Slashdot Mirror


Inside the Mechanical Turk Sweatshop

Barence writes "PC Pro has investigated the appalling rates of pay on offer from online services such as Amazon's Mechanical Turk, YouGov surveys and affiliate schemes. One Mechanical Turk task the writer tried involved finding the website, physical addresses and phone numbers of hotels for a travel website, for only $0.01 per hotel. The details often took more than a minute to locate, which equates to a rate of around $0.60 an hour, barely enough to cover the electricity bill. Meanwhile, filling out surveys for YouGov generates a maximum income of £3 an hour, and you could end up waiting more than a year for your cheque to arrive, because the site only pays out when you reach £50. 'The result is often that those who carry out online or casual work do so for surprisingly low rates of pay, with no job security or protection from unfair terms and practices,' an employment lawyer told PC Pro."

267 comments

  1. *Cracks Whip* by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Funny

    Back to the data mines, slave!

    1. Re:*Cracks Whip* by hedwards · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yeah, that's why I ended up not doing any work for them. The pay rates were abysmally low for what was quite a bit of work. A penny is barely enough to click a link, let alone actually read it. Also a lot of the opportunities were little more than an effort to defraud advertisers and the public by posting fake reviews and clicking on specific adverts.

    2. Re:*Cracks Whip* by jlechem · · Score: 1

      I was going to echo the same thing. I signed up when they first started and noticed quite quickly there was a lot of work for a nickel. And it doesn't seem to have gotten any better. Over the course of a year I think I earned less than $2 USD. Lately it seems there was a lot of SPAM/Pr0n attacks going on as well.

      --
      Hold up, wait a minute, let me put some pimpin in it
    3. Re:*Cracks Whip* by Gruturo · · Score: 3, Informative

      The only thing I ever did for them was looking for Steve Fosset's plane / crash site. And that was quite obviously not for the money.

      --

      Vacuum cleaners suck. Kings rule.
    4. Re:*Cracks Whip* by hedwards · · Score: 4, Informative

      There's other sites that are more legitimate, I think flexjobs is probably one of the more reputable ones.

    5. Re:*Cracks Whip* by toastar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wow, I thought the thing about keeping a 30 Chinese in the basement to memorize numbers was just a joke.

    6. Re:*Cracks Whip* by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>I earned less than $2 USD.

      Yeah it's pretty sad when stealing pays better than legitimate work.

      (I kid)

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    7. Re:*Cracks Whip* by Target+Drone · · Score: 1

      Should it even be legal to pay these rates? Where I live an employer can pay you based on the work acomplished but they must still pay you at least minimum wage. Welcome to the new industrial revolution where you're not entilted to minimum wage because you're working online as an "independent contractor" for a foreign company.

    8. Re:*Cracks Whip* by jeffmeden · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Flexjobs.com you say. Interesting. Now, to set up an Amazon turk job offer to log into Flexjobs and perform some work (paying half of what flexjobs pays) and I can sit back and let the dough roll in! Arbitrage, where would we be without you!

    9. Re:*Cracks Whip* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Illegal? If you don't like the rates they are paying, don't do the job. If no one is willing to do it for that pay then they will either raise their pay rates or go out of business. Why does everyone want to throw a law at something? Imagine if the company did not exist at all. Not only would they not be paying a rate that you feel is acceptable, but they wouldn't even BE there to pay SOMETHING. Should you make it a law that they MUST start a business so they can pay people the "fair" rates that you desire?

    10. Re:*Cracks Whip* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Lie to advertisers? Heck, I'd do that for free!

    11. Re:*Cracks Whip* by MoonBuggy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nobody's making you work for the companies advertising through the Mechanical Turk service. The job description and rate of pay are clearly provided up front. Either you consider it worth your time or you don't do it - seems fair to me.

    12. Re:*Cracks Whip* by Target+Drone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My point is that over that last couple hundred years we have built up a series of labour laws covering things like minimum wage, working hours, unions, child labour etc. It's not perfect and you can make arguments for and against certain aspects of the system. However, these online employers like Turk or Rent a Coder have the potential to wipe the slate clean. Employers can simply set up shop in whatever country has the most favourable (read none) labour laws

      So what will happen in the long term? Will this be the revolution that brings prosperity for all or will it be like the industrial revolution where people were forced to send all of their children to work in the coal mines just to survive?

    13. Re:*Cracks Whip* by Vancorps · · Score: 1

      Nobody is forced to work at McDonalds or any take job that pays minimum wage or any job period. Labor laws exist to prevent the wealthy from exploiting the desperate. At least that is why they were created, you can argue their current status as a political issue to get voters though.

      The other side of the coin however is that they can afford a computer and Internet access already so they probably have other income in which case you can argue it's not exploitive.

    14. Re:*Cracks Whip* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What did people do before the industrial revolution?

    15. Re:*Cracks Whip* by Target+Drone · · Score: 2

      What did people do before the industrial revolution?

      Lived as serfs

    16. Re:*Cracks Whip* by Korin43 · · Score: 1

      So what will happen in the long term? Will this be the revolution that brings prosperity for all or will it be like the industrial revolution where people were forced to send all of their children to work in the coal mines just to survive?

