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

ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

davidoks.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 607 posts

Re: ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

#301

Post by aurareturn »

Sleaker wrote: post #238
aurareturn wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's likely going to be a separation between the top earners and the average. IE. If a top tier dev make $1m today, they'll make $5m in the future. If the average makes $100k today, they'll maybe make $60k. AI likely enables the best of the best to be much more productive while your average dev will see more productivity but less overall.

I think this is assuming that the labor market knows how to identify the dirct value of devs. This already seems to be a problem across the board regardless of job role.

I think solo founders or small software companies where top tier devs can have huge ownership will be making top dollar.

Re: ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

#302

Post by whatisthiseven »

wagwang wrote: post #224
whatisthiseven wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But will it? My prediction is no, because productivity gains must benefit the lower classes to see a multiplier in the economy. For example, ATMs being automated did cause a negative drop in teller jobs, but fast money any time does increase the velocity of money in the economy. It decreases savings rate and encourages spending among the class of people whose money imparts the highest multiplier. AI does not. All t…

> because productivity gains must benefit the lower classes to see a multiplier in the economy by this logic, the invention of mechanized farm equipment, which displaced farm labor, didnt increase productivity

On the contrary, humanity spent nearly its entire existence calorically deficit, and until mechanized farming did we finally see health outcomes improve, height increase, IQ increase, and populations explode.

Productivity gains in the case of mechanized labor got everyone out of subsistence farming and into factories.

AI gets everyone out of every job and into nothing.

Re: ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

#303

Post by hn_acc1 »

collingreen wrote: post #119
irjustin wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But will it? No, because if you think about Startrek the endgame is replicators. Well the concept that 100% of basic needs are met. At some point work becomes unnecessary for a society to function.

Why is that the endgame with people though? Maybe I'm just jaded but several different human nature elements came to mind when I read your comment: Greed/Change Avoidance: If someone invented replicators right now, even if they gave it completely away to the world, what would happen? I can't imagine the finance and military grind just coming to an end to make sure everyone has a working replicator and enough power to…

I mean, if I could live at my current level (middle class) without working, I would gladly do so, and let others also live at the same level, anywhere in the world, freely (if it was in my power). I do give to charity, always have, but, the crazier things get, the less secure I feel in giving $$ away.

Even replicators need feedstock - people who own the rocks or sand or whatever feeds them will start charging an arm and a leg. Sure, I could feed it dirt and rocks from my own property, but only for so long before I'm undermining the foundation of my own house. To say nothing of people who live in apartments.

And then, if everyone has equal $$, how do you decide who gets to live in the better locations / nicer housing?

Re: ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

#304

Post by drnick1 »

mcmcmc wrote: post #222
mullingitover wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My prediction is no, because productivity gains must benefit the lower classes to see a multiplier in the economy. Baumol's cost disease hurts the lower classes by restricting their access to services like health care and education, and LLMs/agents make it possible to increase productivity in these areas in ways which were once unimaginable. The problem with services is that they're typically resistant to productiv…

I’m sick of this idea that “free” services are beneficial to society. There is no such thing as a free lunch; users are essentially bartering their time, attention, IP (contributed content) and personal/behavioral data in exchange for access to the service. By selling those services at a cost of “free”, hyperscalers eliminate competition by forcing market entrants to compete against a unit price of 0. They have to ha…

> I’m sick of this idea that “free” services are beneficial to society. There is no such thing as a free lunch; users are essentially bartering their time, attention, IP (contributed content) and personal/behavioral data in exchange for access to the service.

In aggregate, this is true, but there are many ways to game the system to one's advantage and get a true "free lunch." For example, people watching Youtube with an adblocker and logged out don't provide Google with any income or useful telemetry. Likewise you can get practically unlimited GPT/Claude/etc by using multiple accounts.

Re: ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

#305

Post by kurthr »

mullingitover wrote: post #193
whatisthiseven wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But will it? My prediction is no, because productivity gains must benefit the lower classes to see a multiplier in the economy. For example, ATMs being automated did cause a negative drop in teller jobs, but fast money any time does increase the velocity of money in the economy. It decreases savings rate and encourages spending among the class of people whose money imparts the highest multiplier. AI does not. All t…

> My prediction is no, because productivity gains must benefit the lower classes to see a multiplier in the economy. Baumol's cost disease hurts the lower classes by restricting their access to services like health care and education, and LLMs/agents make it possible to increase productivity in these areas in ways which were once unimaginable. The problem with services is that they're typically resistant to productiv…

You're implying that insurance companies will allow prices to fall and lower their profits. That seems like a really unlikely event in the current economy. They fire a lot of doctors and nurses, but they won't lower prices.

