4 ms·

For taxi drivers, the most important change was already done and it took decades: it wasn't replacing them with self driving vehicles. It was replacing very com

For taxi drivers, the most important change was already done and it took decades: it wasn't replacing them with self driving vehicles. It was replacing very competent drivers having a perfect knowledge of the town and of the optimal paths with drivers with absolutely no competence needed. We don't have software driven vehicles, we have software driven humans.

ido 5y ago
I remember this free book making the same argument (I've read it many - maybe 20? - years ago but I recall enjoying it at the time): https://marshallbrain.com/manna1 https://marshallbrain.com/manna1
hooby 5y ago
Sounds quite similar to my accountants-example, doesn't it?
- trenchgun 5y ago
  Indeed it does.
dom96 5y ago
> We don't have software driven vehicles, we have software driven humans. Wow, this is a very prescient quote. I think we will hear this repeated often in the years to come.
- lytefm 5y ago
  There are two ways to look at it, though: One is to lament how previously specialized professions like taxi drivers become replaced by low-skilled laborers who just need to drive and use an app. The other way is to appreciate how technology augments what humans can do and be more productive. It's not like all accountants got fired when Excel started being a thing: It's that they got way more work done! There is no sign of a decrease in demand for labour in countries like the US or Germany: Quite the opposite, we have to get a lot more efficient in order to sustain an aging population!
  - Kye 5y ago
    Example relevant to what I do: the abundance of affordable software leading to people being able to make fully and professionally mixed and mastered albums in their bedroom didn't lead to all the studios closing. A mix engineer will always blow away anything I can do with the same tools as a generalist. What those tools did was enable people who previously couldn't afford to hire a studio to make music at a reasonable standard.
  - simonh 5y ago
    >There is no sign of a decrease in demand for labour in countries like the US or Germany: In fact there is growing evidence that increased automation actually increases demand for workers in the economy. It might reduce employment in the actual factory itself, but the remaining jobs there are more skilled and technical, the higher efficiency draws investment and allows companies to scale up, there's a significant trickle-down to the surrounding economy. https://www.forbes.com/sites/adigaskell/2020/06/18/why-deep-investment-in-automation-results-in-more-jobs/?sh=66edd3422df0 https://www.forbes.com/sites/adigaskell/2020/06/18/why-deep-... This makes sense when you look at the history of automation, but it's only recently that the processes that underly the way automation actually stimulates and enhances an economy have been better understood. There is an argument that AI is different because it will substitute humans more completely, but we are a long, long way off from anything like that. The kinds of automation we have now, in terms of the effects on the economy and employment, are much more like automation over the last century or two than strong AI that renders humans fundamentally obsolete.
    - lytefm 5y ago
      Yes, exactly. Arntz et al [2019] also put this into a much more reasonable perspective that „We'll lose our jobs due to Software and AI“: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334386191_Digitalization_and_the_Future_of_Work_Macroeconomic_Consequences https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334386191_Digitaliz... They also conclude that only 9% of all US jobs are actually at risk due to automation, using a much more reasonable approch that Frey and Osbourne [2017] who conlude 47% of the population with a risk > 70%: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0040162516302244 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00401...
- civilized 5y ago
  Another similar formulation: Venkatesh Rao says people are now divided into those living above the API and those living below the API. Those below the API are the software-driven humans.
- fennecfoxy 5y ago
  If someone following satnav is a software driven human, what's someone following a paper map? The quote takes a very dystopian view of the augmenting of humans with technology, sure there are people who will blindly follow the directions/"knowledge" of a machine, but just as many will be consciously and intelligently using the machine as a tool to further their own goals. As above, so below. The comment mentioning people above/below the API doesn't remember how much background stuff us developers use every day to be capable of so much more (and also less) than the developers of yore.
  - thwarted 5y ago
    The quote takes a very dystopian view of the augmenting of humans with technology… And really expands possibilities of the Chinese Room Argument.
ciphol 5y ago
Wait a few years, we might have software driven humans. And that's a much bigger deal. Replacing the driver versus replacing the map.
have_faith 5y ago
And with their knowledge moat they got lazy and built an industry where a lot of people dreaded getting taxis because of meters, getting ripped off, lack of accountability, etc.
anubiskhan 5y ago
> It was replacing very competent drivers having a perfect knowledge of the town and of the optimal paths with drivers with absolutely no competence needed So the drivers were replaced with organic hardware (other, non-knowledgable humans) and their knowledge was replaced with software (google maps, or whatever Lyft/Uber use for maps)?

