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

The future of jobs: The onrushing wave

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 141 posts

Re: The future of jobs: The onrushing wave

#71

Post by toomuchtodo »

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #54
raverbashing wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"and it's replaced both a gym and a trainer for me " Exactly The game is enough for you (and for a lot of people) And that's in the universe of people that do exercise currently. But the game doesn't replace weights/equipment (as much as the bodyweight people want to convince it's not needed) or more advanced training techniques (and frankly, several "fitness trainers" are misguided) But trainers and gyms etc are goi…

Weights and equipment can't be emulated in software. And you need a gym to keep them in and provide hot showers after. But I'd say that there's less need for a personal trainer than ever before. You can find the how-to use video on youtube, the community on reddit/r/fitness, the training calculator on your phone, etc. I don't see that trend reversing.

There is a chemical compound going through investigation currently that emulates exercise in your muscle tissue:

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/17/exercise-in-a-pill-...

What we can't emulate in software or robotics, shall be done in biology.

Re: The future of jobs: The onrushing wave

#72

Post by EthanHeilman »

gregpilling wrote: post #63

I am always stunned with statements like this: "For those not in the elite, argues David Graeber, an anthropologist at the London School of Economics, much of modern labour consists of stultifying “bullshit jobs”—low- and mid-level screen-sitting that serves simply to occupy workers for whom the economy no longer has much use. Keeping them employed, Mr Graeber argues, is not an economic choice; it is something the ru…

>Yes, I, as an employer, keep my staff doing "bullshit jobs" because I want to "keep control over the lives of others." WTF?!?! Why would I do that?

One reason bullshit jobs exist is because decisions are made by managers, not some ultimate rational owner who thinks only of profit. In many big companies a manager's status is based on the number of people they manage, if they invent more jobs for people they are more important and get promoted. The same problem exists with corporate budgets, the more money a manager spends/controls the more status that manager has, the faster they move up the ladder, thus managers are incentivized to get as much of the budget as possible and to claim that all the projects and things they purchased helped the company. This prevents the company from even understanding the level of waste which is occurring.

Same thing happens in governments or any hierarchical organisation above a particular size. It is an extension of Celine's second law[0].

For a deeper and much more cynical view of corporate dysfunction read the Gervais principal[1].

>Marx would love it - it puts the means of production in the hands of the common man.

Not sure Marx would love it as it could individualize production and thereby reduce the mechanization and discipline of the proletariat which he felt was necessary for the class to act effectively. I think Proudhon would love it as he was more in favor of individual freedom.

You might be interested to know that Mao tried a maker revolution[2]. It was a complete disaster because it was poorly planned and executed, but shows that Mao was at least open to ideas of radical decentralization.

[0]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celine%27s_laws#Celine.27s_Seco...

[1]: http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-o...

[2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backyard_furnace

Re: The future of jobs: The onrushing wave

#73

Post by maerF0x0 »

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #54
raverbashing wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"and it's replaced both a gym and a trainer for me " Exactly The game is enough for you (and for a lot of people) And that's in the universe of people that do exercise currently. But the game doesn't replace weights/equipment (as much as the bodyweight people want to convince it's not needed) or more advanced training techniques (and frankly, several "fitness trainers" are misguided) But trainers and gyms etc are goi…

Weights and equipment can't be emulated in software. And you need a gym to keep them in and provide hot showers after. But I'd say that there's less need for a personal trainer than ever before. You can find the how-to use video on youtube, the community on reddit/r/fitness, the training calculator on your phone, etc. I don't see that trend reversing.

> "Weights and equipment can't be emulated in software. "

But if you have a friggin strong robo butler, it can provide all the resistance you need.

Re: The future of jobs: The onrushing wave

#74

Post by maerF0x0 »

JshWright wrote: post #61
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like you have a good grasp of the subject. One comment: as for batteries, they are almost there, not at all far away. Metal-air batteries are already capable of over a thousand watt-hours/kg. As for reading smoke, a machine could be adapted to ready everything - heat, smoke, particle size, explosive residue, gas leak - and factor all that in. I don't mean to denigrate an experience firefighter's skills. But a…

I don't know much about metal-air batteries... Based on some quick reading, it seems most of them use water as the electrolyte solvent. Wouldn't they have issues with ambient temperatures north of 100˚C?

water doesnt boil in sufficiently small sealed containers-- the pressure keeps it liquid.