Re: ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

#306

Post by hn_acc1 »

carlosjobim wrote: post #250
Noumenon72 wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say endless fighting against each other is a much more innate desire than work. I know I don't have one.

Depends on the persons soul. Depends on if your nature is constructive or destructive. If you go in with the attitude that work is hell and humiliation, that's what life is going to give you.

I mean... Maybe the things I'd LIKE to work on are getting my car around the race track faster. Very few people will pay me for that - especially if I'm not a very good driver. But I enjoy it immensely. I'd MUCH rather do that than work.

And right now, due to having to work, maintenance on my house is a bit behind.. Would also prefer to catch up on that - but again, no one is paying me to do that.

Re: ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

#307

Post by hn_acc1 »

dylan604 wrote: post #97
freedomben wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Browsers and websites work pretty well on mobile devices too. Website != desktop only

If you consider a website fully laden with ads as working. I have yet to find an ad blocker that works on my iOS/iPad OS that works as well as on my computer. I also hate apps with all of their invasive data hoarding that is much more controllable on my computer. So to me, websites on mobile are broken as they are full of malware vectors that are not present when looking at the same website on my non-mobile device. F…

ublock origin on firefox (Android) works great for me. But, I haven't touched Apple in 30+ years, so I have no idea about that ecosystem.

Re: ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

#308

Post by kccqzy »

stephbook wrote: post #267

I'm based in the rich Western world. Whenever I travel elsewhere, I'm amazed by the cheapness of labor. Humans would attend a gas station or fetch items in a store. Why? They're completely unneeded, I can do (and WANT to do) that myself. I always feel sad about these people, trapped in an economic system that forces them into useless labour when they could spend their time learning actually useful skills.

Some countries prioritize having low unemployment numbers, because they believe that unemployment leads to unrest. Governments can choose to subsidize the cost of labor to achieve this.

Also I think it is preposterous to claim that these people are trapped.

Re: ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

#309

Post by xeromal »

kurthr wrote: post #305
mullingitover wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My prediction is no, because productivity gains must benefit the lower classes to see a multiplier in the economy. Baumol's cost disease hurts the lower classes by restricting their access to services like health care and education, and LLMs/agents make it possible to increase productivity in these areas in ways which were once unimaginable. The problem with services is that they're typically resistant to productiv…

You're implying that insurance companies will allow prices to fall and lower their profits. That seems like a really unlikely event in the current economy. They fire a lot of doctors and nurses, but they won't lower prices.

This is assuming no competition materializes from the lowered friction

Re: ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

#310

Post by dangus »

thegrimmest wrote: post #289
IgorPartola wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine a society where one person produces all the value. Their job is to do highly technical maintenance on a single machine that is basically the Star Trek replicator: it produces all the food, clothing, housing, energy, etc. that is enough for every human in this society and the surplus is stored away in case the machine is down for maintenance, which happens occasionally. Maintaining the machine takes very speci…

For something to be deserved, it must be earned. What do these people do to distinguish themselves from The Engineer’s pets? If they are wholly dependant on him for their subsistence, what distinguishes him from their god? To derive an alternate system you need alternate axioms. The axioms of our liberal society are moral equality and peaceful coexistence. Among such equals, no one person, group, or majority has the…

> For something to be deserved, it must be earned.

Eeeeeerrrr, wrong! This is garbage hypercapitalist/libertarian ideology.

Did you earn your public school education? Did you earn your use of the sidewalk or the public parks and playgrounds? Did you earn your library card? Did you earn your citizenship or right to vote? Did you earn the state benefits you get when you are born disabled? Did you earn your mother’s love?

No, these are what we call public services, unalienable rights, and/or unconditional humanity. We don’t revolve the entire world and our entire selves solely around profit because it’s not practical and it’s empty at its core.

Arguably we still do too much profit-based society stuff in the US where things like healthcare and higher education should be guaranteed entitlements that have no need to be earned. Many other countries see these aspects of society as non-negotiable communal benefits that all should enjoy.

In this hypothetical society with The Engineer, it’s likely that The Engineer would want or need to win over the minds of their society in some way to prevent their own demise and ensure they weren’t overthrown, enslaved, or even just thought of as an evil person.

Many of my examples above like public libraries came about because gilded age titans didn’t want to die with the reputation of robber barons. Instead, they did something anti-profit and created institutions like libraries and museums to boost the reputation of their name.

It’s the same reason why your local university has family names on its buildings. The wealthiest people in society often want to leave a positive legacy where the alternative without philanthropy and, essentially, wealth redistribution, is that they are seen as horrible people or not remembered at all.

Post reply on HN