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

Why Doesn't Software Show Up in Productivity?

austinvernon.eth.link

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 212 posts

Re: Why Doesn't Software Show Up in Productivity?

#81

Post by agumonkey »

datavirtue wrote: post #78
frumper wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DB tracking is the primary benefit. Run a report on all of those paper templates. Look up papers filled out last Tuesday, or July 3rd for the past 10 years. The software only makes staff job easier because now they enter it once and they're done instead of pulling files and compiling reports as a manual process every time the boss needs something.

Lots of places have multiple software systems with "glue humans" in between to read information in one system and re-enter data into another. You will often find that management has no idea that they have extra people doing literally nothing. These data entry clerks have titles that represent a process so it's thought of as the person doing that job (and perhaps that glue process does run partially on their tacit kno…

I often try to estimate how much information is flowing in a give office. I may be wrong but I believe a recent iphone could handle storage and processing. Takes 5 minutes for a person to input a few tokens here and there.

Re: Why Doesn't Software Show Up in Productivity?

#82

Post by Jensson »

strgcmc wrote: post #64
Jensson wrote: post #28

Firstly, GDP is a bad measure of productivity. A pill that replaced all healthcare would reduce GDP by 15%, but I doubt anyone (even economists) would call that a catastrophe. Productivity has stalled mostly because people have already filled their needs, so it makes little sense to buy more. Basically everyone have the clothes they need, the food they need, the car they need, the computer they need, already. Screen…

> Productivity has stalled mostly because people have already filled their needs, so it makes little sense to buy more. Basically everyone have the clothes they need, the food they need, the car they need, the computer they need, already. Screen entertainment and information is basically free nowadays. So no matter how much you increase productivity these sectors will remain mostly constant. I know you are not being…

Those 15% lacks those goods not because we can't provide them but due to how the country is run. If policies were changed so that those 15% got what they need then that would be a small one time bump in GDP and then lead to the same effect I described. Or possibly it would even reduce GDP, since now people would no longer have to fight over the 85% of spots that provides what they need to live a good life. For example, if regulations around healthcare was changed to make it much easier to become a doctor and start clinics greatly increasing the supply of healthcare providers, then the extra competition might even reduce the overall costs of healthcare to similar levels as other countries reducing total GDP even though value delivered to consumers was increased.

Anyway, the point is that USA intentionally keeps 15% in a bad state in order to motivate people to not be a part of that group. There is no need to do that, many other countries doesn't. But keeping people poor doesn't seem to hurt GDP, rather it seems like keeping a part of your people lacking like that increases GDP, making it an even worse measure.

Re: Why Doesn't Software Show Up in Productivity?

#83

Post by datavirtue »

qwerty456127 wrote: post #70

Perhaps because mainstream software of today doesn't add much to what we had in 199x. There already were the same Word, Excel and e-mail those days - . (and I doubt live chats we have today can add much to productivity, well-thought and well-organized emails are better). It can be possible to boost productivity with something like Roam Research (especially used in collaborative mode) but it would require a lot of enh…

We had live chat in the 1990s.

Re: Why Doesn't Software Show Up in Productivity?

#84

Post by CyberDildonics »

bluGill wrote: post #40
CyberDildonics wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In fact, you spend 90% of your time building tools. This is a ridiculous exaggeration with almost any wood worker. Making tools and jigs doesn't require much time and someone usually only does it after they have already done something without them at least once. Programming tools are much more difficult to make. You need special skills and most tools aren't made to be easily extended.

I make jigs because I can't figure out how to do a project without it. I rarely make the same thing twice, but a lot of things need a special jig to do right.

There are two things here and the more important thing by far is that making something like a jig is nothing compared to making a programming tool. You can measure, scribe and cut a few times then drive self tapping screws and have something useful. Making something not only new but integrate with some existing tool doesn't take an hour, it takes weeks months or years.

Re: Why Doesn't Software Show Up in Productivity?

