7 ms·

While it is very cool...I cannot help thinking how many sorters are going to lose their jobs because of this. Scary.

by eva1984 10y ago

vthallam 10y ago
But that's not how progress is made. This whole concept of machines taking over has been happening and will happen more. Humans are good at adapting to circumstances, learning new skills and doing more productive work. So guess it's not that scary.
- kafkaesq 10y ago
  This whole concept of machines taking over has been happening and will happen more. But what seems different with the AI "revolution" is that we may be seeing a hockey-stick rate to these changes that simply has no historical precedent. In which the "progress" (read: forced obsolescence) that might hitherto have happened over the course of 1-2 generations may soon be happening in the space of 5-10 years, for large categories of job descriptions, planet-wide. So guess it's not that scary. Unless you're the one whose job is threatened -- or as is apparently the case of this "success story", eliminated already. Do you really think all these displaced cucumber sorters can find work as Machine Learning engineers at some hot startup? Or in the near term, any kind of job at all, without significant difficulty?
  - 35bge57dtjku 10y ago
    You're right. We should all go back to using horses instead of automobiles while we're at it.
    - kafkaesq 10y ago
      That's (very clearly) not what I'm saying.
      - 35bge57dtjku 10y ago
        That was (very clearly) sarcasm.
        aninhumer 10y ago
        Yes, but sarcasm that I at least would interpret to mean: "Your argument is calling for a halt to progress, which is as silly as going back to using horses." But the parent wasn't actually suggesting that progress be stopped, merely observing that it was going to cause social problems.
    - coldtea 10y ago
      It would be much better for the cities and the environment, for one. And not everybody would need to have a horse, the same way not everybody needs to drive (and most don't) in cities designed for humans.
      - abraae 10y ago
        Not necessarily. If the solar installer can't get to the customer's house because he's traveling by horse... Or the biofuel engineer spends an extra 2 hours a day commuting on his horse, rather than developing new technologies in his lab... Then it's not better for the environment for us to all move to horse and cart.
        coldtea 10y ago
        Then, you know, we could always allow vehicles for professional uses...
      - 35bge57dtjku 10y ago
        How would 250 million horses pissing and shitting everywhere, plus needing to be stabled, fed, and used on a daily basis be better? I'd need to see more analysis before I believe that what worked 100 years ago would scale up to what would be needed today without serious problems, environmental and otherwise.
    - thevardanian 10y ago
      Don't be obtuse, and address the point. How are you going to retrain an entire generation of people that will experience the effects of joblessness immediately; essentially overnight. Cars took at least a generation to become mainstream. This time around it seems technology will destroy jobs almost at the flick of a switch. Unless you're arguing that the adoption rate will not be significantly quick, which I think most would disagree with.
      - gnopgnip 10y ago
        What about the cotton gin or the sewing machine or the steam engine?
        thevardanian 10y ago
        Those are incremental inventions within an overarching paradigm; that being the industrial revolution. The industrial revolution is what produced those inventions, and many others that lead to the countless wars, and newer ways of thinking, which resulted in significant changes in society. Undoubted it has produced great positive changes, but in the short term it was really quite awful.The question is how great of change are we really looking at this time around. Heck is it even a revolution in the first place, or merely an incremental progress. I personally don't think it's incremental and that we're at a point where we just had the idea of collecting seeds and planting them in the ground. The resulting aftermath of that simple idea produced civilization. The resulting aftermath of computation is yet to be seen.
      - 35bge57dtjku 10y ago
        No one is, just like we never do. What have all the people who have been losing their factory jobs for the past 2 decades done? > that might hitherto have happened over the course of 1-2 generations may soon be happening in the space of 5-10 years It's been happening in that shorter timespan for a while now, so really, what have those people who have already lost their jobs done?
        thevardanian 10y ago
- eva1984 10y ago
  > Humans are good at adapting to circumstances Not really. I would the opposite is true. Most people don't like change and appreciate stability as they get older. You cannot eliminate people's jobs, tell them to adapt and expect them to take that. And when a lot of people use their jobs during a short period of time, guess what? Extremist government/ideology will emerge, and we are already seeing some signs of it.
Houshalter 10y ago
But also think about how many people are going to benefit from much cheaper cucumbers.
- Bakary 10y ago
  That would require the savings to actually be passed on to the customer (to use a tired phrase) instead of being siphoned elsewhere. This is not a certainty.
  - riboflava 10y ago
    If they're siphoned anywhere besides under a mattress they'll be a net benefit. (And even the mattress might just delay their usefulness.)
  - Houshalter 10y ago
    Well perhaps not right away. But as his competitors adopt similar practices, they will drive down the price.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
throwaway991199 10y ago
Didn't you know. That the common answer to this on HN, is that these displaced workers are going to retrain for a job in a STEM field. If that doesn't work, just pay more tax like a good boy and put them on basic income! Hilarious!
Nimitz14 10y ago
RTFA.

