5 ms·
Work and salaries ? Like from their own pocket ? No. That is the business money. Wasted. Time, attention, of peoples wasted. That is the same absurd logic as
by Heyso 3y ago
Work and salaries ? Like from their own pocket ? No. That is the business money. Wasted. Time, attention, of peoples wasted.
That is the same absurd logic as for not to replace low qualified human physical work by machines (self checkout in supermarket).
Having less jobs due to technology or less stupid work should be seen as good for humanity.
Perhaps, instead, of imagining some stupid jobs and occupation, so peoples can be paid and survive. We coul reduce the total workhours of working people, so that senseful work would employ more peoples. And with no changes to the salary ofc.
I am not so good with english, so let me rephrase it. What would happen to humanity if 90 % went jobless because -let's imagine- robots and IA would efficientely replace us. Would 90 % be condemned to die in the cold when there is abondance ? Because they have no job and a 0.00001 % "owns" the robots ?
Our current system cannot work with abondance.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago> Work and salaries ? Like from their own pocket ? No. That is the business money. Wasted. Time, attention, of peoples wasted. It actually blows me away sometimes the willingness people w/i companies have to just spend money that isn't theirs. It's not even the calculation of build vs buy, they'll spend exorbitant amounts of money for nothing in particular. It makes me understand the stereotypical budget constraints, because without them people would just waste money left and right.
- shadowgovt 3y agoEventually, one comes to realize that everyone's spending money that isn't theirs. Including the CEO and the owners, who are spending the money invested by people who expect returns.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agosure, but there's a lack of responsibility there that amazes me.
- fnordpiglet 3y agoDepends on if you ever took outside money I guess :-)
- shadowgovt 3y agoThe only organization that doesn't take outside money is the federal government, and they take the consent of the people to rule instead (quite a bit more valuable).
- fnordpiglet 3y agoOh that’s not true at all. Hudson River Trading, for instance, has never taken outside money and has no outside investors, yet makes billions in profit every year. There are likewise many fully private companies that have no investors, debt, or unaffiliated shareholders. Goldman Sachs was a partnership until the mid 1990’s. Etc.
- zer0tonin 3y agoSelf-checkout is still low qualified human work. It's just done for free by the customers.
- amalcon 3y agoThe cashier has three jobs: - Prevent theft - Keep track of what's specifically been sold, to help determine re-ordering schedules - Sometimes, put things in bags. Some stores just ask the customer to do this even if they have a cashier. The thing about physically moving products over a barcode scanner is only for those first two purposes. Mostly the first -- if theft weren't an issue, it would be cheaper to just do manual inventory more frequently. The customer is not preventing theft. They (mostly) aren't stealing, but they also aren't deterring anyone from stealing. The lone employee for the eight self-checkout kiosks is doing that -- with the help of scales, cameras, and (these days) a little bit of AI.
- ToucanLoucan 3y agoNot free if you "miss" scanning a few items. Not that I'm endorsing that of course. But if you're going to saddle me with work you don't want to pay people to do, without training and without compensation and I happen to make a mistake... well. Guess that was a bad move on your part.
- Beldin 3y agoThe obvious benefit to the customer is that they are not stuck in a queue. If you have portable scanners for customers (eg, via an app), all items can already be scanned on the fly, speeding up things even more. Moreover, self-checkout registers take less space - roughly doubling the number of available registers. Which, again, increases throughput and reduces latency. Less obvious benefits to the customer: you can have one employee oversee multiple registers, instead of only 1. So less employees needed, so prices can go down. Customers can more easily take distancing measures themselves, as long as there isn't a queue for self-checkout. But sure, some asshat may forget or "forget" to scan something. That happens with regular registers as well, but is more likely to be caught. And if it isn't: lucky for the asshat, less so gor the other customers - they will end up paying for the store's losses.
- marcosdumay 3y agoWhat will happen is that either the 0.01% will order the robots to kill the 99%, or the 99% will go out and kill the 0.01% and whoever else is near them. Or we could reform our system so it can cope with abundance. It's perfectly well known how to do it, and it helps creating that abundance too. But the 0.01% seems completely decided to fight against this to their death, so I'm not holding my breath.