10 ms·

I've barely forgiven him for explaining genetic algorithms and acting like they have any relevance to contemporary ML research. The footnote video was an alrig

I've barely forgiven him for explaining genetic algorithms and acting like they have any relevance to contemporary ML research. The footnote video was an alright explanation of backprop. If that were part of the main video that would have been reasonable. I really like his history/geography videos but anything technical leave a lot to be desired. And don't get me started on Humans Need Not Apply.

jstx1 3y ago
> And don't get me started on Humans Need Not Apply. Well now you have to tell us. :) Many of the concrete examples in that video are exaggerated and/or misunderstood but the general question it asks - what to do when automation makes many people unemployable through no fault of their own - seems valid.
- bolyarche 3y ago
  [dead]
- musicale 3y ago
  > what to do when automation makes many people unemployable through no fault of their own - seems valid Unfortunately the video doesn't answer its own question directly. The answer for the past 40 years or so seems to be "move them to lower-paying service jobs, or out of the job market entirely."
  - robotresearcher 3y ago
    Another part of the answer over the last 40 (or 200) years, is to repeatedly create totally new industries that employ lots of people, including a large fraction of HN readers.
    - ketzo 3y ago
      Yeah, but what does the Venn diagram look like there? Yes, new technologies create new jobs. But it’s not usually the people from the old jobs who are taking those new jobs.
      - robotresearcher 3y ago
        That can be terribly hard on people, while great for other people. What would you suggest would be better?
        vkou 3y ago
        Tax robots. At a minimum, at the highest income tax rate bracket.
        mikewarot 3y ago
        How? What should a Roomba owner have to pay? Or a dishwasher owner? Or someone who has a calculator? Computer used to be a job description, do we all owe? Where would you draw the line? How would you enforce it? Edit/Append: Also, how do you calculate the income to be taxed?
        vkou 3y ago
        > What should a Roomba owner have to pay? The same amount that someone with a stay-at-home spouse who cleans the house pays.
        robotresearcher 3y ago
        Robots don’t have income. Are you going to pay this tax for your washing machine, dishwasher, car, word processor, electric lightbulbs? The first two are robots, and all of them put a lot of people out of work.
        dragonwriter 3y ago
        A progressive income tax that does not exclude or favor capital income, so that funding ideally targeted transitional assistance, UBI (with a rate ratcheting up with sustained increases in per capita revenue), or, ideally, both so that the adverse effects of labor market shifts which shuffle or concentrate labor demand or shift from labor-intensive to capital-intensive methods are buffered.
  - j33zusjuice 3y ago
    I find this discussion fascinating, but YouTube is one of the last places I’d go for that discussion, unless it’s a debate between two highly-regarded minds on the topic (like Chomsky vs Foucault back in the day). I’m not very interested in listening to random people tell me their ideas without any good pathways for critiques or questions.
flangola7 3y ago
Humans Need Not Apply is one of the most phenomenal videos on YouTube, what do you think is wrong with it?

jstx1 3y ago

> And don't get me started on Humans Need Not Apply. Well now you have to tell us. :) Many of the concrete examples in that video are exaggerated and/or misunderstood but the general question it asks - what to do when automation makes many people unemployable through no fault of their own - seems valid.

bolyarche 3y ago
[dead]
musicale 3y ago
> what to do when automation makes many people unemployable through no fault of their own - seems valid Unfortunately the video doesn't answer its own question directly. The answer for the past 40 years or so seems to be "move them to lower-paying service jobs, or out of the job market entirely."
- robotresearcher 3y ago
  Another part of the answer over the last 40 (or 200) years, is to repeatedly create totally new industries that employ lots of people, including a large fraction of HN readers.
  - ketzo 3y ago
    Yeah, but what does the Venn diagram look like there? Yes, new technologies create new jobs. But it’s not usually the people from the old jobs who are taking those new jobs.
    - robotresearcher 3y ago
      That can be terribly hard on people, while great for other people. What would you suggest would be better?
      - vkou 3y ago
        Tax robots. At a minimum, at the highest income tax rate bracket.
        mikewarot 3y ago
        How? What should a Roomba owner have to pay? Or a dishwasher owner? Or someone who has a calculator? Computer used to be a job description, do we all owe? Where would you draw the line? How would you enforce it? Edit/Append: Also, how do you calculate the income to be taxed?
        vkou 3y ago
        > What should a Roomba owner have to pay? The same amount that someone with a stay-at-home spouse who cleans the house pays.
        robotresearcher 3y ago
        Robots don’t have income. Are you going to pay this tax for your washing machine, dishwasher, car, word processor, electric lightbulbs? The first two are robots, and all of them put a lot of people out of work.
      - dragonwriter 3y ago
        A progressive income tax that does not exclude or favor capital income, so that funding ideally targeted transitional assistance, UBI (with a rate ratcheting up with sustained increases in per capita revenue), or, ideally, both so that the adverse effects of labor market shifts which shuffle or concentrate labor demand or shift from labor-intensive to capital-intensive methods are buffered.
- j33zusjuice 3y ago
  I find this discussion fascinating, but YouTube is one of the last places I’d go for that discussion, unless it’s a debate between two highly-regarded minds on the topic (like Chomsky vs Foucault back in the day). I’m not very interested in listening to random people tell me their ideas without any good pathways for critiques or questions.

flangola7 3y ago

Humans Need Not Apply is one of the most phenomenal videos on YouTube, what do you think is wrong with it?