- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Fears? I’m excited that these jobs where people are treated like machines until they quit for sanity’s sake are getting automated.
Exactly! It seems the other people in comments here don’t understand that this is just a net positive for workers!
You already have universal basic income where you guys are living ? Failing that it’s solely less low qualification jobs and more concentration of revenues for the few above. I don’t see that as « a net positive » -although semantically, those laid off would not be workers anymore so in that you’re right. Horrifically so.
UBI is necessary for this to be positive, so that’s our problem. Not the machines taking the job.
Don’t throw shit at this, throw it at politicians.
And yet you cheer on the loss of jobs and hand wave away issues as someone else’s problem. That makes you part of the problem as the side cheering on the destruction of people’s lives. Seriously how do you “workless utopia” fuckwits not see this?
I know how actually: you don’t work these jobs and it will make you feel better about your demand for more and excessive consumption because “well at least it didn’t hurt a human” but it does and will. You speak from an ivory tower and say it will be good when you hear less screams from below without caring for how the screaming stops.
I actually just want UBI so every single working class can get the basic needs instead of the rich getting richer.
I’m pretty sure I’m in the ground, and not in a tower with this opinion.
Sure but right now that isn’t happening and robotics dismantling jobs destroying income is real. We are focusing on idealism and not reality.
Wanting it is fine but advocating that it’s the only solution right now is not.
B-but the billionaires will get angry you have your basic needs met despite it not hurting them whatsoever! You might actually not be a slave for a few seconds!
The pandemic showed us that people shouldn’t have their income tied to the government.
The corporations should be required to fund public housing. No one pays more then 10% of their income.
Yeah, until it hits them and it will.
I have really mixed feelings about automated UBI societies. UBI needs to be tied to some form of “adulting” otherwise you’re just going to end up enabling people. The idea of tying people’s income to performing certain tasks is also very scary for the potential of abuse. Letting people sit at home and be slobs all day will get us Brave New World.
I think the way to help people is to drastically lower the cost of housing and other essential costs. A government allowance just makes people slaves to the government.
I feel like UBI only works out when people have very strong religious morals that give them discipline and will stop them from becoming fat slobs if they don’t need to work.
I feel like UBI only works out when people have very strong religious morals that give them discipline and will stop them from becoming fat slobs
Dude what.
deleted by creator
You sir have earned my rare use of the downvote button.
It’s a net positive if those people are able to transition into other roles/ jobs.
Removed by mod
What a short-sighted view. Some people sacrifice themselves to be treated like machine because that’s the only option for them to. earn a living. You take the job away from them, they’ll end up on the street. I fear for them.
We need to find a better ways for them not to be treated badly, not ways where they’ll end up badly.
How did we get to a place where awful jobs are the only ones available for people to take? How does holding back the use of technology to keep these awful jobs around help those who are worn out and tossed aside in the long run?
There’s a difference between being idealistic and quixotic. With the introduction of machanization, the problem is not unemployment due to not enough jobs but there won’t be any job at all. The real question is how to accommodate these people when there won’t any job for them? The seemingly scary solution is this current real capitalist world is to leave them on the street. Unless you can provide the better solution to this real world problem, I suggest to keep your utopian world in your dream.
Just head up: the future is scary for the next generation inline. Even the white collar job won’t be spared.
Oh I know!
Let them build more homes, big neighbourhoods of high-density living spaces. And give them for free to everyone.
Then focus energy on growing and distributing enough food.
While we’re at it, give everyone healthcare.
Then watch those ‘unemployed’ people generate ‘value’ like we’ve never seen.
Housed fed healthy people will have great ideas and all the time to implement them.
The kind of answer I’ve already expected. Keep dreaming, dear Don Quixote.
It’s not like there is any other answer that’s going to amount to anything workable.
You get this situation in 50 shades of bad, but never solve the real issue any other way.
Automation moves our society forward.
It’s been happening since the industrial revolution.
When electricity was becoming widespread people feared for the lamp lighters. When the automobile was invented people feared for the farriers.
Jobs will be created in new spaces. That is how it has worked in the past. This is at a level that we younger folk haven’t seen. It can be scary to some. I also won’t deny this will happen at a faster pace than most other changes.
