8 ms·

Where has all the productivity gone? (2021)

49 points by tie-in 2y ago

actuallyalys 2y ago
I think diminishing returns, as the author starts to allude to near the end of the post, is a big reason. To take the example of word processing, the biggest improvement to my workflow of the past 10-15 years is probably either being able to collaborate on documents simultaneously or to be able to view them on a phone. I actually edit documents simultaneously quite a lot, but I’m not sure it’s a huge productivity boost or that common.
- bfung 2y ago
  I’m also in camp The Great Divergence. Learning and using the tools to become multiples more productive is relatively hard, still. In programming, most people still struggle with syntax. The few that get past struggle with conciseness. The few that get past end up managing everyone else instead of solving problems. LLMs move maybe a few percent up the ladder, but hardly enough to matter atm. In other fields, there’d need to be breakthroughs, otherwise it’s literally scale. Ex: manufacturing is labor intensive and/or capital intensive, w/o a breakthrough like… robots.
  - actuallyalys 2y ago
    I understood The Great Divergence as meaning there are large performance gains, but only for certain people, who are better at resisting distractions brought on by new technology. But my conclusion is closer to there being large performance gains but only for a tiny minority of tasks that happen to really benefit from them and more modest gains otherwise. E.g., smart phones are a great technical achievement, but they’re not a huge improvement most of the time—we already had laptops for most portable productivity needs.
    - lotsofpulp 2y ago
      Portable productivity took a huge leap forward with mobile broadband, which came hand in hand with smartphones. Laptops without access to the internet are far less productive for most people. There are so many examples of tablets and smartphones with internet connectivity replacing other machines and/or making them resilient. Point of sale systems, hotel room key, ticketing systems, translation services, navigation from any point to any point, whether it be walking, bicycling, driving, or public transit.
Devasta 2y ago
The biggest productivity boost I've ever had is switching from excel 2003 to 2007. Before I had a limit of 65k rows, now I had just over a million! A whole new world in calculation had opened up. I can't really recall anything that's come out since then that matches it.
- lotsofpulp 2y ago
  Having a computer in one’s pocket connected to broadband internet at almost all times with the capability to navigate, pay, search, communicate (globally, at no cost), photograph, and work on that million row spreadsheet seems close to matching Excel 2003 to 2007. Obviously, it can distract too, but for me, it’s easily been a net positive for productivity.
  - shswkna 2y ago
    Please, could you elaborate how it has worked for you? Specifically how do the productivity gains balance out all the available distractions? Or are you just particularly talented at singleminded focus?
    - lotsofpulp 2y ago
      Mostly, I remember the inefficient of life before smartphones. A very specific thing I was unable to do before was pull up a video on how to fix almost anything, anytime. House projects, car repair, networking/computer issues at someone else’s house, etc. Another is checking stock and comparing prices while I am shopping. I waste near zero time finding items and where are in a store, and finding the best price I can buy them at. Yet another is taking pictures for my reference, or to send to others instead of having to describe something. Being able to video call has made resolving so many problems quicker and easier. Product manuals are at my fingertips. Buying a flight. Researching a vacation while sitting on mass transit. Finding places to eat withe menus amenable to my family’s taste while on the go.
      - shswkna 2y ago
Havoc 2y ago
Into the pockets of the 1%
- euroderf 2y ago
  To a first approximation, this fits what one sees in the development of society over the last few decades.
- kinleyd 2y ago
  Oh, when will you ever learn? Oh, when will you ever learn? Marlene Dietrich
- WalterBright 2y ago
  Buy some stock and get your share.
xyzzyfoobar 2y ago
so where is all this productivity that we are supposed to be getting from AI? I'm struggling to see it in my business or my personal life.
roenxi 2y ago
Human labour isn't all that important in a modern economy, what matters is the capital (hence why capitalism is so successful). To be productive, we need to be building/deploying new capital. The real capital investment seems to be happening in East Asia. Building productive capital in the West has typically been somewhere between discouraged and illegal in favour of playing games with numbers. In the English speaking world we've even managed to disconnect GDP from energy and now people are confused why GDP goes up but real living standards don't change all that much and everyone is shifting to fixed-pie thinking.
- wesselbindt 2y ago
  > capital (hence why capitalism is so successful) Could you expand on this a bit? Isn't capital important precisely because capitalism (private ownership of the means of production, i.e., capital) is the system we operate in?
  - Drakim 2y ago
    The king is the sovereign because all the men obey his commands, and all the men obey his commands because he is the king.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - roenxi 2y ago
    Well the basic question here is something like "how do we maximise material comfort?". The answer is pretty obvious - machines. Humans haven't changed much in the last million-odd years, all the improvements since around year 0 AD have been improvements in what machines (ie, capital) we build. We had a long period where the people with highest social status were war-leaders and we chose them without much care (often a hereditary aristocracy). That led to pretty grim outcomes. It turns out if we award highest status to the people who own and deploy capital efficiently we get absurd amounts of capital produced and this frankly ridiculous society where a tiny group of really driven men seem to just build everything. So yes, capital is important because we declared it to be so, but we declared it to be so because the society with more capital wins wars. Sometimes by driving over the opposition in that capital, gotta respect a good tank charge. More capital is just better, and capitalism is the system that is most effective at encouraging people to build more capital.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

