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

9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

blogs.forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 253 posts

Re: 9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

#91

Post by sixtofour »

sixtofour wrote: post #67
derleth wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Queue I'd understand this better if people didn't always pick the longer word when the short one would be correct.

I have seen grammar and spelling comments given in the spirit of helpfulness, but this was not one of them, and adds nothing. My comment adds very little more than that, but I'd like to remind people that many very smart engineers and business workers have a terrible grasp of formal English, yet they get the job done and more. WalterBright's comment was short, but pointed to more information, and was a potentially us…

derleth, I can't reply to your reply to the above reply. (Follow?)

As I pointed out, you have edited your reply, with no indication that it was edited.

Your original reply was not helpful. You were taking the opportunity to ridicule someone, with sarcasm. Your current version (assuming no further edits) would at best have no downvotes. Your original version deserved every downvote it got (none of which were supplied by me).

I assume you yourself know this, otherwise you wouldn't have done the edit.

EDIT: added the following: "I'd understand this better if people didn't always pick the longer word when the short one would be correct."

The fact that one word is shorter in this case is not what made the original usage wrong. Length had nothing to do with it. It was merely wrong.

Re: 9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

#92

Post by kalid »

jarrett wrote: post #52

The question of whether automation causes unemployment to rise in the long run is addressed in detail here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relationship_of_automation_to_u... TL;DNR for the Wikipedia article: People have worried about machines putting humans out of work for centuries. But the unemployment rate has not risen steadily over the same period even as technology has constantly grown. The long term trend (measu…

I'm probably missing something, but I don't see how driving the marginal cost of human necessities (food, shelter, clothing, health care, education) to zero is anything but a good thing.

Is the world worse off because we have innumerable, self-replicating automated "robots" (plants) which, for free, convert carbon dioxide back into oxygen? Should we prefer a universe where humans must do this themselves? Now what if rice harvested itself and walked to your door every morning? Would that be a bad thing?

My thinking: if we have robot farmers, delivery drivers, tailors, doctors, etc. we've reached the Star Trek universe where the replicator eliminated all scarcity (maybe not with a molecule-by-molecule copies, but a robot which can build anything we need cheaply).

My hidden premise is that people do "work" (labor they don't enjoy) to ensure their survival. There are other issues like status, prestige, satisfaction, etc. but I'm talking about the basic fear of unemployment ("unemployment is bad because you could starve and die").

If the survival cost is 0, then there should be no fear of unemployment. You'd have 100% leisure time for art, study, etc.

Re: 9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

#93

Post by mikeryan »

chernevik wrote: post #81
derleth wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Queue I'd understand this better if people didn't always pick the longer word when the short one would be correct.

The British "queue up" when joining a line in wait for something. As do my print jobs. The comment is submitting a topic for next consideration, so what's wrong the usage here?

Its traditionally "Cue" which can be a reminder , so "Cue the current thread" means "take a look at this current thread" not "get in line for this thread".

I say this having read the original term phonetically and not even realizing the mistake which is likely common and really didn't need to be editorialized.

Re: 9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

#94

Post by matwood »

iqster wrote: post #87
muhfuhkuh wrote: post #54

IMO, the problem is much more than just automation and advancement in technology. It's actually far graver, and maybe inexorable at least in the short term. Hate the man or his policies (or both), but you can't deny President Obama's observation that training education is the real problem in the so-called "jobless recovery". America as it currently stands has a total, almost prideful disregard for education (public a…

There is theory and there is practice. Before suggesting any additional funds for SBA loans, I would suggest you read David Einhorn's book "Fooling Some Of The People All of the Time". In short, when the govt. guarantees loans, loan standards go down and fraud goes up. Yes, there are checks and balances in place but motivated parties find ways to scam the system. It is a travesty how much wastage there is in the proc…

And for a real life example, just take a look at Fannie May and Freddie Mac.

Re: 9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

#95

Post by sixtofour »

MoreTuple wrote: post #82
muhfuhkuh wrote: post #54

IMO, the problem is much more than just automation and advancement in technology. It's actually far graver, and maybe inexorable at least in the short term. Hate the man or his policies (or both), but you can't deny President Obama's observation that training education is the real problem in the so-called "jobless recovery". America as it currently stands has a total, almost prideful disregard for education (public a…

Every person that I know that has considered starting their own business has decided against it for one reason only, health insurance. They have always been the obtainer in chief of health insurance for the family and it is too risky to go without. I strongly suspect that a public health option would blow the job market wide open between folks who want to retire but can't because health insurance is idiotically expen…

"I strongly suspect that a public health option would blow the job market wide open ..."

Excellent argument for real reform to health insurance access.

Re: 9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

#96

Post by iqster »

JeffL wrote: post #35

Could we be trending towards a future where 99% of people are unemployed, but the 1% that is employed are so productive that there is plenty for everyone? I guess that's basically the same as saying that robots will do everything.

Sadly, that is not the way captialism works. The 1% of people will have everything and the remaining 99% will starve. I'm paraphrasing one of my favorite quotes: "Capitalism is the best system we have for creating wealth. It is a lousy system for the distribution of wealth."

I suspect I will make some flack for this comment. I'm not arguing big govt. Rather, I'm pointing out that in a world where a small number of individuals CAN produce the majority of wealth, we need a better system for redistribution to avoid a dystopian society.

Re: 9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

#97

Post by totalc »

jarrett wrote: post #52

The question of whether automation causes unemployment to rise in the long run is addressed in detail here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relationship_of_automation_to_u... TL;DNR for the Wikipedia article: People have worried about machines putting humans out of work for centuries. But the unemployment rate has not risen steadily over the same period even as technology has constantly grown. The long term trend (measu…

What a great article! I have similar ideas to those thinkers (Brain and Ford), but I've been inspired mostly by reading way too much science fiction! Feels great to learn I'm not just simply crazy.

Re: 9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

#98

Post by tsotha »

angrycoder wrote: post #56
billybob wrote: post #22

"I know you want to be hired full time by me. And I want to be doing my part. But please understand: I’m running a business. I want to make profits. And these tools are letting me make more profits by employing people only when I need them rather than carrying them on my payroll." This is why every time I hear a politician talk about "creating jobs," I grimace. A business will hire someone if and only if they think t…

> Government cannot create jobs. This is nonsense. The government can fund projects that create jobs. Do you have any idea how many small businesses out there make their money solely from servicing government contracts? Just as an example, I worked at a small software consulting firm during the middle/end of the dot com boom. We were a project shop. The contracts we worked on for the state allowed us to stay in busin…

>> Government cannot create jobs.

>This is nonsense. The government can fund projects that create jobs.

There's no evidence this is a net creator of jobs, though. There's a lost opportunity cost to take into account here.

Re: 9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

#99

Post by WalterBright »

derleth wrote: post #58
WalterBright wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>A much better take would be an examination of why our education system churns out so many college grads with few marketable skills. Queue the recent discussion about rampant cheating in college. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2774254

> Queue I'd understand this better if people didn't always pick the longer word when the short one would be correct.

I believe this particular usage of queue is correct english. You can see it on the TV show "So You Think You Can Dance" where Nigel will often say "queue music" meaning "start the music."

'Queue' is not quite a direct replacement for 'see', there is an additional nuance that what follows it is obvious or inevitable, which is why I used it.

I also understand that many HN readers are not native English speakers, and have varying levels of mastery of the language. I would also agree that obscure usage of high falutin' words for the purpose of peacocking is annoying.

But using them to add color and nuance is appropriate.

Post reply on HN