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

The Software Revolution

blog.samaltman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 397 posts

Re: The Software Revolution

#161

Post by cottonseed »

peapicker wrote: post #58

"Trying to hold on to worthless jobs is a terrible but popular idea." I'm not sure I agree with this proposition. When I was in India, I noticed a large amount of roadwork was being done by men with shovels and other fairly low tech. I asked about it, and was told, to paraphrase, "Sure, we could do it better and faster with machines, but it is better for society to provide employment to those who would otherwise be u…

Although I am one, I will never understand the mentality of the American worker. You would rather give up your time and freedom to have someone tell you want to do (and that's "dignified") rather than be given total freedom which with ... you would sit on your ass and do nothing? Is there really such an utter lack of creativity out there that that's the best use of your time you could think of if you didn't have to work?

Re: The Software Revolution

#162

Post by sp332 »

gaius wrote: post #126
xj9 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh I dunno, learn to read, find out what modern work they find interesting, get an education, &c. Just because somebody is only qualified to do manual labor now doesn't mean they don't have other talents/abilities. I did manual labor for a long time before I made the gamble to jump into software development. I had the luck to see it work out, but society can provide resources to help people move into more fulfilling…

That is certainly one point of view but the legions of highly educated unemployed in Western nations suggest that it isn't actually true.

The difference between a high school diploma and a bachelor's degree is halving the unemployment rate. http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_chart_001.htm

Re: The Software Revolution

#163

Post by jayfuerstenberg »

Meekro wrote: post #112
peapicker wrote: post #58

"Trying to hold on to worthless jobs is a terrible but popular idea." I'm not sure I agree with this proposition. When I was in India, I noticed a large amount of roadwork was being done by men with shovels and other fairly low tech. I asked about it, and was told, to paraphrase, "Sure, we could do it better and faster with machines, but it is better for society to provide employment to those who would otherwise be u…

"Sure, we could do it better and faster with machines, but it is better for society to provide employment to those who would otherwise be unemployed." They could have employed even more people if they gave them spoons instead of shovels.

Agreed. Let's take it one step further than let them use their fingernails. An honest day's work for all!

Re: The Software Revolution

#164

Post by zenogais »

shas3 wrote: post #130
peapicker wrote: post #58

"Trying to hold on to worthless jobs is a terrible but popular idea." I'm not sure I agree with this proposition. When I was in India, I noticed a large amount of roadwork was being done by men with shovels and other fairly low tech. I asked about it, and was told, to paraphrase, "Sure, we could do it better and faster with machines, but it is better for society to provide employment to those who would otherwise be u…

This is a very skewed view of how things are for these construction workers. I'll give you the benefit of doubt that you have chosen a terrible example to make your point. But in general, 'jobs that don't come back' are usually replaced by higher skilled, more 'meaningful' jobs. It is related to the so called 'lump of labor fallacy'. See more here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy and here in an N…

Just wanted to point out that the lump of labor fallacy is not a fallacy in the same way a logical fallacy is - whether it is fallacious or not is dependent on what economics axioms you choose to accept. In fact, the history of the fallacy leaves it far from settled[1]

[1]: http://econpapers.repec.org/article/tafrsocec/v_3a65_3ay_3a2...

Re: The Software Revolution

#166

Post by ashark »

delinka wrote: post #11
gphil wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure if you're asking sama about his opinion or if you want others to chime in. A popular answer among the HN crowd that I tend to agree with is to tax the wealthy and distribute the proceeds to the poor via a "basic income" scheme.

Why wait for a tax? If we're in the top %x of income earners, why aren't we taking it upon ourselves to give away our wealth? Form a charitable organization that takes care of people, donate your money. Edit: I'm with the others here replying with "reduced burdens on the middle class and small businesses" and "...teach a man to fish..." I keep seeing this basic income and wealth distribution topic on HN and I would g…

The short answer? Game theory.

The longer answer?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volunteer%27s_dilemma

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_rider_problem

And, more broadly:

http://raikoth.net/libertarian.html#coordination_problems

Re: The Software Revolution

#168

Post by pixl97 »

dnautics wrote: post #98
girmad wrote: post #2

> Technology provides leverage on ability and luck, and in the process concentrates wealth and drives inequality. I think that drastic wealth inequality is likely to be one of the biggest social problems of the next 20 years. [2] We can—and we will—redistribute wealth, but it still doesn’t solve the real problem of people needing something fulfilling to do. What's the best case realistic scenario for redistributing w…

I am puzzled by this. There is also this first order decrease in cost of living that technology drives, that really is the 'rising tide that lifts all boats', in effect, a 'natural' progressive redistribution[0]. It would be hard to argue that inequality increased between, say, 1700 and 1900 because of the increase in technology. [0] This 'natural' redistribution tends to be counteracted by authorities that debase th…

> It would be hard to argue that inequality increased between

Based on averages, why would it be? Inequality does not measure where you are coming from, it measures the relative economic distance between groups now. We can all live better these days and yet have a far greater difference in wealth between the richest and poorest.

Re: The Software Revolution

#169

Post by Animats »

Altman sees the problem, but is vague about what to do about it.

He's right that this is a new thing. It's not "software", per se, it's automation in general. For almost all of human history, the big problem was making enough stuff. Until about 1900 or so, 80-90% of the workforce made stuff - agriculture, manufacturing, mining, and construction. That number went below 50% some time after WWII. It's continued to drop. Today, it's 16% in the US.[1] Yet US manufacturing output is higher than ever.

Post-WWII, services took up the slack and employed large numbers of people. Retail is still 9% of employment. That's declining, probably more rapidly than the BLS estimate. Online ordering is the new normal. Amazon used to have 33,000 employees at the holiday season peak. They're converting to robots.

After making stuff and selling stuff, what's left? The remaining big employment areas in the US:

  State and local government, 13%. 
   That's mostly teachers, cops, and healthcare. 
   (The Federal government is only 1.4%).
  Health care and social assistance, 11%.
  Professional and business services, 11%.
   (Not including IT; that's only 2%) 
  Leisure and hospitality, 8%
  Self-employed, 6%.
That's about 50% of the workforce. All those areas are growing, sightly. For now, most of those are difficult to automate. That's what the near future looks like.

[1] http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_table_201.htm [2] http://deadmalls.com/

Re: The Software Revolution

#170

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

enraged_camel wrote: post #103
peapicker wrote: post #58

"Trying to hold on to worthless jobs is a terrible but popular idea." I'm not sure I agree with this proposition. When I was in India, I noticed a large amount of roadwork was being done by men with shovels and other fairly low tech. I asked about it, and was told, to paraphrase, "Sure, we could do it better and faster with machines, but it is better for society to provide employment to those who would otherwise be u…

>>While I doubt this would happen to me as a software engineer, I would certainly rather work and have my dignity than sit on my ass, collect basic income, and feel worthless. Actually, you say that because you are a software engineer: it's quite a dignified job. Digging ditches out in the desert is not.

I assure you this is not a troll, I'm trying to figure out your thought process.

How is one dignified and the other not?

Post reply on HN