49 points by tie-in 2y ago

I think diminishing returns, as the author starts to allude to near the end of the post, is a big reason. To take the example of word processing, the biggest improvement to my workflow of the past 10-15 years is probably either being able to collaborate on documents simultaneously or to be able to view them on a phone. I actually edit documents simultaneously quite a lot, but I’m not sure it’s a huge productivity boost or that common.

bfung 2y ago
I’m also in camp The Great Divergence. Learning and using the tools to become multiples more productive is relatively hard, still. In programming, most people still struggle with syntax. The few that get past struggle with conciseness. The few that get past end up managing everyone else instead of solving problems. LLMs move maybe a few percent up the ladder, but hardly enough to matter atm. In other fields, there’d need to be breakthroughs, otherwise it’s literally scale. Ex: manufacturing is labor intensive and/or capital intensive, w/o a breakthrough like… robots.
- actuallyalys 2y ago
  I understood The Great Divergence as meaning there are large performance gains, but only for certain people, who are better at resisting distractions brought on by new technology. But my conclusion is closer to there being large performance gains but only for a tiny minority of tasks that happen to really benefit from them and more modest gains otherwise. E.g., smart phones are a great technical achievement, but they’re not a huge improvement most of the time—we already had laptops for most portable productivity needs.
  - lotsofpulp 2y ago
    Portable productivity took a huge leap forward with mobile broadband, which came hand in hand with smartphones. Laptops without access to the internet are far less productive for most people. There are so many examples of tablets and smartphones with internet connectivity replacing other machines and/or making them resilient. Point of sale systems, hotel room key, ticketing systems, translation services, navigation from any point to any point, whether it be walking, bicycling, driving, or public transit.

Devasta 2y ago

The biggest productivity boost I've ever had is switching from excel 2003 to 2007. Before I had a limit of 65k rows, now I had just over a million! A whole new world in calculation had opened up. I can't really recall anything that's come out since then that matches it.

lotsofpulp 2y ago
Having a computer in one’s pocket connected to broadband internet at almost all times with the capability to navigate, pay, search, communicate (globally, at no cost), photograph, and work on that million row spreadsheet seems close to matching Excel 2003 to 2007. Obviously, it can distract too, but for me, it’s easily been a net positive for productivity.
- shswkna 2y ago
  Please, could you elaborate how it has worked for you? Specifically how do the productivity gains balance out all the available distractions? Or are you just particularly talented at singleminded focus?
  - lotsofpulp 2y ago
    Mostly, I remember the inefficient of life before smartphones. A very specific thing I was unable to do before was pull up a video on how to fix almost anything, anytime. House projects, car repair, networking/computer issues at someone else’s house, etc. Another is checking stock and comparing prices while I am shopping. I waste near zero time finding items and where are in a store, and finding the best price I can buy them at. Yet another is taking pictures for my reference, or to send to others instead of having to describe something. Being able to video call has made resolving so many problems quicker and easier. Product manuals are at my fingertips. Buying a flight. Researching a vacation while sitting on mass transit. Finding places to eat withe menus amenable to my family’s taste while on the go.
    - shswkna 2y ago

Havoc 2y ago

Into the pockets of the 1%

euroderf 2y ago
To a first approximation, this fits what one sees in the development of society over the last few decades.
kinleyd 2y ago
Oh, when will you ever learn? Oh, when will you ever learn? Marlene Dietrich
WalterBright 2y ago
Buy some stock and get your share.

xyzzyfoobar 2y ago

so where is all this productivity that we are supposed to be getting from AI? I'm struggling to see it in my business or my personal life.

roenxi 2y ago

Human labour isn't all that important in a modern economy, what matters is the capital (hence why capitalism is so successful). To be productive, we need to be building/deploying new capital. The real capital investment seems to be happening in East Asia. Building productive capital in the West has typically been somewhere between discouraged and illegal in favour of playing games with numbers. In the English speaking world we've even managed to disconnect GDP from energy and now people are confused why GDP goes up but real living standards don't change all that much and everyone is shifting to fixed-pie thinking.

wesselbindt 2y ago
> capital (hence why capitalism is so successful) Could you expand on this a bit? Isn't capital important precisely because capitalism (private ownership of the means of production, i.e., capital) is the system we operate in?
- Drakim 2y ago
  The king is the sovereign because all the men obey his commands, and all the men obey his commands because he is the king.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- roenxi 2y ago
  Well the basic question here is something like "how do we maximise material comfort?". The answer is pretty obvious - machines. Humans haven't changed much in the last million-odd years, all the improvements since around year 0 AD have been improvements in what machines (ie, capital) we build. We had a long period where the people with highest social status were war-leaders and we chose them without much care (often a hereditary aristocracy). That led to pretty grim outcomes. It turns out if we award highest status to the people who own and deploy capital efficiently we get absurd amounts of capital produced and this frankly ridiculous society where a tiny group of really driven men seem to just build everything. So yes, capital is important because we declared it to be so, but we declared it to be so because the society with more capital wins wars. Sometimes by driving over the opposition in that capital, gotta respect a good tank charge. More capital is just better, and capitalism is the system that is most effective at encouraging people to build more capital.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]