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

Rolling the ladder up behind us

xeiaso.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 210 posts

Re: Rolling the ladder up behind us

#131

Post by KerrAvon »

whatshisface wrote: post #129
WalterBright wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some startups are worker-owned through stock grants, but those grants are rarely evenly distributed. The founders hold the majority as long as they can. It is a good practice for companies to include stock as part of the pay package. It encourages alignment of the company with the employees. Very, very successful companies follow this model, such as Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Google, etc.

It seems to indicate that if Amazon was employee-owned today, the first thing they would vote to do is convert future hires into non-owners, because that's what the founders did when it was actually employee-owned.

Not entirely sure what you're saying here. Amazon still provides stock to employees as part of the comp package, AFAIK.

Re: Rolling the ladder up behind us

#132

Post by gnulinux996 »

WalterBright wrote: post #4
Refreeze5224 wrote: post #2

This is the true problem with AI. It's with who owns it, and what they will inevitably use it for. Whether it can do cool stuff with code or equal a junior developer is irrelevant. What it can do is less important than what it will be used for. The owning class will use it to reduce payroll costs, which from their perspective is a cost center and always will be. If you're not an owner, then you have no control over t…

> The owning class will use it to reduce payroll costs Of course. That's been going on since the invention of the plow. That's why today we can do more interesting things than turn over the earth with a pointy stick all day every day. > economic democracy, where average people regain control over their lives History shows us that this inevitably means people lose all control over their lives, because the state will m…

> Of course. That's been going on since the invention of the plow. That's why today we can do more interesting things than turn over the earth with a pointy stick all day every day.

Are you suggesting that suppression of wages is what gave us "more interesting things" to do?

> History shows us that this inevitably means people lose all control over their lives, because the state will make your decisions for you and assign you your job.

How is this different from the "free market" assigning me a job?

> For example, let's say the color of cars produce by car companies is determined by democracy. 59% vote for the cars to be green. And if you want a red car? Too bad. What if you want a 4 seat car? No dice, 53% voted for 2 seaters to be made. What if you didn't want a car stereo? You're stuck paying for it anyway, as 73% voted for it.

Concessions are the price to pay for living in a civilized society.

Re: Rolling the ladder up behind us

#133

Post by ungreased0675 »

brooke2k wrote: post #69
WalterBright wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what if 62% wanted two seaters? Back in the 70s, the Department of Energy was tasked with allocating gas to the gas stations. A gas station had to apply for an allocation, and the DoE doled out the gas. The DoE doled out gas based on the previous year's usage patterns. Sounds smart, right? What happened is that gas consumption varies year to year due to a number of factors, like weather patterns, population chang…

I feel this is a slightly disingenuous argument - mismanagement and poor planning can happen in both the public and private sectors. The US healthcare system is just one fantastic example of the private sector absolutely failing to deliver even a bare minimum standard of service. Gas lines are one thing - waiting fifteen hours in the emergency room to be seen, only to be charged thousands of dollars for some tylenol…

The US healthcare system is pretty far from privately run. It’s more an example of regulatory capture and incumbents freezing out new entrants via extensive government regulations.

Re: Rolling the ladder up behind us

#134

Post by ge96 »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #73
Refreeze5224 wrote: post #2

This is the true problem with AI. It's with who owns it, and what they will inevitably use it for. Whether it can do cool stuff with code or equal a junior developer is irrelevant. What it can do is less important than what it will be used for. The owning class will use it to reduce payroll costs, which from their perspective is a cost center and always will be. If you're not an owner, then you have no control over t…

> The owning class will use it to reduce payroll costs Things are cyclic, nothing new; the previous big scare was (is?) outsourcing, where for the same price as one developer in western / northern Europe or SF you can hire five from eastern Europe or India. But that hasn't affected employability of the one developer, as far as I'm aware. I'm not even thinking of skill level, I'm sure that's comparable (but honestly I…

> hasn't affected employability of the one developer

I wonder, combo that r&d rule, general economics, saturation in the field

The norm for new grads seems to be "apply at least 2000 times, get 1 job"

Re: Rolling the ladder up behind us

#135

Post by worik »

> . I have a hoodie from AWS Re:Invent in 2022 that I'm going to have to throw out and replace because the sleeves are dying

What is the use of the right to repair, if we do not have the imagination to use it?