#85

Post by machiaweliczny »

strgcmc wrote: post #64
Jensson wrote: post #28

Firstly, GDP is a bad measure of productivity. A pill that replaced all healthcare would reduce GDP by 15%, but I doubt anyone (even economists) would call that a catastrophe. Productivity has stalled mostly because people have already filled their needs, so it makes little sense to buy more. Basically everyone have the clothes they need, the food they need, the car they need, the computer they need, already. Screen…

> Productivity has stalled mostly because people have already filled their needs, so it makes little sense to buy more. Basically everyone have the clothes they need, the food they need, the car they need, the computer they need, already. Screen entertainment and information is basically free nowadays. So no matter how much you increase productivity these sectors will remain mostly constant. I know you are not being…

This seems like pure lack of will, not resources to me.

I feel that big productivity gains will be made once government software will be required to be open source.

Also if some form of better organization/decision making emerges that blockchain space folks are working on. I feel currently economy is too much supply driven and if more people could securely "invest" into what they really want build it would really make a drastic difference (you can see that kickstarter or crowdfunding as an example but it's too prone to scammers)

Re: Why Doesn't Software Show Up in Productivity?

#86

Post by majormajor »

tharne wrote: post #48
CyberDildonics wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In fact, you spend 90% of your time building tools. This is a ridiculous exaggeration with almost any wood worker. Making tools and jigs doesn't require much time and someone usually only does it after they have already done something without them at least once. Programming tools are much more difficult to make. You need special skills and most tools aren't made to be easily extended.

I'd argue woodworking tools are harder. People expect physical objects to work correctly, whereas the word has largely come to accept buggy, glitchy software.

Look at some houses for sale where the owner did maintenance and you might be surprised how many people accept buggy shit there too. ;)

Re: Why Doesn't Software Show Up in Productivity?

#87

Post by dexen »

I find the opening graph to undermine the central thesis a bit: the dot-com bubble burst in 2002, but is barely reflected on the graph; the growth levels off in 2005 or 2006. If the change in productivity was largely software-moderated, I would expect a lager change around the dot-com burst. Meanwhile the large change seems to be the 2007 Subprime mortgage crisis - and presumably the follow-up change in interest rate and investment patterns.

Re: Why Doesn't Software Show Up in Productivity?

#88

Post by datavirtue »

toolslive wrote: post #16
stdbrouw wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's exactly what people used to think in the 60s and 70s: instead of requiring a bunch of electrical engineers to build some arcane contraption, now ordinary folks can just write something that almost looks like English and you can automate anything and do calculations in seconds that used to take months! If that didn't pan out even though it seemed so freaking obvious that it would , why will No Code be any d…

Yes! SQL for example, was invented for business people to allow them to pull their own reports iso having to bother programmers to do it for them. We all know what really happened.

Millions of business people pulling their own reports? That is a thing.

Re: Why Doesn't Software Show Up in Productivity?

#89

Post by rytis »

jefftk wrote: post #74
jjk166 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd still probably be better off hiring a carpenter who already has the tools than doing it yourself. They can amortize the fixed costs over hundreds of projects.

Hiring a carpenter is very expensive. The cost of tools is tiny compared to the cost of their labor. (I'm assuming that we're talking about saving money in a way that counts your own time doing something you enjoy as free.)

Exactly that. Top brand tools are expensive, but lower mid range these days is surprisingly cheap, and even for one off projects might "pay for itself". And they get cheaper. Labor costs are increasing. Obviously this comes with few caveats: a) you have to enjoy what you do, so the labor is free and you treat the time as me-time and b) you actually know what you're doing... running in to a disaster and then getting someone to fix it can be very-very expensive :)

Re: Why Doesn't Software Show Up in Productivity?

#90

Post by tharne »

majormajor wrote: post #86
tharne wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd argue woodworking tools are harder. People expect physical objects to work correctly, whereas the word has largely come to accept buggy, glitchy software.

Look at some houses for sale where the owner did maintenance and you might be surprised how many people accept buggy shit there too. ;)

Didn't think of that, you're 100% right
Post reply on HN