ido 5y ago

I remember this free book making the same argument (I've read it many - maybe 20? - years ago but I recall enjoying it at the time): https://marshallbrain.com/manna1 https://marshallbrain.com/manna1

hooby 5y ago

Sounds quite similar to my accountants-example, doesn't it?

trenchgun 5y ago
Indeed it does.

dom96 5y ago

> We don't have software driven vehicles, we have software driven humans. Wow, this is a very prescient quote. I think we will hear this repeated often in the years to come.

lytefm 5y ago
There are two ways to look at it, though: One is to lament how previously specialized professions like taxi drivers become replaced by low-skilled laborers who just need to drive and use an app. The other way is to appreciate how technology augments what humans can do and be more productive. It's not like all accountants got fired when Excel started being a thing: It's that they got way more work done! There is no sign of a decrease in demand for labour in countries like the US or Germany: Quite the opposite, we have to get a lot more efficient in order to sustain an aging population!
- Kye 5y ago
  Example relevant to what I do: the abundance of affordable software leading to people being able to make fully and professionally mixed and mastered albums in their bedroom didn't lead to all the studios closing. A mix engineer will always blow away anything I can do with the same tools as a generalist. What those tools did was enable people who previously couldn't afford to hire a studio to make music at a reasonable standard.
- simonh 5y ago
  >There is no sign of a decrease in demand for labour in countries like the US or Germany: In fact there is growing evidence that increased automation actually increases demand for workers in the economy. It might reduce employment in the actual factory itself, but the remaining jobs there are more skilled and technical, the higher efficiency draws investment and allows companies to scale up, there's a significant trickle-down to the surrounding economy. https://www.forbes.com/sites/adigaskell/2020/06/18/why-deep-investment-in-automation-results-in-more-jobs/?sh=66edd3422df0 https://www.forbes.com/sites/adigaskell/2020/06/18/why-deep-... This makes sense when you look at the history of automation, but it's only recently that the processes that underly the way automation actually stimulates and enhances an economy have been better understood. There is an argument that AI is different because it will substitute humans more completely, but we are a long, long way off from anything like that. The kinds of automation we have now, in terms of the effects on the economy and employment, are much more like automation over the last century or two than strong AI that renders humans fundamentally obsolete.
  - lytefm 5y ago
    Yes, exactly. Arntz et al [2019] also put this into a much more reasonable perspective that „We'll lose our jobs due to Software and AI“: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334386191_Digitalization_and_the_Future_of_Work_Macroeconomic_Consequences https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334386191_Digitaliz... They also conclude that only 9% of all US jobs are actually at risk due to automation, using a much more reasonable approch that Frey and Osbourne [2017] who conlude 47% of the population with a risk > 70%: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0040162516302244 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00401...
civilized 5y ago
Another similar formulation: Venkatesh Rao says people are now divided into those living above the API and those living below the API. Those below the API are the software-driven humans.
fennecfoxy 5y ago
If someone following satnav is a software driven human, what's someone following a paper map? The quote takes a very dystopian view of the augmenting of humans with technology, sure there are people who will blindly follow the directions/"knowledge" of a machine, but just as many will be consciously and intelligently using the machine as a tool to further their own goals. As above, so below. The comment mentioning people above/below the API doesn't remember how much background stuff us developers use every day to be capable of so much more (and also less) than the developers of yore.
- thwarted 5y ago
  The quote takes a very dystopian view of the augmenting of humans with technology… And really expands possibilities of the Chinese Room Argument.

ciphol 5y ago

Wait a few years, we might have software driven humans. And that's a much bigger deal. Replacing the driver versus replacing the map.

have_faith 5y ago

And with their knowledge moat they got lazy and built an industry where a lot of people dreaded getting taxis because of meters, getting ripped off, lack of accountability, etc.

anubiskhan 5y ago

> It was replacing very competent drivers having a perfect knowledge of the town and of the optimal paths with drivers with absolutely no competence needed So the drivers were replaced with organic hardware (other, non-knowledgable humans) and their knowledge was replaced with software (google maps, or whatever Lyft/Uber use for maps)?