4 ms·

Bit of a tangent but... Haven't we been automating jobs away since the industrial revolution? I know AI may be an exception to this trend, but at least with cl

Bit of a tangent but... Haven't we been automating jobs away since the industrial revolution? I know AI may be an exception to this trend, but at least with classical programming, demand goes up, GDP per capita goes up, and new industries are born. I mean, there's three ways to get stuff done: do it yourself, get someone else to do it, or get a machine to do it. #2 doesn't scale, since someone still has to do it. If we want every person to not be required to do it (washing, growing food, etc), #3 is the only way forward. Automation and specialization have made the unthinkable possible for an average person. We've a long way to go, but I don't see automation as a fundamentally bad thing, as long as there's a simultaneous effort to help (especially those who are poor) transition to a new form of working.

ToucanLoucan 2y ago
> as long as there's a simultaneous effort to help (especially those who are poor) transition to a new form of working. Somehow everyone who says this misses that never in the history of the United States (and most other countries tbh) has this been true. We just consign people to the streets in industrial quantity. More underserved to act as the lubricant for capitalism.
- smj-edison 2y ago
  But... My local library has a job searching program? I have a friend who's learning masonry at a government sponsored training program? It seems the issue is not that resources don't exist, but that these people don't have the time to use them. So it's unfair to say they don't exist. Rather, it seems they're structured in an unhelpful way for those who are working double jobs, etc. I see capitalism invoked as a "boogey man" a lot, which fair enough, you can make an emotional argument, but it's not specific enough to actually be helpful in coming up with a solution to help these people. In fact, capitalism has been the exact thing that has lifted so many out of poverty. Things can be simultaneously bad and also have gotten better over time. I would argue that the biggest issue is education, but that's another tangent...
  - ToucanLoucan 2y ago
    > So it's unfair to say they don't exist. Rather, it seems they're structured in an unhelpful way for those who are working double jobs, etc. I'll be sure to alert the next person I encounter working UberEats for slave wages that the resources exist that they cannot use. I'm sure this difference will impact their lives greatly. Edit: My point isn't that UberEats drivers make slave wages (though they do): My point is that from the POV of said people and others who need the aforementioned resources, whether they don't exist or exist and are unusable is fucking irrelevant.
    - tptacek 2y ago
      At some point, you've stopped participating in good faith with the thread and are instead trying to push it towards some other topic; in your case, apparently, a moral challenge against Uber. I think we get it; can you stop supplying superficial rebuttals to every point made with "but UberEats employs [contracts] wave slaves"?
    - smj-edison 2y ago
      Slave wages? Like the wages for a factory worker in 1918[1]? $1300 after adjusting for inflation. And that was gruelling work from dawn to dusk, being locked into a building, and nickel and dimed by factory managers. (See the triangle shirtwaist factory). The average Uber wage is $20/hour[2]. Say they use 2 gallons of gas (60 mph at 30 mpg) at $5/gallon. That comes out to $10/hour, which is not great, but they're not being locked into factories and working from dawn to dusk and being fired when sick. Can you not see that this is progress? It's not great, we have a lot of progress to make, but it sure beats starving to death in a potato famine. [1] https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015022383221&seq=288 https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015022383221&se... [2] https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Uber/salaries/Driver https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Uber/salaries/Driver (select United States as location)
      - Nevermark 2y ago
        > Slave wages? Like the wages for a factory worker in 1918[1]? $1300 after adjusting for inflation. I think they were using “slave wages” as a non-literal relative term to the era. As you did. A hundred years before your example, the “slave wages” were actually slave wages. I think it’s fair to say a lot of gig workers, especially those with families, are having a very difficult time economically. I expect gig jobs lower unemployment substantially, due to being convenient and easy to get, and potentially flexible with hours, but they lower average employment compensation.
jll29 2y ago
We have always automated, because we can. What is qualitatively different this time is that it affects intellectual abilities - there is nothing higher up in the work "food chain". Replacing physical work you could always argue you'd have time to focus on making decisions. Replacing decision making might mean telling people go sit on the beach and take your universal basic income (UBI) cheque, we don't need you anymore. Sitting on the beach is not as nice as it sounds for some; if you don't agree, try doing it for 5 years. Most people require work to have some sense of purpose, it gives identity, and it structures their time. Furthermore, if you replaced lorry drivers with self-driving cars, you'd destroy the most commonly held job in North America as well as South America, and don't tell me that they can be retrained to be AI engineers or social media influencers instead (some can only be on the road, some only want to be on the road).
- smj-edison 2y ago
  I agree that we have been able to automate a lot of jobs, but it's not like intellectual jobs have completely replaced physical labor. Electricians, phlebotomists, linemen, firefighters, caregivers, etc, etc, are jobs that current AI approaches don't even scratch. I mean, Boston dynamics has barely been able to get a robot to walk. So no, we don't need to retrain them to be AI engineers if we have an active shortage of electricians and plumbers. Now, perhaps there aren't enough jobs—I haven't looked at exact numbers—but we still have a long ways to go before I think everything is automated. Everything being slop seems to be the much more likely issue in my eyes[1]. [1] https://titotal.substack.com/p/slopworld-2035-the-dangers-of-mediocre https://titotal.substack.com/p/slopworld-2035-the-dangers-of...

