9 ms·

The article is interesting and I am glad to see some contrarian point to the main "automation will destroy jobs" narrative but... But I think that they are com

by Pamar 9y ago

The article is interesting and I am glad to see some contrarian point to the main "automation will destroy jobs" narrative but... But I think that they are comparing apples to oranges here. The engravers have not been "automated away" - in their case technology augments them, so it's not like "I used to be an engraver but now I have lost my job to a robot" but - as the article says "I am an engraver and thanks to technology I have to say sorry but I can't do that ten time less often than before". Same goes for office automation in general. Technology have augmented human-unassisted output (well, in case of office automation a lot of that has been wasted on futzing around with fonts and so on, but still...). But I wonder what would happen if self-service engraving (via web interface, at a fraction of the cost and with your item delivered by drone or automated van in case of larger packages) entered the market, and if they would keep the same level of enthusiasm about automation. I wonder what would they say

dasmoth 9y ago
Same goes for office automation in general. Technology have augmented human-unassisted output (well, in case of office automation a lot of that has been wasted on futzing around with fonts and so on, but still...). That's one issue that crops up in office automation, but not necessarily the biggest one. General tools like word processors and speaadsheets remain just that: tools. But once office functions gain special purpose software, it often locks in strong assumptions about workflows that translate into more, rather than less, "sorry but I can't do that."
- paulryanrogers 9y ago
  On the micro level that's my experience too. Though I suspect at the macro level competitors with more flexibleautomation will win more business. Assuming a competitive market.
  - dasmoth 9y ago
    The people buying the automation are generally not the users. Those with purchasing authority probably already have a somewhat stereotyped view of the workflow in question, so selling them a rigid version may be pretty easy. And taking autonomy away from the individual users might actually seem like a feature, not a bug.
- JoshTriplett 9y ago
  > But once office functions gain special purpose software, it often locks in strong assumptions about workflows that translate into more, rather than less, "sorry but I can't do that." Which just solidifies the demand for people to build more such software for other use cases.
twoodfin 9y ago
If demand for engraving remained constant, then a 10X improvement in productivity for an engraver would actually eliminate far more engraver jobs than the final switch to full automation.
- Kluny 9y ago
  As engraving got cheaper though, the demand for it would increase. So there's no sense assuming that it will remain constant.
  - twoodfin 9y ago
    Sure. Just like farming over the last 150 years. Far fewer jobs, more food, and that's great for essentially everybody. I just don't believe there's some cliff of automation effectiveness where it goes from a good thing to a bad thing. Greater productivity always means making more for less.
    - milcron 9y ago
      It's always a good thing, plus the additional "bad" side-effect of less work for the populace to do, driving down the price of labor. As the price of labor trends downwards, some cohorts are going to have a harder time selling their labor to pay for necessities: food, shelter, healthcare, etc. A good amount of these problems could be mitigated by a strong welfare system and/or basic income.
      - paulddraper 9y ago
        > A good amount of these problems could be mitigated And a good amount of the advantages would be mitigated too.
        EGreg 9y ago
        Advantages for whom? If a growing number of people live in poverty, perhaps they should have a say in how society is run?
ryukafalz 9y ago
Right, and one of the engravers interviewed in the article says as much: > “I’m just really surprised that anyone would say that this is the most automated industry,” says Rader. If someone orders a plaque from his company, a machine engraves it. But a human lays out the appropriate design using a computer, selects the materials, lays the metal in the machine, assembles the plaque, and packages the plaque when it’s done.
- musgrove 9y ago
  "using a computer" are the operative words. The engraver is only thinking physical automation. But the computer handles most of the work they used to do before automation. The "engraver" only makes a few easy design choices, hits Enter, and mails it from what he himself describes. That also seems less of a "profession" and more of a trade, if anything.
  - photojosh 9y ago
    Reminds me of what's happened to professional photography with the advent of digital cameras (+ Internet etc). The barrier to entry is much lower and the skill-level required to do a moderately competent job has plummeted.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
nashashmi 9y ago
> But I wonder what would happen if self-service engraving ... entered the market... To me that would be the final nail in the coffin. But then again, maybe the powers would be shifted from the person who runs the machines to the person who orders the engravings or the person who consults with promotion companies or to the one who opens up the possibilities of more complex engravings.

by Pamar 9y ago

dasmoth 9y ago

Same goes for office automation in general. Technology have augmented human-unassisted output (well, in case of office automation a lot of that has been wasted on futzing around with fonts and so on, but still...). That's one issue that crops up in office automation, but not necessarily the biggest one. General tools like word processors and speaadsheets remain just that: tools. But once office functions gain special purpose software, it often locks in strong assumptions about workflows that translate into more, rather than less, "sorry but I can't do that."

paulryanrogers 9y ago
On the micro level that's my experience too. Though I suspect at the macro level competitors with more flexibleautomation will win more business. Assuming a competitive market.
- dasmoth 9y ago
  The people buying the automation are generally not the users. Those with purchasing authority probably already have a somewhat stereotyped view of the workflow in question, so selling them a rigid version may be pretty easy. And taking autonomy away from the individual users might actually seem like a feature, not a bug.
JoshTriplett 9y ago
> But once office functions gain special purpose software, it often locks in strong assumptions about workflows that translate into more, rather than less, "sorry but I can't do that." Which just solidifies the demand for people to build more such software for other use cases.

twoodfin 9y ago

If demand for engraving remained constant, then a 10X improvement in productivity for an engraver would actually eliminate far more engraver jobs than the final switch to full automation.

Kluny 9y ago
As engraving got cheaper though, the demand for it would increase. So there's no sense assuming that it will remain constant.
- twoodfin 9y ago
  Sure. Just like farming over the last 150 years. Far fewer jobs, more food, and that's great for essentially everybody. I just don't believe there's some cliff of automation effectiveness where it goes from a good thing to a bad thing. Greater productivity always means making more for less.
  - milcron 9y ago
    It's always a good thing, plus the additional "bad" side-effect of less work for the populace to do, driving down the price of labor. As the price of labor trends downwards, some cohorts are going to have a harder time selling their labor to pay for necessities: food, shelter, healthcare, etc. A good amount of these problems could be mitigated by a strong welfare system and/or basic income.
    - paulddraper 9y ago
      > A good amount of these problems could be mitigated And a good amount of the advantages would be mitigated too.
      - EGreg 9y ago
        Advantages for whom? If a growing number of people live in poverty, perhaps they should have a say in how society is run?

ryukafalz 9y ago

Right, and one of the engravers interviewed in the article says as much: > “I’m just really surprised that anyone would say that this is the most automated industry,” says Rader. If someone orders a plaque from his company, a machine engraves it. But a human lays out the appropriate design using a computer, selects the materials, lays the metal in the machine, assembles the plaque, and packages the plaque when it’s done.

musgrove 9y ago
"using a computer" are the operative words. The engraver is only thinking physical automation. But the computer handles most of the work they used to do before automation. The "engraver" only makes a few easy design choices, hits Enter, and mails it from what he himself describes. That also seems less of a "profession" and more of a trade, if anything.
- photojosh 9y ago
  Reminds me of what's happened to professional photography with the advent of digital cameras (+ Internet etc). The barrier to entry is much lower and the skill-level required to do a moderately competent job has plummeted.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

nashashmi 9y ago

> But I wonder what would happen if self-service engraving ... entered the market... To me that would be the final nail in the coffin. But then again, maybe the powers would be shifted from the person who runs the machines to the person who orders the engravings or the person who consults with promotion companies or to the one who opens up the possibilities of more complex engravings.