7 ms·

how about "suck it up and do it anyway"? I don't necessarily disagree with this sentiment, but this doesn't really address the question, which is about what ha

by tro2102 10y ago

how about "suck it up and do it anyway"? I don't necessarily disagree with this sentiment, but this doesn't really address the question, which is about what happens to an industry when it's made redundant by technology. Cab drivers competing with self-driving cars can't "suck it up". "what if they don't want to" in regard to people working? Again, I feel you haven't read the spirit of this comment accurately. What happens to an entire class of working people (truck drivers, for instance), when their trade is replaced by tech which is 1/10 (conservatively) the cost to produce? I too want to say innovation is worth it, but it's definitely worth the thought cycles to consider what happens when we make an entire workforce obsolete.

maverick_iceman 10y ago
What happened to the drivers of horse-drawn carriages when automobiles arrived?
- flamedoge 10y ago
  What happened to the horses?
  - govg 10y ago
    The glue factory?
Trundle 10y ago
Again, I feel you haven't read the spirit of this comment accurately. The comment specifically talked about those people not wanting to do another form of work. It wasn't a generic "lets talk about mass automation induced redundancy" which appears to be what you're trying to discuss with me. As you'll note, I'm pro basic income. I just don't think it's fair to say I'm not properly addressing the spirit, when in this case that means ignoring the specific language the commenter chose to use and just having the same generic conversation that's continuously being had all over the internet. I'm interested in debating this guy if he does actually think work is something people only do if it's intrinsically motivating and thus we should consider taxi drivers desire to spend their day driving around rather than doing math, I'm not interested in just having a standard /r/futurology back and forth. I mean hell, I even hedged against this with my last paragraph.
- acidburnNSA 10y ago
  I didn't say they don't want to do another job. I said they don't want to go back to school. They either hated school or were bored sick of it. So they'll generally look for other jobs available at their skill level. That's why inequality grows. Disruptive tech creates jobs for educated ambitious people while displacing people who are less so. Yeah we as a society can tell them it's their problem, but there might be a lot of them, and they might be a force to be reckoned with politically. Will it escalate beyond Trump, Brexit, etc.? Who knows. Telling people to get more school is something educated people often do, but it's sometimes a bit self-serving. It makes themselves feel like they're a winner and they deserve it when often their circumstances positioned them better to be able to get that education in the first place.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - sokoloff 10y ago
    I'd like to be fit and in-shape. OK, great. Yeah, but I don't want to change at all what I eat nor do I want to do any physical exercise. At some point, personal initiative and responsibility is going to come into the picture. Those who demonstrate it will have better outcomes in the aggregate than those who don't. There's a genuine question of how much we should take from those who do and transfer to those who don't in order that they don't starve. It's far from obvious that the answer should be "none" but it's equally far to suggest the answer should naturally be "a lot".
pfisch 10y ago
I'm pretty sure the answer is to retrain and/or go into a different profession.
- chrisbennet 10y ago
  As a thought exercise, what will/would software developers do once 90% are made redundant by A.I. or something? Maybe "suck it up" and go back to school to become nurses?
  - erklik 10y ago
    Yup. Or learn how to make A.I.'s ?? I don't know yet but basically find a different job. Its not that complicated actually.
    - allendoerfer 10y ago
      I am not saying this specifically to your comment, but to the whole thread: Not all people can accomplish the same performance. Most HN users were just lucky. I am not sure where I would be today if I had not been born into a college educated family, had college educated friends and so on. Not all people have the same luck. Beyond that there are different levels of intelligence or just inability to concentrate etc. There are people on the job market who write and read on a level you had when you were 10 years old. HN could really use some empathy. I would be ashamed if the cab driver, who actually lives next doors and gets up Friday and Saturday nights to drive drunk people home, because that's the only time you can make money here, would read this thread. When we talk about thousands of people we cannot just say "suck it up" and call it a day. HN should be the first to understand that the law of large numbers is at play here: People who do not want to work, will not matter for the whole group. If we do not want society to drift apart (which has enormous costs attached) we should solve the systemic issue.
      - ambicapter 10y ago
        > There are people on the job market who write and read on a level you had when you were 10 years old. 10 years old? Really? Do we expect those people to be useful? Why not just give them a basic income and take them out of the workforce?
ajmurmann 10y ago
I think that's why we need something like universal basic income. Keeping dysfunctional companies our entire industries alive is holding everybody back and also unfair to people who are part of smaller industries that fall through the cracks.
BurningFrog 10y ago
> what happens to an industry when it's made redundant by technology We have over 200 years experience of countless industries being made redundant by technology. It's not a new scary thing that has never happened before.
- onion2k 10y ago
  We also have 200 years of people in the redundant industries complaining about it, and 200 years of government regulating to make the transition less painful. Why should we stop that with taxis?
  - chii 10y ago
    > 200 years of government regulating to make the transition less painful. i find that hard to believe - what was done in the last 200 years to lessen the pain of any transition?
    - allendoerfer 10y ago
      Pensions, accident insurance, and medical care. Not 200 years, but 150-175 years [0]. Universal unemployment insurance came only in 1927. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_state#Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_state#Germany
    - onion2k 10y ago
      Here in the UK there were a number of Factory Acts passed between 1802 and 1961 that were designed to limit the impact of the industrial revolution on workers, lessening the pain of transition from agriculture and cottage industry to the modern mechanised factories. The one closest to 200 years ago did such progressive things as limiting the working hours a 9 year old child could do to 12 hours a day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factory_Acts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factory_Acts
      - ambicapter 10y ago
        How is that easing the transition? Sounds more like making sure the current working environment doesn't suck, and that the benefits of technology are actually passed on to those who are using it.
hx87 10y ago
> What happens to an entire class of working people In a free market capitalist society, the most optimal case is that they spend a significant portion of their earnings buying capital (i.e. stocks and bonds), so as time goes on more of their earnings come from capital. Unfortunately, in the USA at least, we make capital accumulation ridiculously hard for working class people due to the cult of homeownership and a tax system where interest on mortgages (but not stock purchases) are deductible.
- pjc50 10y ago
  Homeownership is capital accumulation. I'm not sure that a system where a large part of GDP is directed at stock purchase is sustainable; that's how private pensions are supposed to work but the system is creaking.
  - allendoerfer 10y ago
    Additionally, home-ownership has the unique feature to be financed with money which would otherwise be a sunken cost. I like the idea of some kind of modern/virtual self-sustained living, where you own your house, produce your own energy and cover all costs by dividends from stocks of the same companies you buy products from.
    - pjc50 10y ago
      Ownership by the workers of the means of production and distribution! ;)
      - allendoerfer 10y ago
        Yep, but actual ownership of a share with the choice on what to own on top of a capitalist base, not forced ownership together with everyone else through a state with corrupt elites.
    - hx87 10y ago
      A home is a massively illiquid and spectacularly undiversified asset, and the same benefits can be gained by, say, investing in a spread-out housing cooperative with a diverse set of owners.
eggy 10y ago
That is like saying take back the washing machine, since it took away washer women jobs, of which my Irish grandma was when she emigrated. Change, flow, adapt, is life. And work is not something you do because you just get compensated for it. Some one pays you what they think a task is worth, and you take up that task, because you are not able or not wanting to move up or horizontally to another job. It takes energy at the most primal level to accomplish work. The problem with politics is that people then think energy can be printed and everyone can be made happy with an endless supply of happy. We try our best to be compassionate, and hope for everyone's well being, but in the end, work needs to be done to gain something.