ToucanLoucan 2y ago

> as long as there's a simultaneous effort to help (especially those who are poor) transition to a new form of working. Somehow everyone who says this misses that never in the history of the United States (and most other countries tbh) has this been true. We just consign people to the streets in industrial quantity. More underserved to act as the lubricant for capitalism.

smj-edison 2y ago
But... My local library has a job searching program? I have a friend who's learning masonry at a government sponsored training program? It seems the issue is not that resources don't exist, but that these people don't have the time to use them. So it's unfair to say they don't exist. Rather, it seems they're structured in an unhelpful way for those who are working double jobs, etc. I see capitalism invoked as a "boogey man" a lot, which fair enough, you can make an emotional argument, but it's not specific enough to actually be helpful in coming up with a solution to help these people. In fact, capitalism has been the exact thing that has lifted so many out of poverty. Things can be simultaneously bad and also have gotten better over time. I would argue that the biggest issue is education, but that's another tangent...
- ToucanLoucan 2y ago
  > So it's unfair to say they don't exist. Rather, it seems they're structured in an unhelpful way for those who are working double jobs, etc. I'll be sure to alert the next person I encounter working UberEats for slave wages that the resources exist that they cannot use. I'm sure this difference will impact their lives greatly. Edit: My point isn't that UberEats drivers make slave wages (though they do): My point is that from the POV of said people and others who need the aforementioned resources, whether they don't exist or exist and are unusable is fucking irrelevant.
  - tptacek 2y ago
    At some point, you've stopped participating in good faith with the thread and are instead trying to push it towards some other topic; in your case, apparently, a moral challenge against Uber. I think we get it; can you stop supplying superficial rebuttals to every point made with "but UberEats employs [contracts] wave slaves"?
  - smj-edison 2y ago
    Slave wages? Like the wages for a factory worker in 1918[1]? $1300 after adjusting for inflation. And that was gruelling work from dawn to dusk, being locked into a building, and nickel and dimed by factory managers. (See the triangle shirtwaist factory). The average Uber wage is $20/hour[2]. Say they use 2 gallons of gas (60 mph at 30 mpg) at $5/gallon. That comes out to $10/hour, which is not great, but they're not being locked into factories and working from dawn to dusk and being fired when sick. Can you not see that this is progress? It's not great, we have a lot of progress to make, but it sure beats starving to death in a potato famine. [1] https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015022383221&seq=288 https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015022383221&se... [2] https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Uber/salaries/Driver https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Uber/salaries/Driver (select United States as location)
    - Nevermark 2y ago
      > Slave wages? Like the wages for a factory worker in 1918[1]? $1300 after adjusting for inflation. I think they were using “slave wages” as a non-literal relative term to the era. As you did. A hundred years before your example, the “slave wages” were actually slave wages. I think it’s fair to say a lot of gig workers, especially those with families, are having a very difficult time economically. I expect gig jobs lower unemployment substantially, due to being convenient and easy to get, and potentially flexible with hours, but they lower average employment compensation.

jll29 2y ago

We have always automated, because we can. What is qualitatively different this time is that it affects intellectual abilities - there is nothing higher up in the work "food chain". Replacing physical work you could always argue you'd have time to focus on making decisions. Replacing decision making might mean telling people go sit on the beach and take your universal basic income (UBI) cheque, we don't need you anymore. Sitting on the beach is not as nice as it sounds for some; if you don't agree, try doing it for 5 years. Most people require work to have some sense of purpose, it gives identity, and it structures their time. Furthermore, if you replaced lorry drivers with self-driving cars, you'd destroy the most commonly held job in North America as well as South America, and don't tell me that they can be retrained to be AI engineers or social media influencers instead (some can only be on the road, some only want to be on the road).

smj-edison 2y ago
I agree that we have been able to automate a lot of jobs, but it's not like intellectual jobs have completely replaced physical labor. Electricians, phlebotomists, linemen, firefighters, caregivers, etc, etc, are jobs that current AI approaches don't even scratch. I mean, Boston dynamics has barely been able to get a robot to walk. So no, we don't need to retrain them to be AI engineers if we have an active shortage of electricians and plumbers. Now, perhaps there aren't enough jobs—I haven't looked at exact numbers—but we still have a long ways to go before I think everything is automated. Everything being slop seems to be the much more likely issue in my eyes[1]. [1] https://titotal.substack.com/p/slopworld-2035-the-dangers-of-mediocre https://titotal.substack.com/p/slopworld-2035-the-dangers-of...