4 ms·

isn't "servant economy" just a clickbait-ier rewording of "service economy"? So many sectors of the economy are about providing services... how is any of this

isn't "servant economy" just a clickbait-ier rewording of "service economy"? So many sectors of the economy are about providing services... how is any of this different from working in the restaurant industry? Aren't many restaurants almost equally unprofitable as these VC-driven "servant economy" startups?

cblconfederate 5y ago
in the service economy, the customer meets the seller face-to-face, while this digitized economy is intentionally hiding all human-to-human interaction (so servants can be replaced with future robots). In exchange, they extract rents, and have almost full control on both sides. I guess intermediaries have always existed, but with tech they are all replaced by the one giant monopoly. It does make everyone feel more like cogs of the machine.
- golergka 5y ago
  > while this digitized economy is intentionally hiding all human-to-human interaction I haven't worked in the service industry, but I heard, repeatedly, that the worst part of the job is dealing with clients. May be reducing human-to-human interaction isn't such a bad change for people working in that industry?
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    If you ever worked in retail, restaurants, or hotels, having to deal with the general public is the worst part of the job.
  - cblconfederate 5y ago
    Indeed that is true , but it is also their only opportunity to increase their payout. Being at the mercy of a machine with no options is more bleak. Telling people to "shut up and work" turns them to serfs
  - RC_ITR 5y ago
    A dirty-little-not-secret about people who complain about “then end of human interaction” is that many of them only have interactions with people who are forced to be nice to them. I would miss that too, but it’s not worth torturing an entire class of people over.
  - uncomputation 5y ago
    I’ll throw in my two cents. I’ve worked in food service before and for me the worst part was not interacting with customers but rather the other 90% of boring monotony during down times. And having to do “busy work” to satisfy management’s desire to see us constantly working even if that “work” was cleaning already cleaned countertops rather than checking your phone. If it was between having to stand around at an empty cash register or dealing with even a quiet customer, I personally would take the human interaction. Then again, I do obviously recognize there are some people who are just awful customers who make you wanna scream.
- uncomputation 5y ago
  > intentionally hiding all human-to-human interaction I do agree this is depressing but isn’t this also the selling point? A lot of people just want food, etc. with no interaction with other humans or any effort involved. In exchange, they’re willing to pay a slight premium. While I do agree it is rather depressing, I feel it’s more of a question of “have we humans always craved this and now we can deliver it or is there something particularly soul-crushing about modern life that makes this desirable?” rather than a question of “is it ethical for companies to cater to iffy consumer desires?” And I do believe it’s catering to rather than creating consumer demands. We’ve always had hermits, outcasts, people willingly living outside of society with minimal interaction. Perhaps now it is either more desirable or more acceptable to “hermit.”
  - 908B64B197 5y ago
    > I do agree this is depressing but isn’t this also the selling point? A lot of people just want food, etc. with no interaction with other humans or any effort involved. In exchange, they’re willing to pay a slight premium. It's been great for food delivery when the languages you speak don't completely overlap with the worker's at the restaurant. And it's much easier to build complex orders on an app rather than over the phone where the recipient is right next to a busy kitchen.
RC_ITR 5y ago
It kind of reflects Americans misconception that salaried work is salvation. 15 years ago, a “non-servant” making minimum wage would drive my tv in a truck to a store, another non-servant would put it on a shelf, and then a final non-servant would check me out. No one then considered any of them to be “servants” because they were “employees”. Now someone can be paid a similar amount to those “employees” salaries to bring food to me. The transaction is structured in a way that I pay directly for their labor and people get to have a moral panic about it.
- sangnoir 5y ago
  > I pay directly for their labor and people get to have a moral panic about it. There'd be a lot less panicking if health insurance (and other employee benefits) were resolved in the new normal. These costs have been externalized, and the Servant-as-a-Service companies are pocketing the difference: there's nothing direct about your payments.
  - RC_ITR 5y ago
    Yeah, hourly retail workers, famous for their non-wage benefits. Sad that on-demand work stripped all those laborers of the great healthcare coverage they were receiving before Listen I agree low end work is fucked in the US. That's why it's my personal rule to tip 25% of GMV or $7 per order on these services (whichever is more, and I recommend every person who reads this adopt a similar rule no matter how painful it is), but please spare me with the 'Servant-as-a-Service' line - the problem is society and its participants, not the shape an individual job takes.