I patch my clothes

Re: Rolling the ladder up behind us

#136

Post by lubujackson »

This post is really all over the place and, I think, misses the main thing here: pretty much every advancement in automation across history has sacrificed some fidelity and craftsmanship. That's the cost of automation. Yet we have continually added more and more automation to our lives because the net value is dramatically higher for the bulk of our civilization.

Yes, we lose (or pidgeon-hole) artisans and craftsmen. But even in his "woe the times" example of AI kludging together two game properties into a painting, where the lighting isn't right and furry tail is not ideal, etc., etc... That $500 image is something no one could have created 20 years ago with a computer. This isn't centuries of artisan skills we are talking about. What about the artisan who would have been paid $500 to paint it with actual paints on an actual canvas? You can mourn progress in every direction if you like, but I don't think it changes a single thing about the trajectory of where we are going.

Now that AI is coming for my job as a programmer I'm not going to get twisted about it - my job didn't exist when I was a kid and it won't exist (certainly not in the same form) when my kid is an adult. And that's ok, it was a "job of opportunity". And that job has changed dramatically over 20 years. AI is just the continuation of that change.

I started in SE because it was fun to make computers do stuff. Programming has only ever been a tool to achieve that goal, and often a frustrating one. AI is just a better tool. If the job becomes "a guy that talks to the AI" that will still be programming because at the end of the day the computer can't do anything without someone telling it what to do.

...until SkyNet.

Re: Rolling the ladder up behind us

#138

Post by egypturnash »

Aurornis wrote: post #110
asmxyz wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are _other options_! You're argument is that the only two alternatives are that the ruling class and owning class be separate groups of people, or the same group of people. And either way the labor class if F'ed. You're right that having the ruling class and the owning class being the _same people_ is terrible. That's what we're living in right now! But what about the labor class being the owning class? What if…

> But what about the labor class being the owning class? What if Amazon was owned by the people who work at Amazon? Instead of Bezos? I wonder how many people who repeat things like this know that Bezos owns less than 10% of Amazon. About 2/3rds of Amazon is owned by institutional investors, much of which is in turn owned by individuals in their 401ks and other retirement plans. So "the people" own more of Amazon tha…

"2/3 of Amazon is owned by institutional investors" is a long-ass way from "Amazon is owned by the people who work at Amazon".

Re: Rolling the ladder up behind us

#139

Post by curmudgeon22 »

KerrAvon wrote: post #131
whatshisface wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to indicate that if Amazon was employee-owned today, the first thing they would vote to do is convert future hires into non-owners, because that's what the founders did when it was actually employee-owned.

Not entirely sure what you're saying here. Amazon still provides stock to employees as part of the comp package, AFAIK.

I mean, it probably depends on the type of employee. I assume folks doing deliveries or working in warehouses aren't getting stock packages. I wonder if the admin or accounting folks do.

Re: Rolling the ladder up behind us

#140

Post by [deleted] »

stego-tech wrote: post #16
schmidtleonard wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a whole list of things I'd like from my car that the market does not provide because it is more profitable not to. Why do I get the feeling that instead of seeing this as a horror story you would scold me for unreasonable expectations, even though it is the identical mirror form of the horror story you just told?

Because Mr. Bright has a long, storied comment history of neolibertarian fantasies being wielded as a cudgel against anyone who dares envision a future that does not align with his own. Speaking from experience with them in another thread. Your best bet is to ignore the bait and move on to more fruitful discussions.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN