7 ms·

"AI," won't kill jobs. Profit-seeking capitalists will. Keeping executive pay high while returning dividends to shareholders means cutting out labour everywhere

"AI," won't kill jobs. Profit-seeking capitalists will. Keeping executive pay high while returning dividends to shareholders means cutting out labour everywhere possible and keeping expenses down. "AI," is how they keep laying people off while "growing" the business. This seems similar to asking the O&G companies to self-report their methane emissions.

kypro 3y ago
If capitalism is the problem – what's the solution?
- deelowe 3y ago
  Capitalism isn't the problem. There is no system which prevents the elite and powerful from taking advantage of the working class.
  - analognoise 3y ago
    This is defeatism and not true. Worker solidarity, political awareness, and effective political work is the solution. Start Boycotting (in the original sense, literally everyone pretend they’re ghosts) the people who cut jobs after making record profits. There’s a lot we can do.
    - randomdata 3y ago
      > This is defeatism and not true. It is, though, as the problem is scarcity. So long as you have that, it is impossible to not end up in a situation where some people have things other people don't have. It doesn't go away simply by slightly changing the way people choose to organize. > Worker solidarity, political awareness, and effective political work is the solution. These are oft considered useful tools to help us achieve post-scarcity, but are not the solution in and of themselves. This is like saying that the hammer is the solution to the housing problem. Indeed, a hammer can help with solving the housing problem, but simply having a hammer doesn't get you there. You have to also hit the nail.
      - analognoise 3y ago
        We have FORCED scarcity as is, not REAL scarcity, already - remember Grapes of Wrath? I think the way they took the venom out of that book was to make us all read it in high school, but it was right there: "And men with hoses squirt kerosene on the oranges, and they are angry at the crime, angry at the people who have come to take the fruit. A million people hungry, needing the fruit- and kerosene sprayed over the golden mountains. And the smell of rot fills the country. Burn coffee for fuel in the ships. Burn corn to keep warm, it makes a hot fire. Dump potatoes in the rivers and place guards along the banks to keep the hungry people from fishing them out. Slaughter the pigs and bury them, and let the putrescence drip down into the earth." We are currently ensuring scarcity to propagate the system and not "solving" the problem. We could also solve homelessness - we went to the moon. The solution is... to build housing. We FORCE homelessness on people to ensure them "participating" in the system.
        randomdata 3y ago
        > We have FORCED scarcity as is, not REAL scarcity, already That's what Cuba thought, with the people coming together under worker solitary and political awareness to create an explicit mandate to see the transition from forced scarcity to post-scarcity through. Ironically, many years later, there are few places with more scarcity. They had the tools. Yet, it seems they missed the nail. But they maintain the transition will happen any day now, so... We shall see. > We could also solve homelessness - we went to the moon. I don't know, the moon might be a nice place to visit, but is rather hostile as a place to live. You might want to give this a second thought. > The solution is... to build housing. A good idea in theory, but in practice requires people. We've completely failed to automate house production in any meaningful way despite a whole lot of trying. And who wants to subject themselves to that harsh environment when you can relax behind a computer screen instead? Construction is not exactly fun. I expect you aren't lining up to do it. I'm definitely not. The few who are willing to do it are booked up years in advance. They are already building as fast as they can.
        thiagoharry 3y ago
        Cuba is a place with little natural resources and that suffers with a criminal economical blockade. Even with these difficulties, it managed to become one of the countries in Caribbean with highest GDP per capita. Of course, the embargo causes scarcity and lowers a lot the Purchasing Power Parity despite the relatively higher GDP for the region. I do not know how is this in USA, but in my country (Brazil) we have more empty houses than homeless people (it's 11 millions of empty houses vs. 6 millions of homeless people). It shows that even if this supposed scarcity of houses are solved, capitalism will not allocate the resources in a way that maximizes human benefit, it insists in maximizing only profit and reproduction of capital. The headline in this news is a symptom: if a new tech makes possible produce more with less labor, we worry that capitalism will cut jobs, and the best news that we could receive is that it will not happen, perhaps because it will open more markets to compensate. We will never celebrate that now we will have more free time because the new tech will allow us to work less.
- randomdata 3y ago
  Ending scarcity. The question is, as always, how to get there and if it is possible at all.
yareal 3y ago
This is the lesson of the Luddites all over again. The Luddites were highly skilled workers who just wanted to share in the prosperity the auto loom would bring. Capitalist factory owners said no, the improved productivity belongs to us, not split between workers and owners. So the Luddites wrecked the looms.
- pfdietz 3y ago
  The lesson of the Luddites is the mill owners had enough financial incentive to get the state to brutally suppress the Luddites. If AI pays off as is hoped, the incentive to suppress neo-Luddites would be even greater.
- randomdata 3y ago
  > So the Luddites wrecked the looms. And then went on to create computers, which made them far more powerful capitalists than the loom owners. Funny how things work out.
  - dns_snek 3y ago
    Who were these luddites that were involved in creating computers?
  - yareal 3y ago
    What?! Source?
test6554 3y ago
If you can't beat shareholders, join em.
hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
> Profit-seeking capitalists will. I like how you say this as if it's some sort of slur. This is fundamentally how the world economy works, not some evil plot. And even if you have some problems with particular implementations of some brands of capitalism, "wanting to get the most value for the lowest cost", which is exactly what "profit-seeking capitalists" do, is a pretty universal human trait, from the CEO who decides he can lay off humans and replace them with AI, to the everyday consumer who decides they can use ChatGPT to plan things around a specific vacation destination instead of using a travel agent.
- analognoise 3y ago
  We can absolutely set the market parameters to prevent this. 5 families have more wealth than 50% of Americans combined. Stock buybacks incentivize short term beahavior - and they used to be illegal! WE set the market parameters. We don’t have to just say “this is how it works”.
  - randomdata 3y ago
    > 5 families have more wealth than 50% of Americans combined. Does that say more about the five families or the 120 million other families in America? Wealth is, after all, created out of thin air. Paint a painting that other people like and you've created wealth. Likewise, stop liking the metaphorical paintings those five families have and their wealth vanishes. How did most Americans become so boring that five families are responsible for 50% of all that is considered desirable?
  - hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
    I totally agree, which is why I wrote "even if you have some problems with particular implementations of some brands of capitalism" - and I certainly have some problems with the American brand of capitalism. I just think it's silly to blame "profit-seeking capitalists", which is really just another word for "people who want to get the most value for the lowest cost", which is everybody.