by tro2102 10y ago

maverick_iceman 10y ago

What happened to the drivers of horse-drawn carriages when automobiles arrived?

flamedoge 10y ago
What happened to the horses?
- govg 10y ago
  The glue factory?

Trundle 10y ago

Again, I feel you haven't read the spirit of this comment accurately. The comment specifically talked about those people not wanting to do another form of work. It wasn't a generic "lets talk about mass automation induced redundancy" which appears to be what you're trying to discuss with me. As you'll note, I'm pro basic income. I just don't think it's fair to say I'm not properly addressing the spirit, when in this case that means ignoring the specific language the commenter chose to use and just having the same generic conversation that's continuously being had all over the internet. I'm interested in debating this guy if he does actually think work is something people only do if it's intrinsically motivating and thus we should consider taxi drivers desire to spend their day driving around rather than doing math, I'm not interested in just having a standard /r/futurology back and forth. I mean hell, I even hedged against this with my last paragraph.

acidburnNSA 10y ago
I didn't say they don't want to do another job. I said they don't want to go back to school. They either hated school or were bored sick of it. So they'll generally look for other jobs available at their skill level. That's why inequality grows. Disruptive tech creates jobs for educated ambitious people while displacing people who are less so. Yeah we as a society can tell them it's their problem, but there might be a lot of them, and they might be a force to be reckoned with politically. Will it escalate beyond Trump, Brexit, etc.? Who knows. Telling people to get more school is something educated people often do, but it's sometimes a bit self-serving. It makes themselves feel like they're a winner and they deserve it when often their circumstances positioned them better to be able to get that education in the first place.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- sokoloff 10y ago
  I'd like to be fit and in-shape. OK, great. Yeah, but I don't want to change at all what I eat nor do I want to do any physical exercise. At some point, personal initiative and responsibility is going to come into the picture. Those who demonstrate it will have better outcomes in the aggregate than those who don't. There's a genuine question of how much we should take from those who do and transfer to those who don't in order that they don't starve. It's far from obvious that the answer should be "none" but it's equally far to suggest the answer should naturally be "a lot".

