3 ms·

> Automation is displacing many jobs; shortening the work week to reduce the supply of labor comparably makes sense. On the contrary, today's automation is hal

> Automation is displacing many jobs; shortening the work week to reduce the supply of labor comparably makes sense. On the contrary, today's automation is half-assed machine learning bullshit for shits and is giggles, because there is not enough labor shortage to make the boring stuff (more kiosks, more trains, etc.) a good investment. Cheap labor is the cause of automatino and undermines the capitalist drive for automation. The only way to us programmers to meaningfully contribute to society outside of stupid moon shots is to continuously reduce the supply of labor so their is demand for efficiency --- honest demand that isn't predicated on the tech in question being "cool".

mlyle 5y ago
> On the contrary, today's automation is half-assed machine learning bullshit for shits and is giggles, because there is not enough labor shortage to make the boring stuff (more kiosks, more trains, etc.) a good investment. We have plenty of kiosks, self-checkout, automated fulfillment and logistics, etc happening. We also have plenty of higher skilled jobs having portions automated. Productivity is way up in the last 50 years, and that's through automation and mechanization. > Cheap labor is the cause of automatino and undermines the capitalist drive for automation. Honestly, I cannot figure out what you're saying, between the pronouns, typos, and jumbled sentences.
- Ericson2314 5y ago
  I should have said today's big attempts at further automation. > We have plenty of kiosks, self-checkout, automated fulfillment and logistics, etc happening. We also have plenty of higher skilled jobs having portions automated. Productivity is way up in the last 50 years, and that's through automation and mechanization. We have indeed accumulated tons of this stuff over that time, and that's good! But the more labor id frees up, the less incentive it is to continue down that route. Like, why buy another kiosk, if there is a gazillion people clamoring to be your cashier? The only way to keep constant the financial incentive for further automation is to keep labor markets tight, which we either do by bumping up demand, or reducing labor supply. My point is a lot of people talking about a "jobs apocalypse" seem to assume the technology will just happen no matter what, but that's not true. Stuff gets stuck in the research phase if it's not profitable to develop. The supply of "potential automation" doesn't create it's own demand for actually deployed automation and this is even worse, because the resulting stagnation obscures the root problem.

mlyle 5y ago

> On the contrary, today's automation is half-assed machine learning bullshit for shits and is giggles, because there is not enough labor shortage to make the boring stuff (more kiosks, more trains, etc.) a good investment. We have plenty of kiosks, self-checkout, automated fulfillment and logistics, etc happening. We also have plenty of higher skilled jobs having portions automated. Productivity is way up in the last 50 years, and that's through automation and mechanization. > Cheap labor is the cause of automatino and undermines the capitalist drive for automation. Honestly, I cannot figure out what you're saying, between the pronouns, typos, and jumbled sentences.

Ericson2314 5y ago
I should have said today's big attempts at further automation. > We have plenty of kiosks, self-checkout, automated fulfillment and logistics, etc happening. We also have plenty of higher skilled jobs having portions automated. Productivity is way up in the last 50 years, and that's through automation and mechanization. We have indeed accumulated tons of this stuff over that time, and that's good! But the more labor id frees up, the less incentive it is to continue down that route. Like, why buy another kiosk, if there is a gazillion people clamoring to be your cashier? The only way to keep constant the financial incentive for further automation is to keep labor markets tight, which we either do by bumping up demand, or reducing labor supply. My point is a lot of people talking about a "jobs apocalypse" seem to assume the technology will just happen no matter what, but that's not true. Stuff gets stuck in the research phase if it's not profitable to develop. The supply of "potential automation" doesn't create it's own demand for actually deployed automation and this is even worse, because the resulting stagnation obscures the root problem.