The genie is out of the bottle.
Your likely know everything I’ve said up to this point. Here’s where we differ.
Most businesses in developed countries revolve around selling things to the middle class. Those businesses that don’t directly, usually play a role to that end. Without a middle class to sell things to very few businesses will exist. If you don’t believe me, browse the fortune 500 list. The Fords, GEs, Home Depots all depends on a middle class.
Philosophically, if the middle class ceases to exist were fucked. If it gets to a point where ford is failing (again) those people with political influence will be asking for ubi. We don’t need to stress over this. I have no political influence. I can’t call in favors with senators. Over half the country is opposed to ubi. Let it play out a little. See what happens. We’ll get through this.
Not a word that you wrote I didn’t agree upon. In fact that leads to whay I am very cautious about in the future.
Philosophically, if the middle class ceases to exist were fucked.
What you pointed above covers my last sentence.
Even the white collar job won’t be spared.
The way the world is moving right now is roughly: agriculture -> industrial -> service. Now, when the service sector is dominating the market, agriculture and industrial sectors still play big roles but with a different twist - the utilisation of automation. So now we have drones, GPS-equipped agriculture machinaries, big fully automated factories to do the works more efficiently that require less and less workers. The more. automation we get, the less low-skill workers we are going to need. So the job markets will shrink and we will need less and less people for a particular work. Thus, we are going to need new kind of jobs to cater for workers where previously their jobs has become obselete. Just imagine that a container tanker that is the size of a football field will need the same amount of. crew members (around 30) as compare to very small ship decades before.
Fortunately, more and more people were able to access education and become the middle-class, and propel industrialization and service industries further. The middle-class during this time will be relatively safe and enjoy quite confortable lives. But, those lower skills are under threats because more and more of their jobs are taken by machines. They have nowhere to go simply because they have no education. Right now there are still safe. They can works with amazon, they can drive ubers, ride door dash etc. And the ability to have this kind of odds jobs (I forget the term) and gain easy and fast money will make them complacent and dependable on these jobs and less eager to gain education. This is the trend that we are seeing more and more happening to generation Z.
The problems is this kind of jobs will not stay static. Somewhere along the ways, automation will come in their way and grasp the jobs from them. We are still in the infancy period, but once we are able to perfect the technology, automation is going to stay. So the pioneering tech that we see happening in California like self-driving ubers, automation in amazon warehouse, self-flying drones are going to be prevalent scenes, not in the near future, but somewhere in the future. When that happens, we need a new kind of jobs to cater for the low-skill workers. What kind of jobs? I don’t know. But we need to have them. Or we need a different kind of society, more social oriented. If not, they will be doomed.
However, the middle-class won’t be safe at all, for the same reason that happens to the low-income class: automation. In the future, automation will complement service industry by the utilisation of AI. Certain jobs will become obselete. We are going to need less workers, analogous during the industrial period. It will be easier to write a book, writer will be less dependent to proofreader/editor, less. teachers, less lecturers, less customer-facing workers etc. It is slowly happening now. More and more we will be using automated system (e.g. bots in chat apps) and will liaise with less human. Internet itself is a great example. Those who would be safe maybe are scientists and researchers, system maintainers, or technology developers. Simply say AI will take over many jobs. It won’t be happening now, as the AI technology is still in infancy but I bet will happen sometimes in the future. During that time the middle-class will be fucked up. Rent will no longer be in parity with earnings, life will become harder, in fact middle-class will cease to exist and merging with low-income class as a result of automation.
Where will automation have the greatest impact? Sorry to say, but the developed nation will first suffer the consequences due to higher level of competition, high wagers and disparity of cost of. living wrt earnings. The developing nation will slowly learn from that.
That’s my take: The impact of AI if the development of technology is not in parallel with the development of societal values.
That why I really disagree with the top OP - nonchalantly trivializing the impact of automation towards the low-income workers. Automation can be a gift or a curse, depending on how it is utilised.
Any company that doesn’t automate will eventually get priced out. People are just too expensive compared to robots. We’re smack dab in the midst of a technological revolution and just like the industrial revolution the job-scape is about to change rapidly and radically.
