21–30 of 113 posts
"What does it mean for the economies of these up-and-coming world powers? Well, probably the same thing that it means for everyone else: The automators will continue to get very, very rich, while the automated will have to find something else to do." Or, you know, basic income. Why is the answer to "there are no jobs anymore" always "well, I guess you can starve, then"?
Cites recent layoffs but has no real stats on the decline of outsourcing, near shoring, etc. Weak. Part of the problem with India is lack of standards. There are people who are good at programming in both the US and India and people who are bad at it. The problem is in the US most of the bad ones don't end up getting a CS degree where in India they do. This means there are a lot of people in India who have a little b…
The problem is of course that the world is placing too much emphasis on degrees and this doesn't scale, because education costs are going through the roof and because degrees are so desirable, the system is being gamed. I see this happening in my own country and everywhere really. Lets take the US as an example - how many software developers skipped college? How many founders skipped college? Quite many, compared with the rest of the world.
This is one of those cases in which you're not seeing the forest from the trees. Do you think those indian companies you're talking about aren't aware that they are routinely hiring mediocre people? Of course they do and they like the ability of doing so, because consulting scales only horizontally - the more people you have, the more profit the company makes. And if universities would get tougher, they would just hire people without degrees and still access the same projects they are accessing today.
http://www.blueprism.com/about/bpm.php
Basically sounds like Selenium for mainframes/win32 powered by some decision tables?
That's certainly one way to solve the enterprise integration problem...
"What does it mean for the economies of these up-and-coming world powers? Well, probably the same thing that it means for everyone else: The automators will continue to get very, very rich, while the automated will have to find something else to do." Or, you know, basic income. Why is the answer to "there are no jobs anymore" always "well, I guess you can starve, then"?
Its almost like a signaling error. A farmer would gladly grow corn in exchange for a tractor and a mechanic would gladly supply that tractor in exchange for corn, but the corn that theoretically could be factory farmed by automation would be cheaper than the farmer can grown and the robot built tractor would theoretically be cheaper than the mechanic can build so neither do anything. Both farmer and mechanic starve a…
I wonder if you could actually model economic systems using impulse response and signal filtering mathematics
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To add to this; a lot of companies in India just gather as many people as they can with a CS degree in a building (often 1000s) and hire them out in 'teams' to western companies. This is a valid (currently) business plan which makes them a lot of money. It also gives outsourcing a really bad name, but that does not seem to deter companies from hiring these kind of, let's call them what they are, sweatshops. The idea…
I don't really see the problem here. Indians are willing to work under these conditions, which honestly don't sound worse than the US. It sounds like even though they might shrink/grow teams at will, because the building has many teams, the risk for the individual is low. And you said that companies are happy with the work these teams do. So what is the problem?
Quality wise I have not seen anything coming from these shops, however that might be OK for departmental (read CRUD; the type MS Access was made for) LoB applications, mobile apps and internal sites.
Edit: stand corrected, I did say happy.
Cites recent layoffs but has no real stats on the decline of outsourcing, near shoring, etc. Weak. Part of the problem with India is lack of standards. There are people who are good at programming in both the US and India and people who are bad at it. The problem is in the US most of the bad ones don't end up getting a CS degree where in India they do. This means there are a lot of people in India who have a little b…
To add to this; a lot of companies in India just gather as many people as they can with a CS degree in a building (often 1000s) and hire them out in 'teams' to western companies. This is a valid (currently) business plan which makes them a lot of money. It also gives outsourcing a really bad name, but that does not seem to deter companies from hiring these kind of, let's call them what they are, sweatshops. The idea…
This statement and lack of any citations with statistics makes me suspect this as an opinion, not necessarily factual. I am a engineer from Bangalore, India. I worked for a few years with companies that outsource teams to many countries across the world. I lived in Bangalore for over 20 years and I know a lot of people who are in similar line of work. Most software companies provide competitive salaries (according to wages in India based on Indian cost of living, which is lower compared to the US) along with annual leaves, sick/casual leave, maternity leaves, statutory programs like provident fund (retirement benefits in India), gratuity fund etc. Many companies (all companies I have worked with and I know people working in) provide a lot more benefits than the ones I mentioned. I worked with companies that provided facilities like on-campus full time doctors, financial support programs, gyms, swimming pools, libraries, higher education support, employee rewards programs, sports programs, transport facilities etc. I have never heard of CS engineers hired and monitored by cameras to ensure work. I would like some citation on this, and even if it occurred at some place I doubt it's a problem at such a scale that it should be termed that it usually happens.
And, about quality of work, a large portion of the outsourcing projects involve support and maintenance of an existing software/website. Many of such customers do not have software as their primary business e.g. a internal web based software for a huge construction company. Such L2/L3 support work generally tends to be repetitive and does not require highly skilled software programmers. There are lot of companies that work on the same outsourcing model which cost the customers a lot higher and produce high quality work, such companies generally attract the better skilled engineers and customers that require high quality products.
My point, outsourcing software companies in India are definitely not sweatshops. There are sweatshops in parts of India mainly in the textile industry and they most certainly do not hire CS engineers. And, there are good and bad engineers everywhere, it's not determined by where they are from or who employs them.
> The automators will continue to get very, very rich, while the automated will have to find something else to do. Part of me thinks this will lead to make much more apparent the paradox of capitalism: Those with the most money can... make the most money. Over time this means it all gets funneled into just a few families' pockets, until they own everything (which is silly and most likely would not be put up with afte…
Problem with this is that most workers don't have the skills and experience, and self-teaching can only go so far in a lot of specialized areas.
Further, you run into the issue of a worker who is, say, 50 and has just been 'automated out'. Learning an entirely new skill set and trying to get into a field where your previous experience may not even be applicable at that age would be brutal, if its even possible in many instances.
To make matters worse, some developed countries (UK and USA to name a couple) have taken to the mindset of cutting education and skills training and prioritized those areas even lower so that it'll only become that much harder for workers to build up skills in the first place...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To add to this; a lot of companies in India just gather as many people as they can with a CS degree in a building (often 1000s) and hire them out in 'teams' to western companies. This is a valid (currently) business plan which makes them a lot of money. It also gives outsourcing a really bad name, but that does not seem to deter companies from hiring these kind of, let's call them what they are, sweatshops. The idea…
>> I hear some companies actually get work done this way.. This statement and lack of any citations with statistics makes me suspect this as an opinion, not necessarily factual. I am a engineer from Bangalore, India. I worked for a few years with companies that outsource teams to many countries across the world. I lived in Bangalore for over 20 years and I know a lot of people who are in similar line of work. Most so…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't really see the problem here. Indians are willing to work under these conditions, which honestly don't sound worse than the US. It sounds like even though they might shrink/grow teams at will, because the building has many teams, the risk for the individual is low. And you said that companies are happy with the work these teams do. So what is the problem?
Indians are willing to work under these conditions => willing or don't (think they) have much choice? And i'm sure rows of long, room wide desks without any separation between 1m workspaces with touching chairs and cameras pointing at you to keep you in your chair is not normal/allowed in the US? It certainly is not over here. I see quite a lot wrong with it. It keeps the prices low, sure. I didn't say the companies…
If you apply basic microeconomics to this situation, it is actually very simple. The company makes Indian workers better off, American workers worse off, and American companies better off.
"What does it mean for the economies of these up-and-coming world powers? Well, probably the same thing that it means for everyone else: The automators will continue to get very, very rich, while the automated will have to find something else to do." Or, you know, basic income. Why is the answer to "there are no jobs anymore" always "well, I guess you can starve, then"?