5 ms·

It's difficult to hold the paradox evident in most of the commentary here: both the desire to free people from the unhealthy repetitive tedium they are bound to

It's difficult to hold the paradox evident in most of the commentary here: both the desire to free people from the unhealthy repetitive tedium they are bound to participate in daily, and the overarching need for "jobs". I'm much happier watching robots take over dangerous, mundane tasks, than seeing them edge into creative, intellectual, and decision-making work. Wasn't that the dream? That robots do all our work and we just chill, enjoy a life of leisure and fulfilling activity? Looking back in history across all the -isms, the surplus created by those labouring has rarely gone to benefit them (unless we look as far back as hunter-gatherers). I don't know that advancing technology is the credible threat here; I think the misalignment is deeper than systemic even, as it persists across lifespans of civilisations.

sydbarrett74 3y ago
A life of leisure is the mirage-like carrot that the PTB dangle in front of our noses. Simultaneously, they intensify advertising to keep us on the hedonic treadmill, and thus trapped in a life of debt peonage.
RaftPeople 3y ago
> I don't know that advancing technology is the credible threat here The thing most people don't realize is that the robots in question aren't really even taking jobs that existed prior to the ecommerce model, and the work the robots are doing used to be handled by the consumer. Details: 1-The robots are taking over the job of moving goods from the storage shelf to the packer. 2-This is pure "walking" time when humans do it, 10 miles per day in a typical DC, not value add. 3-Before ecommerce, with brick and mortar, the goods were picked in bulk and shipped to stores and placed on the racks, and the consumer was the person that walked to get the item and bring it to the packer (cashier). Some of the walking was done in the DC, but not nearly to the same extent. 4-There are multiple different ways to solve this problem of humans walking all over the DC to pick one+two piece orders in a way that is efficient. "Robots" in the form of moving shelves (Amazon), or conveyors+sorters with bulk pick then sort by order, or etc.
- pdfernhout 3y ago
  This is insightful; thanks for pointing it out: "the robots in question aren't really even taking jobs that existed prior to the ecommerce model, and the work the robots are doing used to be handled by the consumer."
beefnugs 3y ago
I hate government authoritarianism, but in my mind the only answer is to force robot labor tied to individual humans instead of corporations. Some kind of coded link so one human operator must be living and healthy and somewhat more than homeless to control the edge cases of the robot messing things up. As the companies get bigger and more monopoly they at least have to support more humans at least somewhat.
Delk 3y ago
> I'm much happier watching robots take over dangerous, mundane tasks, than seeing them edge into creative, intellectual, and decision-making work. I used to think this way, and to an extent I still do, but the reality is that not everybody wants to do intellectual work or decision making as a day job. Some people prefer to do labour, or to have their work relatively unchanging. I know smart and intellectually capable people who have said they like the fact that they don't need to think that much in their day jobs. (Those preferences are of course a spectrum, as are jobs.) For lots of us, automating away the mundane work is a dream, but at the same time the development puts pressure on those who don't find it desirable. One person's dream is stressful to another.
Sohcahtoa82 3y ago
> Wasn't that the dream? That robots do all our work and we just chill, enjoy a life of leisure and fulfilling activity? Unfortunately, I don't see that ever happening. As jobs get lost to automation, unemployment will increase, and eventually our economy will collapse. Even if your McDonalds is automated, they're still going to charge you $15 for that meal. In the fast food world, labor is typically ~20% of the cost, so even if they reduce prices because labor is no longer a factor (they won't, after all, because they already know you'll pay $15 for your meal), it'd only reduce the price to $12.
- w0m 3y ago
  > Unfortunately, I don't see that ever happening. I mean, it's already happened over and over again throughout human history. Hell, in the US ~100 years ago, 90%+ of the population was farming. 'Automation took our jobs!' and now ~1% are farming. Work doesn't go away; it just shifts. Unemployment/collapse is a pipe dreams, the human components will simply move when large market shifts come in. Yea, they're disruptive - what will an older career truck driver move to once no one is driving? But the next generation coming up will find new niches that are still needed or desired.

sydbarrett74 3y ago

A life of leisure is the mirage-like carrot that the PTB dangle in front of our noses. Simultaneously, they intensify advertising to keep us on the hedonic treadmill, and thus trapped in a life of debt peonage.

RaftPeople 3y ago

> I don't know that advancing technology is the credible threat here The thing most people don't realize is that the robots in question aren't really even taking jobs that existed prior to the ecommerce model, and the work the robots are doing used to be handled by the consumer. Details: 1-The robots are taking over the job of moving goods from the storage shelf to the packer. 2-This is pure "walking" time when humans do it, 10 miles per day in a typical DC, not value add. 3-Before ecommerce, with brick and mortar, the goods were picked in bulk and shipped to stores and placed on the racks, and the consumer was the person that walked to get the item and bring it to the packer (cashier). Some of the walking was done in the DC, but not nearly to the same extent. 4-There are multiple different ways to solve this problem of humans walking all over the DC to pick one+two piece orders in a way that is efficient. "Robots" in the form of moving shelves (Amazon), or conveyors+sorters with bulk pick then sort by order, or etc.

pdfernhout 3y ago
This is insightful; thanks for pointing it out: "the robots in question aren't really even taking jobs that existed prior to the ecommerce model, and the work the robots are doing used to be handled by the consumer."

beefnugs 3y ago

I hate government authoritarianism, but in my mind the only answer is to force robot labor tied to individual humans instead of corporations. Some kind of coded link so one human operator must be living and healthy and somewhat more than homeless to control the edge cases of the robot messing things up. As the companies get bigger and more monopoly they at least have to support more humans at least somewhat.

Delk 3y ago

> I'm much happier watching robots take over dangerous, mundane tasks, than seeing them edge into creative, intellectual, and decision-making work. I used to think this way, and to an extent I still do, but the reality is that not everybody wants to do intellectual work or decision making as a day job. Some people prefer to do labour, or to have their work relatively unchanging. I know smart and intellectually capable people who have said they like the fact that they don't need to think that much in their day jobs. (Those preferences are of course a spectrum, as are jobs.) For lots of us, automating away the mundane work is a dream, but at the same time the development puts pressure on those who don't find it desirable. One person's dream is stressful to another.

Sohcahtoa82 3y ago

> Wasn't that the dream? That robots do all our work and we just chill, enjoy a life of leisure and fulfilling activity? Unfortunately, I don't see that ever happening. As jobs get lost to automation, unemployment will increase, and eventually our economy will collapse. Even if your McDonalds is automated, they're still going to charge you $15 for that meal. In the fast food world, labor is typically ~20% of the cost, so even if they reduce prices because labor is no longer a factor (they won't, after all, because they already know you'll pay $15 for your meal), it'd only reduce the price to $12.

w0m 3y ago
> Unfortunately, I don't see that ever happening. I mean, it's already happened over and over again throughout human history. Hell, in the US ~100 years ago, 90%+ of the population was farming. 'Automation took our jobs!' and now ~1% are farming. Work doesn't go away; it just shifts. Unemployment/collapse is a pipe dreams, the human components will simply move when large market shifts come in. Yea, they're disruptive - what will an older career truck driver move to once no one is driving? But the next generation coming up will find new niches that are still needed or desired.