5 ms·

So you automated your coworkers out of a job

30 points by jmsflknr 8y ago

protomyth 8y ago
But it is deeply suspect to me that the company, which Winick prefers I don’t name, would put an intern in charge of a project that would lead directly to the elimination of someone’s job. Not because Winick wasn’t capable with the technology, certainly—but because that’s a hell of a burden to lay on a summer intern. Actually, I can see from a manager's point of view how a summer intern would be perfect. The person who automated the job is no longer with the company.
- captainbland 8y ago
  Plus they're just trying to get their foot on the employment ladder: perfectly vulnerable
nerdponx 8y ago
This is a great demonstration of how naive free market economics simply don't work in labor markets. Employees typically can't "just get another job". The obvious solution is some kind of social safety net -- maybe even UBI -- but that is a bitter pill to swallow for free market zealots (and the wealthy elites they shill for, who abhor the thought of having to relinquish some of their personal gain for the betterment of society).
- CuriousSkeptic 8y ago
  As a former free market zealot I actually derived UBI as a basic right, just as basic as right to self. The idea of the argument is to start with the commons as a shared resource instead of first come first served. As such, privatization of the commons must be justified by some agreement with the to be excluded commoners, not just putting a stake in the ground. Borrowing Rawls idea of an original position to negotiate such an agreement it makes sense to at least demand compensation for the rental value of the property before agreeing to be excluded from it. And an equal shared dividend of said rental value would be an UBI of sorts. I later discoverd this principle to exist as “geolibertarianism”
  - nerdponx 8y ago
    Interesting line of thinking, thank you for sharing.
Topgamer7 8y ago
The article isn't clear about the 2d painting to 3d model anecdote. Basically used as a story to drive the messaging of "WARNING automation removes workers from workforce" with no substance to the example.
- nerdponx 8y ago
  It's a human interest story meant to garner empathy in a discussion that is typically couched in sterile, aggregate terminology.
whack 8y ago
https://outlookzen.com/2019/01/05/prosperity-comes-from-eliminating-jobs-not-saving-them/ https://outlookzen.com/2019/01/05/prosperity-comes-from-elim... Prosperity comes from eliminating jobs, not saving them. Short-term shocks from increased unemployment and income inequality, is a real problem that can and should be addressed. By having more generous unemployment benefits and a more progressive tax system. Foregoing these fixes and instead saving jobs that can be effectively automated, is nothing more than an awful waste of human talent.
EADGBE 8y ago
But the project moved ahead, and the company said it would retrain Gary to work on the new printers. It turned out he wasn’t much interested in learning a new job three decades into his career, however, and took the news as the latest in a long line of slights from management. To me, it seems the larger problem is a lack of willingness to learn a new technology/role. Gary had an opportunity to learn the new way to 3d print molds. He chose to disregard it. [He pushed back. Production was slowed]* He no longer was needed. [Some more assumptions]
- cbanek 8y ago
  This is how I feel with automating tasks. It really frees me and other people up to work on the never ending pile of work that is more valuable than just rote daily maintenance tasks. I've never been able to automate so much that I automated myself out of a job though, or anyone else for that matter. They just always get reassigned to do something else. There's always plenty of work for capable people. I think the problem comes when you are unwilling or unable to accept new work/tasks/technologies and are kind of "left behind." If a company has a lot of these manual tasks that can be easily automated, and they don't, and there's another company who has the talent and will to automate it, the slower moving company will be inevitably put out of business, because they are inherently less competitive.

30 points by jmsflknr 8y ago

But it is deeply suspect to me that the company, which Winick prefers I don’t name, would put an intern in charge of a project that would lead directly to the elimination of someone’s job. Not because Winick wasn’t capable with the technology, certainly—but because that’s a hell of a burden to lay on a summer intern. Actually, I can see from a manager's point of view how a summer intern would be perfect. The person who automated the job is no longer with the company.

captainbland 8y ago
Plus they're just trying to get their foot on the employment ladder: perfectly vulnerable

nerdponx 8y ago

This is a great demonstration of how naive free market economics simply don't work in labor markets. Employees typically can't "just get another job". The obvious solution is some kind of social safety net -- maybe even UBI -- but that is a bitter pill to swallow for free market zealots (and the wealthy elites they shill for, who abhor the thought of having to relinquish some of their personal gain for the betterment of society).

CuriousSkeptic 8y ago
As a former free market zealot I actually derived UBI as a basic right, just as basic as right to self. The idea of the argument is to start with the commons as a shared resource instead of first come first served. As such, privatization of the commons must be justified by some agreement with the to be excluded commoners, not just putting a stake in the ground. Borrowing Rawls idea of an original position to negotiate such an agreement it makes sense to at least demand compensation for the rental value of the property before agreeing to be excluded from it. And an equal shared dividend of said rental value would be an UBI of sorts. I later discoverd this principle to exist as “geolibertarianism”
- nerdponx 8y ago
  Interesting line of thinking, thank you for sharing.

Topgamer7 8y ago

The article isn't clear about the 2d painting to 3d model anecdote. Basically used as a story to drive the messaging of "WARNING automation removes workers from workforce" with no substance to the example.

nerdponx 8y ago
It's a human interest story meant to garner empathy in a discussion that is typically couched in sterile, aggregate terminology.

whack 8y ago

https://outlookzen.com/2019/01/05/prosperity-comes-from-eliminating-jobs-not-saving-them/ https://outlookzen.com/2019/01/05/prosperity-comes-from-elim... Prosperity comes from eliminating jobs, not saving them. Short-term shocks from increased unemployment and income inequality, is a real problem that can and should be addressed. By having more generous unemployment benefits and a more progressive tax system. Foregoing these fixes and instead saving jobs that can be effectively automated, is nothing more than an awful waste of human talent.

EADGBE 8y ago

But the project moved ahead, and the company said it would retrain Gary to work on the new printers. It turned out he wasn’t much interested in learning a new job three decades into his career, however, and took the news as the latest in a long line of slights from management. To me, it seems the larger problem is a lack of willingness to learn a new technology/role. Gary had an opportunity to learn the new way to 3d print molds. He chose to disregard it. [He pushed back. Production was slowed]* He no longer was needed. [Some more assumptions]

cbanek 8y ago
This is how I feel with automating tasks. It really frees me and other people up to work on the never ending pile of work that is more valuable than just rote daily maintenance tasks. I've never been able to automate so much that I automated myself out of a job though, or anyone else for that matter. They just always get reassigned to do something else. There's always plenty of work for capable people. I think the problem comes when you are unwilling or unable to accept new work/tasks/technologies and are kind of "left behind." If a company has a lot of these manual tasks that can be easily automated, and they don't, and there's another company who has the talent and will to automate it, the slower moving company will be inevitably put out of business, because they are inherently less competitive.