Re: The future of jobs: The onrushing wave

#75

Post by maerF0x0 »

grandalf wrote: post #28

If unemployment ever becomes a problem we can simply outlaw the wheat combine, which will open up hundreds of thousands of jobs harvesting grain manually.

or we could have a national slingshot gift to all children. Window jobs for everyone, and a few eye doctors too.

Re: The future of jobs: The onrushing wave

#76

Post by JshWright »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #74
JshWright wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know much about metal-air batteries... Based on some quick reading, it seems most of them use water as the electrolyte solvent. Wouldn't they have issues with ambient temperatures north of 100˚C?

water doesnt boil in sufficiently small sealed containers-- the pressure keeps it liquid.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding how metal-air batteries work... I thought they used ambient air as the oxidizer, precluding them from being sealed.

Re: The future of jobs: The onrushing wave

#77

Post by douche »

JshWright wrote: post #34
SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #2

They estimate in their chart that Athletic trainers have a 0.007 chance of being automated, the third lowest chance after therapists and dentists. it's hard to know exactly what they class as "Athletic trainers". For Olympic athletes, there will always be staff. For the rest of us, what would that "unlikely" automation of the coach look like? Perhaps it would start with a movement sensor on the wrist? A smartphone ap…

Yeah, the same chart lists a 17% chance that "firefighters" will be automated... I'm equally curious what then definition of "firefighter" is. If they are talking about woodland (or "forest") firefighting, then _maybe_ (I could see drones accomplish at least some of the tasks involved). But for structural firefighting? No way... Not in 20 years.

I was under the impression that more modern building construction and heating technologies have already made a large percentage of professional firefighters redundant - hence why they spend as much time responding to car accidents and working as EMTs as actually fighting fires.

Re: The future of jobs: The onrushing wave

#78

Post by eli_gottlieb »

grandalf wrote: post #62
eli_gottlieb wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many people, for some strange reason, believe they would rather see the end of the world than the end of capitalism.

My point was that employment is not something to be overly focused on. The idea of creating millions of jobs by outlawing the combine is absurd to most people, as should be the idea of ever trying to "create jobs" via policy. In a dynamic economy there will always be lots of demand for labor. At the margins, some labor is priced very low, which is a separate social issue for which I favor some kind of welfare system.…

But why on Earth would there be any such things as jobs when algorithms can do almost all economically necessary work and people don't like working?

Re: The future of jobs: The onrushing wave

#79

Post by JumpCrisscross »

gregpilling wrote: post #63

I am always stunned with statements like this: "For those not in the elite, argues David Graeber, an anthropologist at the London School of Economics, much of modern labour consists of stultifying “bullshit jobs”—low- and mid-level screen-sitting that serves simply to occupy workers for whom the economy no longer has much use. Keeping them employed, Mr Graeber argues, is not an economic choice; it is something the ru…

Creating "bullshit jobs" doesn't need a coördinated cabal. The wrong incentives can manufacture such roles in a distributed fashion.

Consider our tax system. Government bureaucracies refine the tax code. The same bureaucracies that fight each year for their budget allocations from Congress. Districts reward Congressmen who bring jobs home. Increased staffing, cost, taxation and knock-on bureaucracy ensues across government. And complexity. That complexity keeps accountants and tax lawyers employed. They are not interested in having the complexity legislated away [1].

Thus a system generating more and more self-fulfilling (and -employing) complexity. To keep civil servants and tax professionals employed. Cabal-free bullshit jobs. (Consider the difficulty with which structural reforms are being introduced in Greece, Italy and Spain. Those countries' elites are being forced to retrench the bullshit. They will likely pay with their seats of power.)

[1] http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/04/15/303356915/sto...

Re: The future of jobs: The onrushing wave

#80

Post by eli_gottlieb »

api wrote: post #65
gregpilling wrote: post #63

I am always stunned with statements like this: "For those not in the elite, argues David Graeber, an anthropologist at the London School of Economics, much of modern labour consists of stultifying “bullshit jobs”—low- and mid-level screen-sitting that serves simply to occupy workers for whom the economy no longer has much use. Keeping them employed, Mr Graeber argues, is not an economic choice; it is something the ru…

Bullshit jobs arise in two ways. One is through the crazy inefficiencies of huge companies and governments. This is likely not you. Second is as an emergent property of red queens races in the economy, escalating complexity or overhead that does not actually increase overall macro productivity. The latter requires at least a casual familiarity with evolutionary game theory, but once comprehend cannot be un-comprehend…

Utter failure would have been nuclear self-annihilation.
Post reply on HN