cblconfederate 5y ago

in the service economy, the customer meets the seller face-to-face, while this digitized economy is intentionally hiding all human-to-human interaction (so servants can be replaced with future robots). In exchange, they extract rents, and have almost full control on both sides. I guess intermediaries have always existed, but with tech they are all replaced by the one giant monopoly. It does make everyone feel more like cogs of the machine.

golergka 5y ago
> while this digitized economy is intentionally hiding all human-to-human interaction I haven't worked in the service industry, but I heard, repeatedly, that the worst part of the job is dealing with clients. May be reducing human-to-human interaction isn't such a bad change for people working in that industry?
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  If you ever worked in retail, restaurants, or hotels, having to deal with the general public is the worst part of the job.
- cblconfederate 5y ago
  Indeed that is true , but it is also their only opportunity to increase their payout. Being at the mercy of a machine with no options is more bleak. Telling people to "shut up and work" turns them to serfs
- RC_ITR 5y ago
  A dirty-little-not-secret about people who complain about “then end of human interaction” is that many of them only have interactions with people who are forced to be nice to them. I would miss that too, but it’s not worth torturing an entire class of people over.
- uncomputation 5y ago
  I’ll throw in my two cents. I’ve worked in food service before and for me the worst part was not interacting with customers but rather the other 90% of boring monotony during down times. And having to do “busy work” to satisfy management’s desire to see us constantly working even if that “work” was cleaning already cleaned countertops rather than checking your phone. If it was between having to stand around at an empty cash register or dealing with even a quiet customer, I personally would take the human interaction. Then again, I do obviously recognize there are some people who are just awful customers who make you wanna scream.
uncomputation 5y ago
> intentionally hiding all human-to-human interaction I do agree this is depressing but isn’t this also the selling point? A lot of people just want food, etc. with no interaction with other humans or any effort involved. In exchange, they’re willing to pay a slight premium. While I do agree it is rather depressing, I feel it’s more of a question of “have we humans always craved this and now we can deliver it or is there something particularly soul-crushing about modern life that makes this desirable?” rather than a question of “is it ethical for companies to cater to iffy consumer desires?” And I do believe it’s catering to rather than creating consumer demands. We’ve always had hermits, outcasts, people willingly living outside of society with minimal interaction. Perhaps now it is either more desirable or more acceptable to “hermit.”
- 908B64B197 5y ago
  > I do agree this is depressing but isn’t this also the selling point? A lot of people just want food, etc. with no interaction with other humans or any effort involved. In exchange, they’re willing to pay a slight premium. It's been great for food delivery when the languages you speak don't completely overlap with the worker's at the restaurant. And it's much easier to build complex orders on an app rather than over the phone where the recipient is right next to a busy kitchen.

RC_ITR 5y ago

It kind of reflects Americans misconception that salaried work is salvation. 15 years ago, a “non-servant” making minimum wage would drive my tv in a truck to a store, another non-servant would put it on a shelf, and then a final non-servant would check me out. No one then considered any of them to be “servants” because they were “employees”. Now someone can be paid a similar amount to those “employees” salaries to bring food to me. The transaction is structured in a way that I pay directly for their labor and people get to have a moral panic about it.

sangnoir 5y ago
> I pay directly for their labor and people get to have a moral panic about it. There'd be a lot less panicking if health insurance (and other employee benefits) were resolved in the new normal. These costs have been externalized, and the Servant-as-a-Service companies are pocketing the difference: there's nothing direct about your payments.
- RC_ITR 5y ago
  Yeah, hourly retail workers, famous for their non-wage benefits. Sad that on-demand work stripped all those laborers of the great healthcare coverage they were receiving before Listen I agree low end work is fucked in the US. That's why it's my personal rule to tip 25% of GMV or $7 per order on these services (whichever is more, and I recommend every person who reads this adopt a similar rule no matter how painful it is), but please spare me with the 'Servant-as-a-Service' line - the problem is society and its participants, not the shape an individual job takes.