7 ms·
A robotic sewing machine could throw garment workers out of a job
- tcdent 11y agoWhat if garment workers were able to buy their own robotic sewing machines? Then we could have distributed labor and manufacturing and nobody would be out of a job. Services like Uber will likely work this way when automation hits; invest in a car and put it to work. In any case, I'll take one!
- tcbawo 11y agoMargins will shrink to the point where economies of scale prevail. If garment workers tried this, it would probably not take long before they get priced out of business.
- nosuchthing 11y agoRaw production cost only factors in slightly, there certainly is room and customer demand for boutique designs and customization options of such designs.
- tcdent 11y agoToday, people shop for clothes that incidentally both fit them and match their style. You'd have infinite options for both.
- nosuchthing 11y agoInfrastructure... as a service! https://www.3dhubs.com/ https://www.3dhubs.com/ Open Source manufacturing equipment: http://openknit.org/build/ http://openknit.org/build/ http://github.com/g3rard/OpenKnit http://github.com/g3rard/OpenKnit http://instructables.com/id/Building-the-Open-Knit-machine http://instructables.com/id/Building-the-Open-Knit-machine OpenKnit is an open-source, low cost, digital fabrication tool that affords the user the opportunity to create their own bespoke clothing from digital files. Starting from the raw material, the yarn, and straight to its end use, a sweater for example, in about an hour. Designing and producing clothes digitally and wearing them can now happen in the very same place, rewarding the user with the ability to make decisions regarding creativity and responsibility.
- tcdent 11y agoThanks! I can't believe I hadn't seen this yet. I actually have a knitting machine, which works similarly, but haven't used it much. Short programs are way more appealing than counting pins by hand.
- hugh4 11y agoHow could the average garment worker afford a sewing robot?
- andrewflnr 11y agoFor starters, if garment workers had the resources to purchase a sewing robot, they wouldn't be garment workers. You're going to have logistics issues on par with all farming being replaced with home gardens. I think the more likely usage is amateur designers being able to produce their own designs. However, I'm pretty sure that's a very different demographic than the people currently working in garment factories.
- pjc50 11y agoIf people had access to capital, they'd be capitalists. And if my grandmother had wheels she'd be a wagon.
- svepuri 11y agoWhile I appreciate the advances in technology to sew garments, I wonder how this will negatively impact the economies, which are thriving because of the garment business.
- emersonrsantos 11y agoThe workers just really need to shift functions from craftwork to technical. Since the industrial revolution, that's the way it goes.
- jonah 11y agoUnfortunately, the more automation, fewer and more skilled workers are needed. That's always been the case and will only continue to happen. People will be able to specialize and diversify more.
- svepuri 11y agoYou mean these workers need to be trained to handle machines? Perhaps thats going to be a huge challenge for the middle-age workers, who would have lived all their lives doing the craft work. Survival of the fittest!
- JeffreyKaine 11y agoAs good an argument for universal basic income as I've ever seen.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- jpatokal 11y agoGood. Working in a garment factory is not just mindnumbingly monotonous, but backbreaking and dangerous. http://hesperian.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf/en_work_2013/en_work_2013_garments06.pdf http://hesperian.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf/en_work_2013/en_...
- svepuri 11y agoGarment companies can make the working situations better by implementing sustainable work practices. Sustainable Apparel Coalition is an organization working on this approach. Not working is not any better than working in a potentially dangerous place, which could turn better in the near future. http://apparelcoalition.org/ http://apparelcoalition.org/
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- Crito 11y agoDo you think that all of these former garment workers will find new jobs in the robotics industry? "Your job is shitty, so you are better off if you lose it", said the wealthy man to the poor man.
- intopieces 11y ago>Do you think that all of these former garment workers will find new jobs in the robotics industry? An important question for both the garment workers abroad and for American workers. In the past, we took for granted that a redundant worker could find work again: one factory is like another. Now, we're not so sure.
- neil1023 11y agohttp://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/05/21/408234543/will-your-job-be-done-by-a-machine http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/05/21/408234543/will-... ^Some researchers gathered some data and tried to determine the chances of a job being automated by robots. It's a little scary but impressive how so many jobs that exist today can just be done by robots.