Automation is not the point of argument. That going to happens no matter what. In fact I touch about it in my other comment.
The point to ponder is how to address the impact of automation. As far as I know even without full automation, the US (and many other capitalism based) don’t have a good record to address the difficulty faced by low skilled workers, e.g. depicted by Nomadland. To simply give utopian solution won’t address the issue and would be premature.
Unless we are talking about Scandinavian countries (socialism system), that’s a whole different issue.
There are so many factors at play right now and they’re all changing so fast that it’s hard to even guess at what strategy might be beneficial. AI development and automated manufacturing could theoretically bring down the costs of making in America to the point where American companies bring manufacturing back to the States again. On the other hand it could exasperate the rust belt trend that killed many Midwest cities.
I think in the short term it’s going to be pretty bad for unskilled labor and it already has been pretty bad especially in certain areas of the country like west Virginia. The problem is all of Scandinavia has a population lower than California’s let alone the entire US. It’s amazingly easier to adapt when you have a small densely populated populous. Wyoming has a population density of 6 people per square mile.
Only time will tell but if Congress’s current misadventures is telling at all I’m not overly optimistic.
Finally, I get a realistic answer.
Anyway, if I am a capitalist like Bezos, I will discreetly implement the full automation system to a new factory instead of rebuilding the system in already existing factory. By doing that, the system is there by design and its introduction won’t impact any prospective workers, because there won’t be any (existing) worker anyway. However, its impact to the society can’t be neglected, because it’s a lost opportunity for low-skilled people.
If there are enough number fully automated facilties built this way and if there is no social system in place to help them, the unemployable lower skilled workers will be doomed. As a capitalist, I don’t care. The politicians won’t bat an eye, as they’re no issues being raise as it is done discreetly. The low-skilled people will become more.and more impoverished without them ever realize.
Capitalism means different things to different people. In my opinion it’s an almost meaningless term now.
Building new factories is definitely one strategy. The upside is the building’s infrastructure and footprint can exactly match the system you’re implementing. The downside is that it’s much more expensive and time consuming. The bottom line is if you can’t fulfill your orders or your projections predict you won’t be able to in the short term then it might convince you to retrofit an existing building rather than build a new one.
I’m a firm believer that there will always be someone who’s willing to pay someone else to do something. New technologies obliterate old jobs but tend to create new jobs in the process. It’s the in-between time that’s truly difficult. When you have a job force trained for a job that isn’t needed anymore. Retraining is the often cited cure but I don’t know how scalable that really is.
A social safety net is important but there are a lot of states that either can’t or won’t provide that safety net in any substantial way. Just look at the republican state that sued trying to prevent the federally subsidized Medicaid expansion. The voters in these states don’t seem to care enough about it to vote politicians in who want to provide a safely net.
They’ve tried in the past and they always perform like shit. I know management salivates at the thought of robots replacing people, but the technology just isn’t there yet. Robots just don’t seem to have very good problem solving skills and can’t deal with the wide range of seemingly inconsequential hiccups that occur throughout the work day that most people solve without much efgort. They do a few simple things well, but then break down at the slightest deviation from that. Maybe one day they’ll marry robots and AI together and they’ll be able to do complicated tasks, but for now they’re just not there yet.
People hear the word “robot” and assume that there’s some level of intelligence involved. Often, that isn’t the case. A robot is usually just a sophisticated machine following a painfully specific set of instructions.
If something unusual happens that an engineer hadn’t written a thousand lines of code to deal with, it could shut down the entire line.
I’m dealing with these specific issues right now in a distribution center, and it’s just with shelf moving robots that Amazon has had for 10-15 years already. It’s amazing how dumb they are and how poorly they are programmed to handle exceptions, and they aren’t even doing puts and picks.
Eventually someone will figure out how to make robots that can handle the more complicated tasks that humans currently do. I figured we were still a decade or 2 away from that point, but if anyone can figure it out quicker, it’s Amazon. I kind of hate the possibility that they might have already figured it out, but I’m very skeptical of a simple announcement.
