Page 27 of 39 FirstFirst ...
17
25
26
27
28
29
37
... LastLast
  1. #521
    Quote Originally Posted by beanman12345 View Post
    Yeah the self checkout seemed like a cost saving thing at first, convenience for customer and lower costs on the employer, and I while do seem some places still have them, I think more and more are going away from it. Since, you still need people to stock your shelves, or cut your meat in the supermarket, and you still need people to make your fast food. Hell you still need to employ and train checkouts regardless because people or the self checkout machines are always screwing up.

    .
    Self checkout at the grocery store near me has a handheld scanner and you just need to go up to the register to pay. you can bag as you shop.

    once they upgrade to the ability to check out from then handheld i will shop there exclusively. Still a pain to have to wait in the self serve checkout line just to swipe my card.

    they do random audits to make sure to try to keep you honest


    any actual self scanning at the register is a pain in the ass and i always see at least 2 reps running from machine to machine to help people. Walmart had 8 machines and 3 reps working those 8 on a busy day. i bet they would do more volume if they put 2 on full service lines and only had a few self checkouts.
    Buh Byeeeeeeeeeeee !!

  2. #522
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,900
    Quote Originally Posted by Noxx79 View Post
    The McDonald’s nearby me has both cashiers and an order screen. People like cashiers.

    When is automation going to take over? Been waiting for 30 years now.
    Every grocery store around here has cashiers and self-checkout. I preferentially choose self-checkout unless I've got a cartful and want assistance processing all of it. There are often lineups for the cashiers. There are almost never lineups for the self-checkouts.

    People generally prefer cashiers; I'm a bit of an outlier and I'm perfectly comfortable with that.


  3. #523
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    And why should we take your "belief" seriously?

    If you can't justify it through evidence and analysis, you may as well be telling us you "believe" in My Little Pony. Resorting to "beliefs" you can't prove is just a declaration that you're unwilling to think about the issue, and you want everyone else to know how willful that ignorance is.
    I mean friendship is magic. Still we are talking hypothetical long term outcomes. I would point to something like Venezuela ( I know not most relevant but most recent) then you would go on about how it's not exactly identical.

    It's rather tiring. I simply dont see the model as being sustainable in the long term because when push comes to show I think people are to prone to being lazy for the system to be sustainable long term. All you will get is a slow and steady decline as more and more specialized and skilled labor gets harder and harder to find.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    2026 - "Oh, hey, with this UBI we just put in, everyone's doing fine. And the economy's growing again! Why didn't we try and automate everything sooner?"

    Automation is only a "negative" when you're exploiting people's duress to force them into shitty jobs they don't want in the first place. Remove that duress, and automation is just . . . a 100% net positive in every possible respect.



    I just wanted to revisit this (and didn't edit the response into the prior because I didn't want it to get lost); you're basically misrepresenting the tragedy of the commons, here.

    The status quo of poverty is the tragedy of the commons in action, applied to people. That's already how it is. That's what we're trying to change.

    The "tragedy of the commons" is the idea that if there is a resource (in the original context, public spaces/fields) that is open to the use of all, without rules limiting its use or obligations to maintain it levied on those who use it, people will generally use it with self-interest and not communal benefit. They will exploit it for their own gain until that resource is consumed or ruined. Hence "tragedy".

    Applying that to the labor market, employers who have no obligations to ensure their employees meet a living standard and have comfortable lives, that means they can treat the resource (the labor pool) out of pure self-interest and without any concern for its upkeep. The status quo is that ruinous exploitation. The idea that you'd bring this up as a criticism for approaches that seek to correct that is . . . pretty damned asinine.
    No I applied it in the manner I've seen it. The thing carelessly used is the capital produced by those going beyond the most basic of labor...

    I'm seeing the problem from the other end of it is all. The long term repercussions of allowing people to coast by.

  4. #524
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,900
    Quote Originally Posted by Krakan View Post
    I mean friendship is magic. Still we are talking hypothetical long term outcomes. I would point to something like Venezuela ( I know not most relevant but most recent) then you would go on about how it's not exactly identical.
    As in "not similar in any way at all". If you can't tell the difference between Venezuela's approach and other socialist proposals, that's on your lack of understanding, nothing more.

    Nobody who knows the first thing about socialist theory is using Venezuela as proof of anything. It's only brought up by propagandists or those who don't know enough to realize they're parroting propaganda.

    Venezuela's issues largely boil down to;
    1> A capitalist economy relying almost entirely on a single volatile resource (oil) that eventually collapsed, and
    2> An authoritarian neo-fascist revolution movement led by Chavez seizing power in the aftermath.

    Nothing about a liberal market socialism bears any resemblance to what Chavez has built, and if you understood what we were talking about and were willing to engage honestly, you'd know that.

    It's rather tiring.
    What, repeating nonsense propaganda claims repeatedly and having to put up with people dunking on them every time?

    Then stop pushing nonsense.

    I simply dont see the model as being sustainable in the long term because when push comes to show I think people are to prone to being lazy for the system to be sustainable long term. All you will get is a slow and steady decline as more and more specialized and skilled labor gets harder and harder to find.
    You have no evidence of said "laziness". What evidence exists flies in that claim's face. You're making that up out of nothing.