- cheepin 11y agoInteresting how they predict Programmers have a higher chance of automation than the other areas of engineering since programmers are the ones automating other things. I figure once programming is fully automated, pretty much everything else is automatable.
- gutnor 11y agoI guess they are actually talking about the actual translation of precise requirements to code. Most of the programmer in western countries handle a lot more than the coding of things. If your job contains even a tiny bit of analysis, the probability drop significantly. Computer system analyst has a 0.6% chance of being automated according to this. Software Developer is 4.2%.
- jabgrabdthrow 11y ago> translation of precise requirements I think code can be recursively defined as "the translation of precise requirements to code". Seems like it's word games and everyone just wants to name the "last automatable thing" after what their current role is
- bendykstra 11y agoI'm having trouble imagining any sufficiently specific and unambiguous format for writing requirements that does not look like programming. Even something like SQL, which only needs to describe database queries, is still the domain of the programmer.
- 11y ago
- 1024core 11y agoWhy do we need to sew, anyways? Why not invent some sort of a glue (or a binding agent, to be more vague) to hold the pieces together? Something that'll last a 1000 washes and never wear.
- svepuri 11y agoSustainability takes 3 aspects into consideration: Economical, Social, and Environmental. Inventing a glue and making the garment last 1000 washes makes sense environmentally, but think about the negative impact it has on the economies. Potentially, it will increase the unemployment related problems in many developing nations.
- benjohnson 11y agoYou would need to balance this sentiment with the fact that poor people wear clothing and would appreciate the cost savings with longer lasting garments.
- svepuri 11y agoThats a good point.
- JoshTriplett 11y ago> think about the negative impact it has on the economies Building a product worse so it wears out and you'll have to buy another sooner is in no way a positive ethical choice.
- fnordfnordfnord 11y agoI wouldn't wish employment in the garment industry on anyone, besides; we've already destroyed the local garment/craft economies in many impoverished countries by sending our old clothes to them for free. http://www.theroot.com/articles/politics/2009/03/donating_clothes_to_africa.html http://www.theroot.com/articles/politics/2009/03/donating_cl... http://www.djiboutijones.com/2014/02/dont-send-your-used-shoes-to-africa-or-maybe-do-send-them/ http://www.djiboutijones.com/2014/02/dont-send-your-used-sho...
- zach 11y agoThis is highly relevant for the recently-bankrupt American Apparel, which has a fundamental proposition (even in its name) of producing clothing in the USA: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-american-apparel-manufacturing-html-20151005-htmlstory.html http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-american-apparel-manuf... Wages in their current location will be rising from $9/hour to $15/hour over the next five years. It doesn't seem tenable in that situation to produce goods at the same level of technology that overseas workers use. So this may be the perfect opportunity to get serious about automation for clothing manufacturing. Send in the sewbots.
- marincounty 11y agoWhen I first learned American Apparel was made in the U.S. years ago, I really tried to like their products. In my case I wanted to buy their underware, and sports ware. Every year I would feel that material, and think to myself, who buys their product. Their choice of material was always cheap feeling, and didn't fell good when put on. I don't know why declared for bankruptcy, but quality of manufacture was the reason I didn't buy. A few years ago, I was astounded they were still in business. I had no gripes to the quality of sewing; it was their fit, and grade of material that didn't get my dollar. Yea, I know a lot of you loved their hoodies. I have a bulky, polyester blend you can have in my closet. I might have used it while working under my truck, because I didn't care if it was ruined? (In all honesty, the last time I looked at their clothing line was at least ten years ago. They might have cleaned up their act, but it was too late for me.)
- tcdent 11y agoHigher labor cost has to be accounted for elsewhere. In their case, with a high retail price and low quality materials. I think material cost is also the main reason why they only use a few types of fabric. Putting in the largest possible order will have the largest possible discount.
- jakejake 11y agoThat particular style of thin fabric is fashionable with, for lack of a better word, hipsters. The t-shirts don't feel as substantial as a nice, thick cotton T, but they wear and look like old vintage shirts. The ones that feel kinda cheap are interestingly more expensive.
