majors shouldn't have to take all those pesky electives and get at least a basic grounding in Ethics and the Humanities, we can point to this startup as a potential consequence.

Has any of those classes ever been actually useful for this kind of thing though?

The closest classes I took could be summarized as:

* Snowden: good or bad?

* Poor people should try enjoying rich-people hobbies!

* Does it belong in a museum, or should it be returned to the descendants of the people it was taken from? (actually a very interesting class)

Re: 'Hey Number 17 '

#47

Post by [deleted] »

imglorp wrote: post #31

We were told the machines would free us from repetitive or injurious work, letting us pursue more meaningful and prosperous lives. Or at least they would be our partners we could leverage. Instead, will they be the tools of our enslavement to The Man?

[deleted]

Re: 'Hey Number 17 '

#48

Post by theamk »

ryandrake wrote: post #37

What I'd love to know is: Assuming the founders pitched this idea for feedback to many people before getting this far, including to friends and family, didn't a single one of those people pull them aside and say: "Wait a minute, maybe stop and think about what you're actually creating here..." Could they find nobody in their circle of advisors who are able to empathize with low paid factory workers or at the very lea…

Depends on how you pitch...

"Today, workers who get paid per week might not notice they are working slow, and be super surprised when they get a very small paycheck at the end of the week. But with our technology, we give them the early warnings, so they can speed up so their paycheck is bigger! See, we benefit them!"

It's all B.S. of course, but founders can be pretty convincing - charisma is one of the major requirements for their job.

Re: 'Hey Number 17 '

#49

Post by gowld »

It's giving https://www.monticello.org/slavery/online-exhibitions-relate...

> Many slaveowners, including Jefferson, understood that female slaves—and their future children—represented the best means to increase the value of his holdings, what he called “capital.” "I consider a woman who brings a child every two years as more profitable than the best man of the farm," Jefferson remarked in 1820. "What she produces is an addition to the capital, while his labors disappear in mere consumption."

Re: 'Hey Number 17 '

#50

Post by LoganDark »

uoaei wrote: post #43
LoganDark wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One is that we often can't conceive of sociopaths as anything but the stylized depictions we get in media where they are often portrayed as violent animal abusers or serial killers. This is psychopaths!!! Sociopaths are different. Sociopaths just lack empathy, they do not necessarily want to do anything with that . Psychopaths are the ones who intentionally cause harm. Psychopaths can have empathy and simply choose…

As I understand, the terminology has evolved since the time that Dexter was still being released. The DSM-V does not list either sociopathy or psychopathy, so any definitions ultimately have no authority and are merely colloquial. That being said, I remember an effort to discourage the use of "psychopath" and to move them under the umbrella of "sociopath" since it was more of a condition affecting social behaviors th…

I would be capable of psychopathy, but not sociopathy, because I am capable of empathy, but can consciously choose to ignore it when necessary. Both labels have their uses.
Post reply on HN