4 ms·

We engineers live in an information economy. Many, if not most Americans do not (pardon my lack of statistics). They work in service jobs that will be trivially

by natrius 16y ago

We engineers live in an information economy. Many, if not most Americans do not (pardon my lack of statistics). They work in service jobs that will be trivially automatable in our lifetimes. Wealthy people will actually own the means of production in a very meaningful way, and those that aren't equipped by their genes, upbringing, or education to participate in the information economy will be unable to earn an income. Secondly, despite the information economy, it is still very much about what you own. If you are capable of making something amazing, you still need savings or investors who will feed and house you while you make those things and pay the still significant costs of infrastructure that many products require. Concentration of wealth matters. That doesn't necessarily mean that government intervention is a good idea.

javert 16y ago
Many, if not most Americans do not (pardon my lack of statistics). They work in service jobs that will be trivially automatable in our lifetimes. Most jobs that truly are "trivially automatable" have already been automatized. I think it's extremely unlikely that most or nearly most of Americans' jobs can be replaced by computers in our lifetimes, barring something like the Singularity happening (which I'm not holding my breath for). Wealthy people will actually own the means of production in a very meaningful way Like I said, this is a Marxist bromide. Fundamentally, the means of production is mens' minds. Marx mistakenly believed that production amounted to physical human labor + expensive heavy-industry capital (like factories), which leaves work requiring intelligence and skill (MOST work) out of the picture, and is inaccurate - and is becoming more and more innacurate. those that aren't equipped by their genes, upbringing, or education to participate in the information economy will be unable to earn an income. Everyone is equipped to participate, barring exceptionally low IQ. Human beings are not automatons; they are not determined by the environment or their parents or their genes; they exercise choice. Secondly, despite the information economy, it is still very much about what you own. If you are capable of making something amazing, you still need savings or investors who will feed and house you while you make those things and pay the still significant costs of infrastructure that many products require. Big projects typically require capital investment, but so what? That can be gotten if you have a good idea. Also, lots of people that work in service jobs and don't need heavy capital investment do important, creative work. My point here is that, no, it's not "very much about what you own." Most people in America are doing just fine, especially those with an education, and most people in America did not inherit a trust fund or something. Concentration of wealth matters. That doesn't necessarily mean that government intervention is a good idea. If it has no implications, then by definition, it doesn't matter. So if you claim that it matters, you should give an implication.
- natrius 16y ago
  > "Most jobs that truly are "trivially automatable" have already been automatized." Food service. Retail. Automobile repair. Lower-end healthcare jobs. Any job that doesn't require creativity can be automated. Do you doubt that a McDonalds with zero human employees will exist in our lifetimes? When farming and transportation are automated as well and Big Macs are produced with zero human involvement, will you agree that "owning the means of production" is quite possible? > "...which leaves work requiring intelligence and skill (MOST work) out of the picture..." You are very, very wrong. Here are the 15 most common jobs according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/06/the-most-popular-jobs-in-_n_752615.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/06/the-most-popular-jo... 3.2% of Americans work in retail sales alone. Those jobs are going away. I count two jobs in that list, elementary teachers and general managers, that will be difficult to automate. What careers do you see this huge group of people switching to? Please stop bringing Marx into this. It's basically an ad hominem argument. You're arguing against him instead of me. > "Everyone is equipped to participate, barring exceptionally low IQ." This is extremely wishful thinking with no evidence to back it up. The incentives for training oneself for a job in the information economy is huge today, yet only half of Americans have completed any college coursework.[1] If all of the people doing menial tasks today are capable of doing more intellectual work, why are they ignoring the incentives that exist today to get them to do so? > "Big projects typically require capital investment, but so what? That can be gotten if you have a good idea." Your arguments are skewed by your familiarity with the software industry. The businesses normal people start don't get venture capital. They get small business loans on their personal credit. If you have no credit or bad credit because you're poor, you'll never start a business. Concentration of wealth creates more people who are relatively poor. > "Most people in America are doing just fine, especially those with an education, and most people in America did not inherit a trust fund or something." I agree. I've been talking about the future, not now. > "If it has no implications, then by definition, it doesn't matter. So if you claim that it matters, you should give an implication." Implications: 1) An almost-permanent upper class. 2) An almost-permanent lower class. 3) (1) and (2) lead to civil unrest. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_attainment_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_attainment_in_the_U...
sleight42 16y ago
Spoken like someone in the second 20% who believes that they are in the top 20%. "We engineers" are barely in that top 20% if at all. It's occupied by corporate CEOs, Wall Street bankers, and lawyers: the people who either write or lobby/bribe the people who write the laws (at least in the plutonomy/plutocracy that we call the United States). "We engineers" don't control the information. We write the tools that do. The people with the money (see above) use the tools. Statistically speaking, I imagine that the majority of engineers who participate in a successful startup exit (how else is an engineer going to get into the top 10 or 20%?) are still less well off than a great deal of the above "fat cats". What separates "we engineers", at least those that read and participate in Hacker News, is that, perhaps, we have just a little more potential for social mobility than the rest. Bring on them downvotes!
- reinhardt 16y ago
  I seriously doubt that there are ~60 million corporate CEOs, Wall Street bankers and lawyers to make up the top 20%. Doctors, middle managers and, yes, engineers probably cover a sizeable chunk of this slice.