- Sanddancer 11y agoThis seems pretty much an obvious area for automation, seeing as how repetitive sewing can get...and that automation in the clothing/textile industry was the birthplace of one of the first disruptive technologies. Thousands of people lost their jobs, thousands of people gained jobs as clothing could now be made faster and easier than before. This just continues a trend that's been going on for centuries.
- dalke 11y agoAs perhaps the most relevant predecessor, look at the effect the cotton mills of Lancashire had on textile production in India.
- douche 11y agoSeems like a natural consequence of rising standards of living in the countries that this work was previously outsourced to. The garment industry has always exploited low-cost workers - from children, to women, immigrants, China, south-east Asia. When the cost of labor is no longer a significant input to the equation (because there is little to no actual human labor involved), I would expect to see production move back into the markets nearer to customers, to cut the cost of transportation. And transportation costs are going to go down, as the distribution networks become more automated, so I suppose the next domino is going to be the cost of energy.
- ThomPete 11y agoOutsourcing really just is the last step before automation. The major trend to look for is always cost of production where labour being the number one cost. In order for products to keep getting cheaper the cost has to come down. This trend doesn't stop just because we outsource it to China or Brazil or India and so even they become too expensive. Unless economist start factoring in technology as one of the key economic factors rather than treating it as they do now as an externality we will still fight about whether too much government or too little government is going to save us all. And the politicians wont do anything because they don't see it projected in the forecasts their advisors give them. In the meantime robots are going to slowly but surely put most of us out of a job in almost all the industries we know of right now. Or put another way – it's the technology stupid.
- kbenson 11y agoThe question is whether that's a bad thing. Sure, in the short term, it causes disruptions and job loss, but if we can steer ourselves towards a better future through it's use, then it may be a net win, if not for the current populace, than for its descendants. The question is, can we steer ourselves, will we blindly stumble into this better tomorrow, or are we heading for a crash? The past gives clues based on prior outcomes, but only a fool would blindly expect models to scale indefinitely in the real world.
- ThomPete 11y agoAgree, but the problem is that even short term is at least a decade and probably a major crisis before we will find a new solution to how to deal with that. And so a lot of people are going to find themselves without jobs without anyway to get a new one, my parents for instance and most probably myself at one point too.
- astazangasta 11y agoThe problem as always is the basic premise of capitalism: who reaps the benefits of productivity gains. It doesn't matter a fig if we automate away all of the labor in the world if all (or nearly all) of the gains go to the people who "own" the machines. Since 1970 this has been almost entirely the case - none of the productivity gains made by American workers have gone to the working class, they have gone to the rich,and mostly to the ultrarich. Why, then, should we cheer for any productivity gains? This problem is purely political, not at all technological, and we can only solve it by clawing power away from capitalists. So, sure, robot sewing machines. But let's make sure we all get to eat the benefits.
- kujenga 11y agoWhere are the luddites when you need them?
- brlewis 11y agoAs the Industrial Revolution began, workers naturally worried about being displaced by increasingly efficient machines. But the Luddites themselves “were totally fine with machines,” says Kevin Binfield, editor of the 2004 collection Writings of the Luddites. They confined their attacks to manufacturers who used machines in what they called “a fraudulent and deceitful manner” to get around standard labor practices. “They just wanted machines that made high-quality goods,” says Binfield, “and they wanted these machines to be run by workers who had gone through an apprenticeship and got paid decent wages. Those were their only concerns.” Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-the-luddites-really-fought-against-264412/#cFqIw584x2Gt01tx.99 http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-the-luddites-real...
- justanother 11y agoWhy does this remind me of the invention (and widespread adoption) of the Cotton Gin, which itself is partly blamed for the United States Civil War? The parallels to the Industrial Revolution are everywhere you look these days.
- aaron695 11y agoA conspiracy theorist might say there's more to this than meets the eye. DARPA caring about the cost of uniforms seems silly. $1000? per year per person who costs a stack more than that to train and pay.