pfisch 10y ago

I'm pretty sure the answer is to retrain and/or go into a different profession.

chrisbennet 10y ago
As a thought exercise, what will/would software developers do once 90% are made redundant by A.I. or something? Maybe "suck it up" and go back to school to become nurses?
- erklik 10y ago
  Yup. Or learn how to make A.I.'s ?? I don't know yet but basically find a different job. Its not that complicated actually.
  - allendoerfer 10y ago
    I am not saying this specifically to your comment, but to the whole thread: Not all people can accomplish the same performance. Most HN users were just lucky. I am not sure where I would be today if I had not been born into a college educated family, had college educated friends and so on. Not all people have the same luck. Beyond that there are different levels of intelligence or just inability to concentrate etc. There are people on the job market who write and read on a level you had when you were 10 years old. HN could really use some empathy. I would be ashamed if the cab driver, who actually lives next doors and gets up Friday and Saturday nights to drive drunk people home, because that's the only time you can make money here, would read this thread. When we talk about thousands of people we cannot just say "suck it up" and call it a day. HN should be the first to understand that the law of large numbers is at play here: People who do not want to work, will not matter for the whole group. If we do not want society to drift apart (which has enormous costs attached) we should solve the systemic issue.
    - ambicapter 10y ago
      > There are people on the job market who write and read on a level you had when you were 10 years old. 10 years old? Really? Do we expect those people to be useful? Why not just give them a basic income and take them out of the workforce?

ajmurmann 10y ago

I think that's why we need something like universal basic income. Keeping dysfunctional companies our entire industries alive is holding everybody back and also unfair to people who are part of smaller industries that fall through the cracks.

BurningFrog 10y ago

> what happens to an industry when it's made redundant by technology We have over 200 years experience of countless industries being made redundant by technology. It's not a new scary thing that has never happened before.

onion2k 10y ago
We also have 200 years of people in the redundant industries complaining about it, and 200 years of government regulating to make the transition less painful. Why should we stop that with taxis?
- chii 10y ago
  > 200 years of government regulating to make the transition less painful. i find that hard to believe - what was done in the last 200 years to lessen the pain of any transition?
  - allendoerfer 10y ago
    Pensions, accident insurance, and medical care. Not 200 years, but 150-175 years [0]. Universal unemployment insurance came only in 1927. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_state#Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_state#Germany
  - onion2k 10y ago
    Here in the UK there were a number of Factory Acts passed between 1802 and 1961 that were designed to limit the impact of the industrial revolution on workers, lessening the pain of transition from agriculture and cottage industry to the modern mechanised factories. The one closest to 200 years ago did such progressive things as limiting the working hours a 9 year old child could do to 12 hours a day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factory_Acts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factory_Acts
    - ambicapter 10y ago
      How is that easing the transition? Sounds more like making sure the current working environment doesn't suck, and that the benefits of technology are actually passed on to those who are using it.

hx87 10y ago

> What happens to an entire class of working people In a free market capitalist society, the most optimal case is that they spend a significant portion of their earnings buying capital (i.e. stocks and bonds), so as time goes on more of their earnings come from capital. Unfortunately, in the USA at least, we make capital accumulation ridiculously hard for working class people due to the cult of homeownership and a tax system where interest on mortgages (but not stock purchases) are deductible.

pjc50 10y ago
Homeownership is capital accumulation. I'm not sure that a system where a large part of GDP is directed at stock purchase is sustainable; that's how private pensions are supposed to work but the system is creaking.
- allendoerfer 10y ago
  Additionally, home-ownership has the unique feature to be financed with money which would otherwise be a sunken cost. I like the idea of some kind of modern/virtual self-sustained living, where you own your house, produce your own energy and cover all costs by dividends from stocks of the same companies you buy products from.
  - pjc50 10y ago
    Ownership by the workers of the means of production and distribution! ;)
    - allendoerfer 10y ago
      Yep, but actual ownership of a share with the choice on what to own on top of a capitalist base, not forced ownership together with everyone else through a state with corrupt elites.
  - hx87 10y ago
    A home is a massively illiquid and spectacularly undiversified asset, and the same benefits can be gained by, say, investing in a spread-out housing cooperative with a diverse set of owners.

eggy 10y ago

That is like saying take back the washing machine, since it took away washer women jobs, of which my Irish grandma was when she emigrated. Change, flow, adapt, is life. And work is not something you do because you just get compensated for it. Some one pays you what they think a task is worth, and you take up that task, because you are not able or not wanting to move up or horizontally to another job. It takes energy at the most primal level to accomplish work. The problem with politics is that people then think energy can be printed and everyone can be made happy with an endless supply of happy. We try our best to be compassionate, and hope for everyone's well being, but in the end, work needs to be done to gain something.