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

Uber will offer gig work like AI data labeling to drivers while not on the road

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 111 posts

Re: Uber will offer gig work like AI data labeling to drivers while not on the road

#101

Post by array_key_first »

oefrha wrote: post #98
ryandrake wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no reason to hide it anymore. A CEO can go on CNBC and openly admit "Yes, we are excited about AI because if it works we won't have to pay so many middle class white collar workers anymore" and there are many average people who will ideologically defend it, as if they'll somehow be immune.

Any time you dare to mention AI is going to replace software devs here, loads of people come out of the woodwork saying there’s zero evidence and it’s all just the end of ZIRP or whatever. Well I know for a fact that my company’s art spending is way down, and while we haven’t fired any software engineer we also haven’t added any. I’m very conservative about the AI hype but I can’t deny a 20%-30% boost at the moment s…

Software development jobs will be some of the first to go.

If you think about what we do, it's very manual. We're the assembly line workers of the office. We manualy, painstakingly, put the product together out of primitive pieces.

Re: Uber will offer gig work like AI data labeling to drivers while not on the road

#102

Post by array_key_first »

FredPret wrote: post #99
Avicebron wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your spherical cow version of economics is laughably naive and misguided. If "adults" decided tomorrow that it was fine to employ people at only the infrastructure cost of preventing them running away, people would be outraged. But somehow flooding an ecosystem with money to starve meaningful competition and capitalize on people's inherent lack of options, which is "preventing them from running away with extra steps"…

It’s reality-based, empirical economics, not “mine”. Place that let adults choose who to work for and who to employ, and furthermore consider it improper to even use the word “let” in this context, universally have better employment situations than places that follow your “spherical cow” theoretical planned / over-regulated economies. You seem to ascribe agency only to the employers, but remember that every Uber driv…

Similarly, a lot less children would be impoverished if they could work in factories. Time to put those little hands to use! Oh, uh, for humanity or something.

We do have to draw the line somewhere and it is arbitrary.

Re: Uber will offer gig work like AI data labeling to drivers while not on the road

#103

Post by insane_dreamer »

zeroonetwothree wrote: post #78
mikkupikku wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My ideal would be a world in which boring, heavy, dangerous, etc work is replaced by machines. Giving humans time and opportunity to pursue creative, fun, stimulating or intellectually challenging tasks. I can't quite square people seriously believing such things, it seems like it must be wishful thinking crossed with denial. We have more than 200 years of technology taking away the hard and dangerous jobs and it h…

This is pretty wrong. We went from 90% of the population working in agriculture in ~1800 to (now) 80% working in services. Most services jobs are much nicer (and require far less manual labor) than those in agriculture.

> Most services jobs are much nicer (and require far less manual labor) than those in agriculture.

We tell ourselves that because none of us have ever done agriculture. But I'm not so sure that it's true. Yes, far less manual labor. But manual labor isn't a bad thing.

Technology has made our lives _easier_, no question about it. It could also make our lives _better_, but I'm not sure that it is anymore (I feel like the curve has flattened, except for the few who are reaping nearly all the benefits of increased technological "progress").

Re: Uber will offer gig work like AI data labeling to drivers while not on the road

#104

Post by r721 »

jamwil wrote: post #91
ryandrake wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always wondered what the world would look like if these huge powerful corporations were run by average people instead of multi-billionaires completely out of touch with what it's like to live in the world. Like have a lottery where everyone gets a single ticket, and the person whose name is drawn gets to be the CEO of Apple for a year, and the 10 next-drawn tickets get to be the senior staff.

This is similar to my idea for a better democracy. Every cycle involves a lottery where, say, 1000 random citizens become eligible to run for public office. A small enough number to make ‘career politician/sociopath’ an unviable life path but large enough that there will inevitably be some excellent potential candidates in the pool that wouldn’t have entered politics otherwise.

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

Re: Uber will offer gig work like AI data labeling to drivers while not on the road

#105

Post by notepad0x90 »

skeeter2020 wrote: post #55
notepad0x90 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you can stop working at any time, so that's what they do, and then start working for another company. Any employer can't have a problem with working a second job, so long as you're not violating a non-compete.