    If you can't back up a premise like that, the entire argument you predicate on it falls apart.

    I'll note you're also implicitly arguing that you have to make people suffer, because if you're not hurting them, they won't work. That's just misanthropy.

    No I applied it in the manner I've seen it. The thing carelessly used is the capital produced by those going beyond the most basic of labor...

    I'm seeing the problem from the other end of it is all. The long term repercussions of allowing people to coast by.
    The capital in question is not "the commons", so you're using the term incorrectly, then.

    You're not "seeing the problem from the other end". You're imagining a fantasy land that does not reflect human nature in any way whatsoever, and which you cannot actually justify with evidence. And then you feign unhappiness that we won't just accept your fantasies as a reasonable argument.


  5. #525
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    As in "not similar in any way at all". If you can't tell the difference between Venezuela's approach and other socialist proposals, that's on your lack of understanding, nothing more.

    Nobody who knows the first thing about socialist theory is using Venezuela as proof of anything. It's only brought up by propagandists or those who don't know enough to realize they're parroting propaganda.

    Venezuela's issues largely boil down to;
    1> A capitalist economy relying almost entirely on a single volatile resource (oil) that eventually collapsed, and
    2> An authoritarian neo-fascist revolution movement led by Chavez seizing power in the aftermath.

    Nothing about a liberal market socialism bears any resemblance to what Chavez has built, and if you understood what we were talking about and were willing to engage honestly, you'd know that.



    What, repeating nonsense propaganda claims repeatedly and having to put up with people dunking on them every time?

    Then stop pushing nonsense.



    You have no evidence of said "laziness". What evidence exists flies in that claim's face. You're making that up out of nothing.

    If you can't back up a premise like that, the entire argument you predicate on it falls apart.

    I'll note you're also implicitly arguing that you have to make people suffer, because if you're not hurting them, they won't work. That's just misanthropy.



    The capital in question is not "the commons", so you're using the term incorrectly, then.

    You're not "seeing the problem from the other end". You're imagining a fantasy land that does not reflect human nature in any way whatsoever, and which you cannot actually justify with evidence. And then you feign unhappiness that we won't just accept your fantasies as a reasonable argument.
    I'm saying if this utopia vision of the world you have was likely we would of seen it somewhere at some time in the world by now.

    I believe in a post scarcity world your vision would be ideal I just can't see it leading to anything positive until we hit that point.

  6. #526
    Herald of the Titans
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    2,821
    Quote Originally Posted by Krakan View Post
    I'm saying if this utopia vision of the world you have was likely we would of seen it somewhere at some time in the world by now.

    I believe in a post scarcity world your vision would be ideal I just can't see it leading to anything positive until we hit that point.
    We will never reach post scarcity as long as profit motiphs for a minority controls resources.
    - Lars

  7. #527
    "Just make robots bro, then everyone can be unemployed and have a bigass house and 3 cars"

  8. #528
    The Insane draynay's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    18,798
    Quote Originally Posted by Krakan View Post
    I'm saying if this utopia vision of the world you have was likely we would of seen it somewhere at some time in the world by now.

    I believe in a post scarcity world your vision would be ideal I just can't see it leading to anything positive until we hit that point.
    Sounds like you're against incremental progress and just hope to wake up one day and find that everything worked out anyway. I think that "laziness" talk might be projection.
    /s

  9. #529
    Quote Originally Posted by Al Gorefiend View Post
    2021 - "Human labor is worth more! pay us more or we will not work these low-paying low-skill jobs!"

    2025 - "wtf there are no jobs all the low-paying low-skill jobs were replaced by automation!"
    2030 - even more jobs are replaced by automation - people get basic UBI so they dont starve - coming from taxatio of robots etc - problem is UBi will be extremly small - like for example 500-600$ - just so they are n verge of starvation - to weak to rebel .

    ofc they will have alternative of sellign their land/apartment to corporations in exchange for any work to keep them from starving .

  10. #530
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,900
    Quote Originally Posted by Krakan View Post
    I'm saying if this utopia vision of the world you have was likely we would of seen it somewhere at some time in the world by now.
    1> The idea of a UBI is not a "utopia vision".
    2> "Innovation and new ideas cannot exist" is a fundamentally ridiculous position to hold, and one that can be casually dismissed by literally any glance at history for any time something new was tried for the first time.

    I believe in a post scarcity world your vision would be ideal I just can't see it leading to anything positive until we hit that point.
    Again, what you "believe" means absolutely nothing to anyone else. It's just a statement that you cannot rationalize and defend your position.


  11. #531
    The Unstoppable Force Belize's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Gen-OT College of Shitposting
    Posts
    21,922
    Quote Originally Posted by Al Gorefiend View Post
    2021 - "Human labor is worth more! pay us more or we will not work these low-paying low-skill jobs!"

    2025 - "wtf there are no jobs all the low-paying low-skill jobs were replaced by automation!"
    Ah yes, the age old automation meme that was already discussed 20 pages ago.

