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

No Recent Automation Revolution

overcomingbias.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–368 of 368 posts

Re: No Recent Automation Revolution

#361

Post by andrey_utkin »

kaybe wrote: post #318
SkyBelow wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I would agree they were very unlikely to have Vietnam or North Korea in mind, how does one draw the same conclusion about communism? I've met plenty of people who see communism, or at least a system of government that they would ascribe that label to even if others might not, as being a preferable alternative to capitalism. This leads me to think it is a reasonable assumption that they might have been thinking…

Not that it actually matters for the discussion, just for transparency - I am pretty open about the method. As long as we all get to do less of the undesirable work, our needs are covered and the profits and power of automation are not concentrated in the hands of a few I'd say we reached the goal. 'Evenish' distribution might be sufficient too. There is a lot of literature on ideas and theories about it. The systems…

> undesirable work

> our needs are covered

Human desires and human needs don't work the way you're probably thinking. I'd suggest to take into account Maslow's theory of human motivation. http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Maslow/motivation.htm

Re: No Recent Automation Revolution

#362

Post by kaybe »

andrey_utkin wrote: post #361
kaybe wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that it actually matters for the discussion, just for transparency - I am pretty open about the method. As long as we all get to do less of the undesirable work, our needs are covered and the profits and power of automation are not concentrated in the hands of a few I'd say we reached the goal. 'Evenish' distribution might be sufficient too. There is a lot of literature on ideas and theories about it. The systems…

> undesirable work > our needs are covered Human desires and human needs don't work the way you're probably thinking. I'd suggest to take into account Maslow's theory of human motivation. http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Maslow/motivation.htm

*less of the undesirable and more of the desirable work

is what I meant but did not specify. Is that more in line with what you mean?

Re: No Recent Automation Revolution

#363

Post by andrey_utkin »

kaybe wrote: post #362
andrey_utkin wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> undesirable work > our needs are covered Human desires and human needs don't work the way you're probably thinking. I'd suggest to take into account Maslow's theory of human motivation. http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Maslow/motivation.htm

*less of the undesirable and more of the desirable work is what I meant but did not specify. Is that more in line with what you mean?

Desirability is defined by the consequences the success brings, as opposed to the failure of inaction. It is a thing only in context of some unfulfilled needs.

How do you define desirability in the society where "needs are covered" (already)?

What would comprise the desirability if the profit of every action is alienated from the acting person?

Re: No Recent Automation Revolution

#364

Post by bamboozled »

ryandrake wrote: post #263
bamboozled wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It really makes me sad that jobs are seen as inherently valuable. The way you phrase it, 'provide jobs', feels like jobs are something needed. If I had to guess, you have a job, so it's fun for you to sit here and make these comments from your high horse.

I don't think anyone inherently needs what we think of as jobs. What we actually need is a way to provide for our own and our families' livelihoods, and the currently in-fashion way to do this is with "jobs". If everyone were magically able to live without jobs, some would still go off and do things productive out of an innate desire to be productive, but many wouldn't.

Try say this to someone without a job though? Because I'm pretty sure in this utopian idea of "I don't need a job because my basic needs will be met" is complete fantasy in 2020.

Millions have recently lost their jobs so I'm sure its' easy enough to find someone who can tell you how it feels.

Re: No Recent Automation Revolution

#365

Post by bamboozled »

m12k wrote: post #254
bamboozled wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It really makes me sad that jobs are seen as inherently valuable. The way you phrase it, 'provide jobs', feels like jobs are something needed. If I had to guess, you have a job, so it's fun for you to sit here and make these comments from your high horse.

I don't see what high horse you are talking about. The point is that having to work in order to survive is not inherently a desirable situation for a human to be in. A more desirable situation is to have your needs such as housing, food and healthcare already taken care of irrespective of what you spend your time on. Historically such a life has been possible for a select few in the aristocracy, and they seem to have…

The length of your counter argument is enough to prove to me that your answer is complex and it's not straight forwards.

Go leave you job in 2020 and see how that goes for you. I understand "the dream" you're trying to describe, but it's 100% fictitious.

Just on the agriculture bit, do you even know where your food comes from or how it's produced? Honest question?

Re: No Recent Automation Revolution

#366

Post by dTal »

tharne wrote: post #233
som33 wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Capitalism isn't really a political system, even though people seem to elevate it to one. It is you need a giant violent state to create a culture of sophisticated property rights. AKA capitalism requires a state and legal system, it doesn't exist without one. Things like copyright and Intellectual property are pure man made cultural political fictions, they do not exist in the natural animal kingdom. How is it poss…

Capitalism is the default system that evolves organically when free men and women create things of value and voluntarily exchange them with others. That's not to say it's perfect or 100% fair. That's why you always hear communists and socialists talk about the need for a "revolution". No one ever talks about a capitalist revolution because people don't need to be coerced into voluntarily exchanging goods and services…

I rather think that feudalism is the default system. Power begets power, so in the absence of some sort of check on runaway power accumulation i.e. a government, "free markets" are quickly replaced by "do what I say or I'll have my minions kill you".

Re: No Recent Automation Revolution

#367

Post by kaybe »

andrey_utkin wrote: post #363
kaybe wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

*less of the undesirable and more of the desirable work is what I meant but did not specify. Is that more in line with what you mean?

Desirability is defined by the consequences the success brings, as opposed to the failure of inaction. It is a thing only in context of some unfulfilled needs. How do you define desirability in the society where "needs are covered" (already)? What would comprise the desirability if the profit of every action is alienated from the acting person?

Not all needs can just be covered by the economy, of course. You cannot make people respect or love someone. I was talking purely about basic physical needs such as enough varied good food and decent shelter. As your link says, 'Man is a perpetually wanting animal.'

I would say a desirable job is one with

- mostly pleasant tasks,

- good working conditions (not hard on the body (heavy lifting and bad positions, no natural light, noisy, bad air quality, ..) and mind (bad stress, bad social fit, ..),

- good relationships with the people around you, (and the ability to leave if they don't work for you)

- a good amount of agency (where 'good' might differ from person to person),

- achievable and worthwhile goals that do not feel like 'bullshit work', with a good feedback loop,

- and probably more I cannot think of off the top of my head right now.

(Respect and reward of other people is definitively a big plus, but if you yourself think your job is worthwhile it's probably enough to count as desirable.)

Most of these are not material rewards (though not having them can increase profit). If the only reason somebody does a specific job at all is money, the above conditions are not met/the person is not actively happy about doing it, and it can be done by a machine just as easily, I say we shouldn't have a need for this person to do it. Still, current society demands people have a job, any job, or even several, as a value in itself.

How the profit from work done is distributed is whole other (but connected) story. (Concerning your last question, I would argue that this disconnect to profit is already the case for many many people.)

Sorry for not writing clearly, this topic would probably warrant a seminar with lots of beer and reading at least.

Re: No Recent Automation Revolution

#368

Post by sparcraft »

I actually disagree with this article. Based on my experience in the insurance industry, it is slowly but surely coming. It will appear not as a sudden drop, but as a gradual need for fewer and fewer roles as technology initially allows humans to do more with their time, and eventually replacing some of them. It is going to be a small effect on any one company. But a large effect over all, which will manifest over a long period.
Post reply on HN