by natrius 16y ago

javert 16y ago

Many, if not most Americans do not (pardon my lack of statistics). They work in service jobs that will be trivially automatable in our lifetimes. Most jobs that truly are "trivially automatable" have already been automatized. I think it's extremely unlikely that most or nearly most of Americans' jobs can be replaced by computers in our lifetimes, barring something like the Singularity happening (which I'm not holding my breath for). Wealthy people will actually own the means of production in a very meaningful way Like I said, this is a Marxist bromide. Fundamentally, the means of production is mens' minds. Marx mistakenly believed that production amounted to physical human labor + expensive heavy-industry capital (like factories), which leaves work requiring intelligence and skill (MOST work) out of the picture, and is inaccurate - and is becoming more and more innacurate. those that aren't equipped by their genes, upbringing, or education to participate in the information economy will be unable to earn an income. Everyone is equipped to participate, barring exceptionally low IQ. Human beings are not automatons; they are not determined by the environment or their parents or their genes; they exercise choice. Secondly, despite the information economy, it is still very much about what you own. If you are capable of making something amazing, you still need savings or investors who will feed and house you while you make those things and pay the still significant costs of infrastructure that many products require. Big projects typically require capital investment, but so what? That can be gotten if you have a good idea. Also, lots of people that work in service jobs and don't need heavy capital investment do important, creative work. My point here is that, no, it's not "very much about what you own." Most people in America are doing just fine, especially those with an education, and most people in America did not inherit a trust fund or something. Concentration of wealth matters. That doesn't necessarily mean that government intervention is a good idea. If it has no implications, then by definition, it doesn't matter. So if you claim that it matters, you should give an implication.

natrius 16y ago
> "Most jobs that truly are "trivially automatable" have already been automatized." Food service. Retail. Automobile repair. Lower-end healthcare jobs. Any job that doesn't require creativity can be automated. Do you doubt that a McDonalds with zero human employees will exist in our lifetimes? When farming and transportation are automated as well and Big Macs are produced with zero human involvement, will you agree that "owning the means of production" is quite possible? > "...which leaves work requiring intelligence and skill (MOST work) out of the picture..." You are very, very wrong. Here are the 15 most common jobs according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/06/the-most-popular-jobs-in-_n_752615.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/06/the-most-popular-jo... 3.2% of Americans work in retail sales alone. Those jobs are going away. I count two jobs in that list, elementary teachers and general managers, that will be difficult to automate. What careers do you see this huge group of people switching to? Please stop bringing Marx into this. It's basically an ad hominem argument. You're arguing against him instead of me. > "Everyone is equipped to participate, barring exceptionally low IQ." This is extremely wishful thinking with no evidence to back it up. The incentives for training oneself for a job in the information economy is huge today, yet only half of Americans have completed any college coursework.[1] If all of the people doing menial tasks today are capable of doing more intellectual work, why are they ignoring the incentives that exist today to get them to do so? > "Big projects typically require capital investment, but so what? That can be gotten if you have a good idea." Your arguments are skewed by your familiarity with the software industry. The businesses normal people start don't get venture capital. They get small business loans on their personal credit. If you have no credit or bad credit because you're poor, you'll never start a business. Concentration of wealth creates more people who are relatively poor. > "Most people in America are doing just fine, especially those with an education, and most people in America did not inherit a trust fund or something." I agree. I've been talking about the future, not now. > "If it has no implications, then by definition, it doesn't matter. So if you claim that it matters, you should give an implication." Implications: 1) An almost-permanent upper class. 2) An almost-permanent lower class. 3) (1) and (2) lead to civil unrest. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_attainment_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_attainment_in_the_U...

sleight42 16y ago

Spoken like someone in the second 20% who believes that they are in the top 20%. "We engineers" are barely in that top 20% if at all. It's occupied by corporate CEOs, Wall Street bankers, and lawyers: the people who either write or lobby/bribe the people who write the laws (at least in the plutonomy/plutocracy that we call the United States). "We engineers" don't control the information. We write the tools that do. The people with the money (see above) use the tools. Statistically speaking, I imagine that the majority of engineers who participate in a successful startup exit (how else is an engineer going to get into the top 10 or 20%?) are still less well off than a great deal of the above "fat cats". What separates "we engineers", at least those that read and participate in Hacker News, is that, perhaps, we have just a little more potential for social mobility than the rest. Bring on them downvotes!

reinhardt 16y ago
I seriously doubt that there are ~60 million corporate CEOs, Wall Street bankers and lawyers to make up the top 20%. Doctors, middle managers and, yes, engineers probably cover a sizeable chunk of this slice.