    Funny how threats of automation always come when there's a push for better work conditions, and yet they always fail to materialize.

  12. #532
    Herald of the Titans
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    2,821
    Quote Originally Posted by Belize View Post
    Ah yes, the age old automation meme that was already discussed 20 pages ago.

    Funny how threats of automation always come when there's a push for better work conditions, and yet they always fail to materialize.
    It also misses that while some repetitive tasks can be automated with ease and cheaply. See, removing products from Injection Moulding Machines. That are also mostly automated.
    Installing the tools in said machines?
    Automating that process would be expensive as fuck.

    Same with cleaning. A lot of cleaning work is expensive to automate due to the non-static nature of the work, if you actually want it done well.
    Yes you can have a Roomba going around cleaning an office floor, but will that take care of the desks or vents? Same as a self-cleaning toilet is probably more expensive than paying someone to go around and clean everything once or twice a day.
    - Lars

  13. #533
    Quote Originally Posted by Krakan View Post
    I'm saying if this utopia vision of the world you have was likely we would of seen it somewhere at some time in the world by now.

    I believe in a post scarcity world your vision would be ideal I just can't see it leading to anything positive until we hit that point.
    So, you're scared to try anything good because you think it might eventually fail, because.....why? What data, or objective evidence to you have to support your belief that society and the economy will fail if you don't treat people like a resource to be exploited?

  14. #534
    Quote Originally Posted by Al Gorefiend View Post
    2021 - "Human labor is worth more! pay us more or we will not work these low-paying low-skill jobs!"

    2025 - "wtf there are no jobs all the low-paying low-skill jobs were replaced by automation!"
    Hey they should automate meat processing plants next...what could possibly go wrong!


    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/meat-...214130697.html

    One-Fifth of U.S. Beef Capacity Wiped Out by JBS Cyberattack
    Buh Byeeeeeeeeeeee !!

  15. #535
    Quote Originally Posted by Katchii View Post
    So, you're scared to try anything good because you think it might eventually fail, because.....why? What data, or objective evidence to you have to support your belief that society and the economy will fail if you don't treat people like a resource to be exploited?
    The same evidence that it would be successful long term. Conjecture. It depends what you believe most people are... hard working and well meaning or lazy and greedy. It's the grand debate of the nature of man.

  16. #536
    Quote Originally Posted by Krakan View Post
    The same evidence that it would be successful long term. Conjecture. It depends what you believe most people are... hard working and well meaning or lazy and greedy. It's the grand debate of the nature of man.
    History shows that your conjecture is demonstrably false. Historical facts are not up for debate.

    I'm not arguing that humans can be lazy and greedy, but they aren't all that way. You seemingly arguing that humans are all bad and nothing good comes from them unless it's practically exploited out of them is complete garbage.

  17. #537
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,900
    Quote Originally Posted by Krakan View Post
    The same evidence that it would be successful long term. Conjecture.
    Yeah, no. There's economic analysis and successful test runs to support that.

    When you have to lie about the facts because they contradict your "beliefs", it's because what you believe is objectively wrong.


  18. #538
    Quote Originally Posted by Katchii View Post
    History shows that your conjecture is demonstrably false. Historical facts are not up for debate.

    I'm not arguing that humans can be lazy and greedy, but they aren't all that way. You seemingly arguing that humans are all bad and nothing good comes from them unless it's practically exploited out of them is complete garbage.
    It's the belief that nobility is the exception rather then the expected among people. Saint or sinner it's a old question.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Yeah, no. There's economic analysis and successful test runs to support that.

    When you have to lie about the facts because they contradict your "beliefs", it's because what you believe is objectively wrong.
    There has never been something like this seen for any extended period of time... I'm talking decades not months or years.

  19. #539
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,900
    Quote Originally Posted by Krakan View Post
    It's the belief that nobility is the exception rather then the expected among people. Saint or sinner it's a old question.
    Human empathy is consistent throughout all human societies to the degree that lack of empathy is literally considered a mental illness, a deficiency in your brain either chemically or structurally. So no; it is not an "old question", or at least not an old question that's gone unanswered.

    There has never been something like this seen for any extended period of time... I'm talking decades not months or years.
    When the facts contradict your statements, just move the goalposts and pretend that you weren't proven wrong, eh?

    You have nothing to back your claims. Whereas there is evidence that contradicts you. Makes it an easy analysis.


  20. #540
    The Insane Glorious Leader's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    In my bunker leading uprisings
    Posts
    19,214
    Quote Originally Posted by Krakan View Post
    It's the belief that nobility is the exception rather then the expected among people. Saint or sinner it's a old question.

    - - - Updated - - -



    There has never been something like this seen for any extended period of time... I'm talking decades not months or years.
    This is all rhetoric, empty of any fact or analysis. Its sophistry.
    The hammer comes down:
    Quote Originally Posted by Osmeric View Post
    Normal should be reduced in difficulty. Heroic should be reduced in difficulty.
    And the tiny fraction for whom heroic raids are currently well tuned? Too bad,so sad! With the arterial bleed of subs the fastest it's ever been, the vanity development that gives you guys your own content is no longer supportable.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •