3 ms·

>every "no-code will replace developers" wave actually creates more developer jobs, not fewer you mean "created", past tense. You're basically arguing it's im

>every "no-code will replace developers" wave actually creates more developer jobs, not fewer you mean "created", past tense. You're basically arguing it's impossible for technical improvements to reduce the number of programmers in the world, ever. The idea that only humans will ever be able to debug code or interpret non-technical user needs seems questionable to me.

groundzeros2015 9mo ago
This doesn’t seem immediately false. Industrial society creates more complexity and specializations. There is more work to do all the time.
- Retric 9mo ago
  Actual AI seems like a possibility here. Also the percentage of adults working has been dropping for a while. Retired used to be a tiny fraction of the population that’s no longer the case, people spend more time being educated or in prison etc. Overall people are seeing a higher standard of living while doing less work.
  - groundzeros2015 9mo ago
    > Also the percentage of adults working has been dropping for a while. There are lots of negative reasons for this that aren’t efficiency. Aging demographics. Poor education. Increasing complexity leaves people behind.
    - Retric 9mo ago
      Efficiency is why things continue to work as fewer people work. Social programs, bank account, etc are just an abstraction you need a surplus or the only thing that changes is who starves.
      - kiba 9mo ago
        Social programs often compensate for massive distortion in the economy. For example, SNAP benefits both the poor and the businesses where SNAP funds is spent on, but that's because a lot of unearned income goes to landowners, while preventing people from employing laborers and starting businesses. SNAP merely ameliorate a situation that shouldn't had arise in the first place. So, yes, reasons other than efficiency explain why people aren't working, as well why there are still poor people.
        Retric 9mo ago
        Only the relatively tiny homeless population is poor by historic standards. And that’s almost exclusively mental health issues and addiction. Now we can set arbitrary thresholds for what standard of living every American should have but even knowing people on SNAP it’s not that low.
        groundzeros2015 9mo ago
        > Only the relatively tiny homeless population is poor by historic standards. The cost to participate in society is much greater. Yeah we do have more cars. But you also need to buy one to go to work. We have education, but you need 22 years to be employable. It’s probably not with continuing the discussion if you don’t believe poverty exists as a concept.
        Retric 9mo ago
        Millions of working Americans don’t have cars. Also, you can make the median wage in the US without any collage education. Poverty still exists, but vast inflation of what is considered’a basic standard of living’ hides a great deal of progress. People want to redefine illiteracy to mean being unable to use the internet not by the standards of the past.
        groundzeros2015 9mo ago
        > Millions of working Americans don’t have cars. How would you describe the level of wealth of those Americans outside of metro areas?

groundzeros2015 9mo ago

This doesn’t seem immediately false. Industrial society creates more complexity and specializations. There is more work to do all the time.

Retric 9mo ago
Actual AI seems like a possibility here. Also the percentage of adults working has been dropping for a while. Retired used to be a tiny fraction of the population that’s no longer the case, people spend more time being educated or in prison etc. Overall people are seeing a higher standard of living while doing less work.
- groundzeros2015 9mo ago
  > Also the percentage of adults working has been dropping for a while. There are lots of negative reasons for this that aren’t efficiency. Aging demographics. Poor education. Increasing complexity leaves people behind.
  - Retric 9mo ago
    Efficiency is why things continue to work as fewer people work. Social programs, bank account, etc are just an abstraction you need a surplus or the only thing that changes is who starves.
    - kiba 9mo ago
      Social programs often compensate for massive distortion in the economy. For example, SNAP benefits both the poor and the businesses where SNAP funds is spent on, but that's because a lot of unearned income goes to landowners, while preventing people from employing laborers and starting businesses. SNAP merely ameliorate a situation that shouldn't had arise in the first place. So, yes, reasons other than efficiency explain why people aren't working, as well why there are still poor people.
      - Retric 9mo ago
        Only the relatively tiny homeless population is poor by historic standards. And that’s almost exclusively mental health issues and addiction. Now we can set arbitrary thresholds for what standard of living every American should have but even knowing people on SNAP it’s not that low.
        groundzeros2015 9mo ago
        > Only the relatively tiny homeless population is poor by historic standards. The cost to participate in society is much greater. Yeah we do have more cars. But you also need to buy one to go to work. We have education, but you need 22 years to be employable. It’s probably not with continuing the discussion if you don’t believe poverty exists as a concept.
        Retric 9mo ago
        Millions of working Americans don’t have cars. Also, you can make the median wage in the US without any collage education. Poverty still exists, but vast inflation of what is considered’a basic standard of living’ hides a great deal of progress. People want to redefine illiteracy to mean being unable to use the internet not by the standards of the past.
        groundzeros2015 9mo ago
        > Millions of working Americans don’t have cars. How would you describe the level of wealth of those Americans outside of metro areas?