While it is very cool...I cannot help thinking how many sorters are going to lose their jobs because of this. Scary.

by eva1984 10y ago

While it is very cool...I cannot help thinking how many sorters are going to lose their jobs because of this. Scary.

But that's not how progress is made. This whole concept of machines taking over has been happening and will happen more. Humans are good at adapting to circumstances, learning new skills and doing more productive work. So guess it's not that scary.

kafkaesq 10y ago
This whole concept of machines taking over has been happening and will happen more. But what seems different with the AI "revolution" is that we may be seeing a hockey-stick rate to these changes that simply has no historical precedent. In which the "progress" (read: forced obsolescence) that might hitherto have happened over the course of 1-2 generations may soon be happening in the space of 5-10 years, for large categories of job descriptions, planet-wide. So guess it's not that scary. Unless you're the one whose job is threatened -- or as is apparently the case of this "success story", eliminated already. Do you really think all these displaced cucumber sorters can find work as Machine Learning engineers at some hot startup? Or in the near term, any kind of job at all, without significant difficulty?
- 35bge57dtjku 10y ago
  You're right. We should all go back to using horses instead of automobiles while we're at it.
  - kafkaesq 10y ago
    That's (very clearly) not what I'm saying.
    - 35bge57dtjku 10y ago
      That was (very clearly) sarcasm.
      - aninhumer 10y ago
        Yes, but sarcasm that I at least would interpret to mean: "Your argument is calling for a halt to progress, which is as silly as going back to using horses." But the parent wasn't actually suggesting that progress be stopped, merely observing that it was going to cause social problems.
  - coldtea 10y ago
    It would be much better for the cities and the environment, for one. And not everybody would need to have a horse, the same way not everybody needs to drive (and most don't) in cities designed for humans.
    - abraae 10y ago
      Not necessarily. If the solar installer can't get to the customer's house because he's traveling by horse... Or the biofuel engineer spends an extra 2 hours a day commuting on his horse, rather than developing new technologies in his lab... Then it's not better for the environment for us to all move to horse and cart.
      - coldtea 10y ago
        Then, you know, we could always allow vehicles for professional uses...
    - 35bge57dtjku 10y ago
      How would 250 million horses pissing and shitting everywhere, plus needing to be stabled, fed, and used on a daily basis be better? I'd need to see more analysis before I believe that what worked 100 years ago would scale up to what would be needed today without serious problems, environmental and otherwise.
  - thevardanian 10y ago
    Don't be obtuse, and address the point. How are you going to retrain an entire generation of people that will experience the effects of joblessness immediately; essentially overnight. Cars took at least a generation to become mainstream. This time around it seems technology will destroy jobs almost at the flick of a switch. Unless you're arguing that the adoption rate will not be significantly quick, which I think most would disagree with.
    - gnopgnip 10y ago
      What about the cotton gin or the sewing machine or the steam engine?
      - thevardanian 10y ago
        Those are incremental inventions within an overarching paradigm; that being the industrial revolution. The industrial revolution is what produced those inventions, and many others that lead to the countless wars, and newer ways of thinking, which resulted in significant changes in society. Undoubted it has produced great positive changes, but in the short term it was really quite awful.The question is how great of change are we really looking at this time around. Heck is it even a revolution in the first place, or merely an incremental progress. I personally don't think it's incremental and that we're at a point where we just had the idea of collecting seeds and planting them in the ground. The resulting aftermath of that simple idea produced civilization. The resulting aftermath of computation is yet to be seen.
    - 35bge57dtjku 10y ago
      No one is, just like we never do. What have all the people who have been losing their factory jobs for the past 2 decades done? > that might hitherto have happened over the course of 1-2 generations may soon be happening in the space of 5-10 years It's been happening in that shorter timespan for a while now, so really, what have those people who have already lost their jobs done?
      - thevardanian 10y ago
eva1984 10y ago
> Humans are good at adapting to circumstances Not really. I would the opposite is true. Most people don't like change and appreciate stability as they get older. You cannot eliminate people's jobs, tell them to adapt and expect them to take that. And when a lot of people use their jobs during a short period of time, guess what? Extremist government/ideology will emerge, and we are already seeing some signs of it.

Houshalter 10y ago

But also think about how many people are going to benefit from much cheaper cucumbers.

Bakary 10y ago
That would require the savings to actually be passed on to the customer (to use a tired phrase) instead of being siphoned elsewhere. This is not a certainty.
- riboflava 10y ago
  If they're siphoned anywhere besides under a mattress they'll be a net benefit. (And even the mattress might just delay their usefulness.)
- Houshalter 10y ago
  Well perhaps not right away. But as his competitors adopt similar practices, they will drive down the price.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

throwaway991199 10y ago

Didn't you know. That the common answer to this on HN, is that these displaced workers are going to retrain for a job in a STEM field. If that doesn't work, just pay more tax like a good boy and put them on basic income! Hilarious!

Nimitz14 10y ago

RTFA.