Pretty tough to have a non-compete when you're casual and/or a contractor. Some jurisidctions make this illegal in even more of an employer/employee relationship, most aren't going to enforce it in an Uber-style job, and it would never be cost-effective for Uber et al. to go after a contractor. They would just kick the "offender" off the platform - which might still be very bad for them.

Yeah, that was my point to the original comment. there are no non-competes and they're fulfilling their obligations under their contract.

Re: Uber will offer gig work like AI data labeling to drivers while not on the road

#106

Post by cindyllm »

nativeit wrote: post #58
intended wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hell, tech used to be.. it still is.. the thing I am interested in. It meant a cool future to look forward to. This for sure isn’t that.

To quote several other people who have made thoughtful pieces around this in the past: the futurism espoused by people like Elon Musk seeks to engage with the aesthetics of Star Trek, whilst ignoring entirely the post-scarcity socialism that Roddenberry’s worlds very clearly represented. That’s not quite as apt today, as it seems he’s just as happy to engage with the aesthetics of Blade Runner while also cheerfully e…

[dead]

Re: Uber will offer gig work like AI data labeling to drivers while not on the road

#107

Post by jamwil »

r721 wrote: post #104
jamwil wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is similar to my idea for a better democracy. Every cycle involves a lottery where, say, 1000 random citizens become eligible to run for public office. A small enough number to make ‘career politician/sociopath’ an unviable life path but large enough that there will inevitably be some excellent potential candidates in the pool that wouldn’t have entered politics otherwise.

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

Close but slightly different. As I envision it, the random selection would only be for the pool of candidates. People in the pool would have the option but not the obligation to run and there would still be campaigns and voting as there are now, just with a very narrow slice of the population eligible to run if they choose.

The only goal is to remove politics as a career option, since it is quite improbable that any one person would win the lottery to be eligible. A secondary goal is that a potentially great leader who would not have considered politics under current system’s may well be called to duty if they are drawn into the pool and view themselves as a strong option within the pool.

Re: Uber will offer gig work like AI data labeling to drivers while not on the road

#108

Post by FredPret »

array_key_first wrote: post #102
FredPret wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s reality-based, empirical economics, not “mine”. Place that let adults choose who to work for and who to employ, and furthermore consider it improper to even use the word “let” in this context, universally have better employment situations than places that follow your “spherical cow” theoretical planned / over-regulated economies. You seem to ascribe agency only to the employers, but remember that every Uber driv…

Similarly, a lot less children would be impoverished if they could work in factories. Time to put those little hands to use! Oh, uh, for humanity or something. We do have to draw the line somewhere and it is arbitrary.

I just knew someone would bring up child labour / slavery.

There's a big difference between gig jobs and very low-paying jobs that help free adults with no other options in life, and kids in work houses & coal mines, and you know it.

Re: Uber will offer gig work like AI data labeling to drivers while not on the road

#109

Post by loloquwowndueo »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #95
wiseowise wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do people really think the measly $2M 401(k) they got from their tech job is enough to buy them a ticket to the Elysium space station? Move to a low cost area and live like a king.

Not having to live in a low cost area is a defining feature of kings.

Not really. Imagine you are a remote worker earning average tech salary. Would you rather live in a San Francisco slum (all you can afford) or a nice beachfront house in (insert random low-cost country of your preference)?

Re: Uber will offer gig work like AI data labeling to drivers while not on the road

#110

Post by lotsofpulp »

loloquwowndueo wrote: post #109
lotsofpulp wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not having to live in a low cost area is a defining feature of kings.

Not really. Imagine you are a remote worker earning average tech salary. Would you rather live in a San Francisco slum (all you can afford) or a nice beachfront house in (insert random low-cost country of your preference)?

Cheaper places are almost always cheaper due to lack of economic opportunities. If one needs to or desires to reduce income volatility (and have upward potential), the SF slum would be better.

On top of that, more expensive places might have access to better judicial systems, educational opportunities, and networking opportunities for kids.

Post reply on HN