The orange kiva bots? Amazon stole/purchased a robotics company for those as they wanted to develop them inhouse. A lot of the issues with robotics is cost and imperfect environments. Even dumb shit like changing the warehouse lighting can screw up sensors, guidance systems, and other automation if it wasn’t designed that way. Customers want automation, but they don’t want to pay for it. If we have to cheap out on sensors, cameras, drives, and other parts, it makes for less reliable systems depending on the application.
There is nothing more demoralizing than knowing a design is going to fail from the beginning because sales let the customer dictate the parts and design elements to cut costs. Then we get yelled at when it doesn’t work perfectly or make rate. Or worse, it does/did work but the customer now uses the system in a way it wasn’t designed and sabotage any good we might have done for them. Best is when a customer doesn’t maintain a system, something that has to start on day 0, and then throws a tantrum when it breaks down all the time.
Robotics and automation isn’t perfect. I have seen some great systems run with little to no downtime and shitty systems that operators have to constantly babysit. Us engineers try our best, but we have to use the tools we are given. I will say that technology overall has boomed over the last decade, but the parts and shipping situation since the pandemic started still hasn’t been solved.
Not Kiva bots specifically, but similar concept, different vendors. Lots of new companies popped up in the years after Amazon bought them, but their protectionism definitely set the industry back at least 5 years. I don’t want to share any specific vendors, because that would cause the info that I’m sharing to violate my NDAs.
And yeah, you’re totally right about the environmental and reading constraints, but I’m talking more the internal problems that I’ve noticed in a few different vendors’ logic. I’m also an engineer so i totally get what you’re talking about, and the dumb robot problem that I’m talking about is simply insufficient engineering. Problems like sending a robot to pick up a rack to move it, then setting a path that is impassable despite the system having all the necessary inputs and correctly recording and storing all the data necessary to make a more informed decision and choose a better path. But instead the robot takes the impassable path, then when its censors notice there is a blockage, it stops but it’s too late to get another path at that point because of system constraints. If the logic had properly validated the path with the available data at the time of assignment rather than visual cues much later, it would cause much fewer issues. So that’s one example the sort of thing I’m referring to when I say they’re too dumb.
Technology has been there for a while now. Places like Ocado are 100% robotised.
I agree and will add that management always seems to forget that machines have downtime too. Robots replacing humans is a lovely dream these companies have where they conveniently ignore the needs and demands of using said robotics.
Perhaps, but it will be a net win for Amazon even if they only automate a part of the warehouse.
Weren’t these jobs like, feared already cause they treat you less like a machine, they treated you like shit to the point youd have a good chance that you have to step over a dead body eventually?
Their turnover rate is ridiculously high and supply chains as an industry have been steadily moving towards automation. Robots are going to keep replacing unloaders, loaders, and pickers just as AI is going to start replacing buyers and dispatchers in the near future.
I worked for FedEx and it seems to me that Amazon didn’t start this practice which is why it’s confusing to me why they get the spotlight, it’s just industry standard it seems (Amazon, FedEx, and UPS)
The place I work at had a 400% turnover rate for the 90 day period. Luckily I’ve seen other places and it doesn’t seem like its a company wide thing, but a location to location issue. They pay higher than minimum wage as a standard, but that still didn’t entice me or others to continue working there because of how much labor vs pay it is. Plus the stress of angry managers doesn’t help it at all.
That’s an important point. A lot of these places can’t find or keep people even when they pay rather well. A few years ago an old neighbor of mine got a job at (I’m pretty sure) UPS and it paid well but the work just wasn’t worth it and he quit and took a pay cut to have significantly less stressful job. To be fair he had a pretty bad back that caused him a lot of pain.
I honestly don’t know what to think. Yes, people need jobs, but more importantly, they need GOOD jobs. Amazon treats people terribly and, even at their best, does the bare minimum to comply with the law and keep their warehouses staffed.
Employees are being taken advantage of. Getting people out of there might be a net positive.
We need protections for those workers (i.e. UBI, et al) BEFORE they lose their jobs to capitalist dreams, preferably funded by the capitalists.
I 100% agree with this, and that’s why I can’t see robots taking job as bad news.
The problem is with the society. We need to build it better, so these advantages are for us - not for some scummy rich guy.
On another note: nobody should be a billionaire.
Yes, unfortunately currently society exists to serve billionaires, and we don’t see that changing much. More automation will just entrench that power further.
We need to eliminate billionaires yesterday, or risk ending up in techno neo-feudalism.
Capitalism is reaching its end road. Things will change, for better or for worse. How it will change will depend on whether politics will support the people, or the rich… and of we continue on without changing much, it will support the rich.
I think this could have worked if the employees being replaced owned the robots. They don’t have the capital anymore but when there was a middle class this could have been a possibility.
As it stands right now, we need those workers to be out of jobs and on the streets for protections to be considered. Otherwise “they have jobs,” unemployment is low and the machine is “working as expected.” Therefore nothing needs to be done.
we need those workers to be out of jobs and on the streets
I’m guessing you’ll be the first to volunteer then? For the greater good and all.
Is that what you gather from my comment? 😳
I think you’re missing the point, those who lose their jobs to automation are somewhat random / due to environmental factors and not up to choice so it’s a bit weird suggesting that.
What they are suggesting is politicians will only act once enough people are suffering in the streets. Not necessarily saying it’s morally justified, just that’s what it takes for governments to take action. Nobody is defending how our politicians are failing us.
No, we don’t.
If Amazon doesn’t need employees then they don’t need tax breaks. In fact add a new tax for any business that switches to robot labor. They can pay the missing personal wages in taxes. Texas makes electric car drivers pay more for not using gas, this seems like the same thing.
Charge everyone that uses computers then, instead of using secretaries to do everything.
Stupid idea because it incentives inefficiencies. Taxes need to be made up elsewhere like in vat or income tax.
Computers didnt reduce jobs, they created many more.
Amazon (along with others) absolutely destroyed jobs, killed competition and violated antitrust laws. All because they were wealthy and could buy their way out. Then they treated their employees with contempt (piss-bottles) and made them work in unsafe work environments (Illinois tornado). They deserve to be broken up like all monopoly-like businesses.
How did the printing press make more jobs?
It didn’t at least not immediately.
This is just being a luddite all over again. Higher output and less work for a society is a dream we should all be striving for. Keeping people in shitty jobs because they don’t have another job to go to when we could replace their work is barbaric.
I didn’t say keep people in shitty jobs. I said pretty much let’s make Amazon pay back all the tax breaks theyve got and if they want to remove employees tax them for it. Why do you think all the cities in America threw themselves at Amazon and offered $100s of millions of tax breaks to open facilities near them. It was for the jobs they were bringing locally. They want to remove, fine. Other corporations that effectively pay $0 in taxes each year want to dump workers too, that’s cool. They better pay for doing it tho. For running small businesses out of towns. For using genuine antitrust practices to prevent real competition that would have kept wages and jobs safe all these years. They owe the American people. All you guys defending them, defending the failure of capitalism can suck my dick. I’m done fighting this with you.
That’s insanity. You can’t draw the line anywhere clearly
The government fucked up by giving them tax breaks. They operate within the confines of the law, the law needs changing so politicians can’t give them handouts.
But taxing efficiencies and advancing the world is the worst idea ever.
If the politicians gave it to bezos the people can take it back. You think its fair the sackler family keeps the billions they made for killing 10s of millions of people through the years. Just because what they did was legal at the time. They are going to see justice and I can only hope the billionaires in this country see the same justice for their crimes against the economy.
Disagree. There’s no need to pay taxes if you don’t employ anyone. No salaries - no salary taxes. Also Texas is backwards.
This is why any politicians say they are bringing back the manufacturing jobs back to “US” “Japan” “Germany” or whatever are extremely dumb.
If you are worried about your amazon job you need to join a government program that will train you for a better job. Amazon sucks to work for and you deserve better.
Why do they need a humanoid robot to move an empty box from one conveyor belt to the other? They could have made a conveyor belt or robot arm instead.
Whatever. I’m glad no human is needed to waste their life doing that shit job.
That’s not what these robots are doing. They are picking items out of bins, verifying them, and packing them into totes which will be put on a conveyor. A conveyor is good for moving boxes or totes, but that’s about it. It does really poorly with small items, large items, irregular shapes, and especially anything in a bag.