kypro 3y ago

If capitalism is the problem – what's the solution?

deelowe 3y ago
Capitalism isn't the problem. There is no system which prevents the elite and powerful from taking advantage of the working class.
- analognoise 3y ago
  This is defeatism and not true. Worker solidarity, political awareness, and effective political work is the solution. Start Boycotting (in the original sense, literally everyone pretend they’re ghosts) the people who cut jobs after making record profits. There’s a lot we can do.
  - randomdata 3y ago
    > This is defeatism and not true. It is, though, as the problem is scarcity. So long as you have that, it is impossible to not end up in a situation where some people have things other people don't have. It doesn't go away simply by slightly changing the way people choose to organize. > Worker solidarity, political awareness, and effective political work is the solution. These are oft considered useful tools to help us achieve post-scarcity, but are not the solution in and of themselves. This is like saying that the hammer is the solution to the housing problem. Indeed, a hammer can help with solving the housing problem, but simply having a hammer doesn't get you there. You have to also hit the nail.
    - analognoise 3y ago
      We have FORCED scarcity as is, not REAL scarcity, already - remember Grapes of Wrath? I think the way they took the venom out of that book was to make us all read it in high school, but it was right there: "And men with hoses squirt kerosene on the oranges, and they are angry at the crime, angry at the people who have come to take the fruit. A million people hungry, needing the fruit- and kerosene sprayed over the golden mountains. And the smell of rot fills the country. Burn coffee for fuel in the ships. Burn corn to keep warm, it makes a hot fire. Dump potatoes in the rivers and place guards along the banks to keep the hungry people from fishing them out. Slaughter the pigs and bury them, and let the putrescence drip down into the earth." We are currently ensuring scarcity to propagate the system and not "solving" the problem. We could also solve homelessness - we went to the moon. The solution is... to build housing. We FORCE homelessness on people to ensure them "participating" in the system.
      - randomdata 3y ago
        > We have FORCED scarcity as is, not REAL scarcity, already That's what Cuba thought, with the people coming together under worker solitary and political awareness to create an explicit mandate to see the transition from forced scarcity to post-scarcity through. Ironically, many years later, there are few places with more scarcity. They had the tools. Yet, it seems they missed the nail. But they maintain the transition will happen any day now, so... We shall see. > We could also solve homelessness - we went to the moon. I don't know, the moon might be a nice place to visit, but is rather hostile as a place to live. You might want to give this a second thought. > The solution is... to build housing. A good idea in theory, but in practice requires people. We've completely failed to automate house production in any meaningful way despite a whole lot of trying. And who wants to subject themselves to that harsh environment when you can relax behind a computer screen instead? Construction is not exactly fun. I expect you aren't lining up to do it. I'm definitely not. The few who are willing to do it are booked up years in advance. They are already building as fast as they can.
        thiagoharry 3y ago
        Cuba is a place with little natural resources and that suffers with a criminal economical blockade. Even with these difficulties, it managed to become one of the countries in Caribbean with highest GDP per capita. Of course, the embargo causes scarcity and lowers a lot the Purchasing Power Parity despite the relatively higher GDP for the region. I do not know how is this in USA, but in my country (Brazil) we have more empty houses than homeless people (it's 11 millions of empty houses vs. 6 millions of homeless people). It shows that even if this supposed scarcity of houses are solved, capitalism will not allocate the resources in a way that maximizes human benefit, it insists in maximizing only profit and reproduction of capital. The headline in this news is a symptom: if a new tech makes possible produce more with less labor, we worry that capitalism will cut jobs, and the best news that we could receive is that it will not happen, perhaps because it will open more markets to compensate. We will never celebrate that now we will have more free time because the new tech will allow us to work less.
randomdata 3y ago
Ending scarcity. The question is, as always, how to get there and if it is possible at all.

yareal 3y ago

This is the lesson of the Luddites all over again. The Luddites were highly skilled workers who just wanted to share in the prosperity the auto loom would bring. Capitalist factory owners said no, the improved productivity belongs to us, not split between workers and owners. So the Luddites wrecked the looms.

pfdietz 3y ago
The lesson of the Luddites is the mill owners had enough financial incentive to get the state to brutally suppress the Luddites. If AI pays off as is hoped, the incentive to suppress neo-Luddites would be even greater.
randomdata 3y ago
> So the Luddites wrecked the looms. And then went on to create computers, which made them far more powerful capitalists than the loom owners. Funny how things work out.
- dns_snek 3y ago
  Who were these luddites that were involved in creating computers?
- yareal 3y ago
  What?! Source?

test6554 3y ago

If you can't beat shareholders, join em.

hn_throwaway_99 3y ago

> Profit-seeking capitalists will. I like how you say this as if it's some sort of slur. This is fundamentally how the world economy works, not some evil plot. And even if you have some problems with particular implementations of some brands of capitalism, "wanting to get the most value for the lowest cost", which is exactly what "profit-seeking capitalists" do, is a pretty universal human trait, from the CEO who decides he can lay off humans and replace them with AI, to the everyday consumer who decides they can use ChatGPT to plan things around a specific vacation destination instead of using a travel agent.

analognoise 3y ago
We can absolutely set the market parameters to prevent this. 5 families have more wealth than 50% of Americans combined. Stock buybacks incentivize short term beahavior - and they used to be illegal! WE set the market parameters. We don’t have to just say “this is how it works”.
- randomdata 3y ago
  > 5 families have more wealth than 50% of Americans combined. Does that say more about the five families or the 120 million other families in America? Wealth is, after all, created out of thin air. Paint a painting that other people like and you've created wealth. Likewise, stop liking the metaphorical paintings those five families have and their wealth vanishes. How did most Americans become so boring that five families are responsible for 50% of all that is considered desirable?
- hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
  I totally agree, which is why I wrote "even if you have some problems with particular implementations of some brands of capitalism" - and I certainly have some problems with the American brand of capitalism. I just think it's silly to blame "profit-seeking capitalists", which is really just another word for "people who want to get the most value for the lowest cost", which is everybody.