That’s not what these robots are doing. They are picking items out of bins, verifying them, and packing them into totes which will be put on a conveyor. A conveyor is good for moving boxes or totes, but that’s about it. It does really poorly with small items, large items, irregular shapes, and especially anything in a bag.
This guy Material Handlings. Handles Material? Does Material Handling?
I’ve heard “material handles” and “handles materials,” but you are correct. I this-guy it hard.
Me too! Or at least I’m in the industry. Software side though.
Similar here. I do computer and industrial engineering for system integrations and process improvement, and I’m currently sending this from a wave picker 30 ft in the air trying to understand what keeps causing this damn jam in our new crossdock conveyor.
That sounds like way more fun than what I do. I just work on our one-stop-shop solutions development/planning/engineering/papers/order entry software. It’s like a glorified, complicated version of The Sims home construction but with conveyors and racking and structural steel and whatnot instead of couches and pianos and windows.
Oh gotcha. I work with a lot of people at various companies that have a similar role as you. I work for a consultancy that gives me the opportunity to wear a lot of hats. The job is always really challenging, but every project is a new adventure.
You think this is the only job they will ever do? They gotta start somewhere.
I think this whole post sounds astroturfed by people pushing the idea that workers being denied jobs is a good thing. At least I hope it is, because otherwise that means people actually believe that.
Let’s face it, the only reason we get by is because rich people need our labor.
Yep! No one wants these jobs lol
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Amazon is experimenting with a humanoid robot as the technology company increasingly seeks to automate its warehouses.
The company’s ambitious drive to integrate robotics across its sprawling operation has sparked fears about the effect on its workforce of almost 1.5 million humans.
Insisting that people are “irreplaceable” in the company’s operation, Brady pushed back at the suggestion it could one day have a fully automated warehouse.
Digit was developed by Agility Robotics, a startup based in Corvallis, Oregon, and backed by Amazon.
Amazon plans to put Digit to work “in spaces and corners of warehouses in novel ways”, it said in a blogpost.
Separately at Wednesday’s event, Amazon announced it was deploying a robotic system called Sequoia at one of its Houston warehouses in an effort to speed up deliveries.
The original article contains 521 words, the summary contains 130 words. Saved 75%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Digit gone get his ass knocked over.
The big reason corporations are using robots instead of human labor is because people either don’t want to work or can’t hold a position.
The turnover rate is actually insane in these positions; enough so that they would rather spend more paying a technician to set up an automated cell with robots, PLC’s, pneumatic slides, ect.
It’s sad af but don’t blame the robots or the technicians, this is not their fault.
The turnover rate at companies like Amazon is so high because the working conditions are so poor and demanding. People are just liabilities and expenses that should be burned through.
Amazon has burned through so many employees that they worry they will not have enough viable applicants to keep filling positions. That isn’t because of the workers, that is a calculated decision by management.
https://www.essence.com/news/amazon-burning-through-workers/
There is no need to a shill and push right wing talking points for corporations, they get plenty of help from the politicians and news networks they buy.
The big reason corporations are using robots instead of human labor is because people either don’t want to work or can’t hold a position.
For some reason, people aren’t big fans of timed bathroom breaks and monitored smalltalk.
This take is so horrible - you are the first person i ever blocked in my life
I have to admit I’ve never heard anyone read a high attrition rate and then put the blame on the workers. I really, really, hope this person isn’t in any position to make decisions in an organization.
It’s amazing how they disregard the absolute shit working conditions Amazon warehouse jobs have, that can’t totally be why they have a high turnover rate right?
Nobody ever considers the feelings of the poor corporations! It’s all the fault of those mealy-mouthed… sneers … humans! With their “I’m tired” and “I need to eat food” and “I need to go to the bathroom.” How is that productive or efficient? How does that contribute to shareholder value?
/s
I work in this industry, and you couldn’t be more wrong. The turnover rate is so high because the job is incredibly demanding, working conditions are usually horrible, and the pay is absolute shit.
If you can’t work, then no job for you.
Removed by mod
What are your other hot takes? Trump won the election? The “lizard people” control the media? Slavery was beneficial to black people?
deleted by creator