      Or people will generally ignore it because of the low pay (like they are now).

    17. Re:*Cracks Whip* by sjames · · Score: 1

      You kid, but there's some truth in it.

    18. Re:*Cracks Whip* by SkyDude · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Welcome to the new industrial revolution where you're not entitled to minimum wage because you're working online as an "independent contractor" for a foreign company.

      But....no one has to take the job. I can see how an argument can be made that these grossly underpaid jobs break the laws protecting workers. The number of jobs being offered is minuscule compared to the number of real world jobs.

      Besides, low and unpaid positions are always being offered on craigslist in several categories, notably, media production and web design. How many people actually answer these ads? Probably very few and those that do probably never actually show up for them.

      There's always trying to get something for nothing, but the market decides what the prevailing wage will be, not some cheap piker on mechanical turk or craigslist.

      --
      == First cross river, then insult alligator.
    19. Re:*Cracks Whip* by speculatrix · · Score: 4, Informative
    20. Re:*Cracks Whip* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      When the industrial revolution occurred the country was still relatively poor. Sending nearly the entire family to work at that time was often a necessity. The prosperity that Capitalism and the emerging industrial technologies brought, created enough wealth that families no longer had to resort to having their children work to help support the family. It is a myth that improper laws such as minimum wage and child labor laws were the cause behind the societal change

    21. Re:*Cracks Whip* by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Well, considering Mechanical Turk has been around since 2005, and your nightmarish scenario has yet to pass, I'm not going to be losing any sleep over it.

      The real point is that if your only labor skill is doing the kinds of random tasks on Turk, then yes you're probably in trouble. Most jobs require things like, say, institutional knowledge and experience, things that the Mechanical Turk service can never provide employers.

    22. Re:*Cracks Whip* by Zadaz · · Score: 1

      Who is this "We"?

      My local Minimum wage is $9.79 an hour. The small Midwestern town I grew up in it's only 75% of that. Certainly if I have any work done by people in the Midwest I'm encouraging abusive workplaces and taking advantage of those poor stupid disadvantaged Midwesterners.

      Or, you know, not.

      I live in a global marketplace, and surprisingly there are many many places in the world where $1.00 an hour is good wage for a literate worker, well above the local standard for minimum wages and workplace safety.

    23. Re:*Cracks Whip* by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      > Back to the data mines, slave!

      Seriously, is the "solution" to simply outlaw it, then? People at home wanting to earn a bit extra cash?

      Is the "supplemental income" market to be saddled with all the primary, "full-time day job" laws?

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    24. Re:*Cracks Whip* by theNAM666 · · Score: 1

      Actually no. Most US States (and the feds) for instance, define what an 'employee' is and required compensation terms, and forbid treating employees as contractors.

      Entities in the US trying to task-out "jobs" that employees typically perform, via MT, may have significant liabilities.

      And that's not even dealing with the fact that 10-50% of MT tasks may be fraudulent.

    25. Re:*Cracks Whip* by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      An interesting discussion has been going on about this on Guru.com, a freelance networking site. At least with sites like Guru, you can do well (I've gotten multiple returning clients at a reasonable rate), but you do end up with idiots posting projects who believe they can get work for free.

      Inevitably they get the quality they pay for.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    26. Re:*Cracks Whip* by ottothecow · · Score: 1
      Mechanical Turk isn't a job. If I were a regular turker and I stopped filling out turks today and didn't come back for a month, they would say "welcome back, here are some $.01 tasks".

      If you did this at a real job they would say "ahh, come to collect your personal effects?".

      Being a turker (is this a real term?) is more akin to being a shoeshine boy. You go around taking what you can get for menial tasks--should we pay a minimum wage to the shoe shine boy who can't find any customers (not unlikely due to the glue and plastic crap we call shoes these days)

      --
      Bottles.
    27. Re:*Cracks Whip* by Zaiff+Urgulbunger · · Score: 1

      The only thing I ever did for them was looking for Steve Fosset's plane / crash site. And that was quite obviously not for the money.

      Especially since you didn't even manage to find it! ;)

    28. Re:*Cracks Whip* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here in Australia it is $15 bucks a hour minimum wage. 1AUD buys 0.913 USD. Yay Australia!

    29. Re:*Cracks Whip* by bosef1 · · Score: 1

      Kinda reminds me of the section in "Forever War", where due to overpopulation and unemployment, people basically (and illegally) "sublet" their jobs. You split your time with someone else, and that person (with a modest fee to the black-market jobs broker) gets some fake ID and works part time.

    30. Re:*Cracks Whip* by RACNicole · · Score: 1

      Hi, this is Nicole Miller from vWorker.com (formerly known as Rentacoder.com). I have to agree with MoonBuggy. The way our service (and other similar services) is set up gives workers the platform to volunteer for a job. No one forces them to bid. But there are certainly arguments for and against the system as you stated, and it's particularly hard to argue against the system when it overwhelmingly works for those who make thousands of dollars. Even those who aren't pulling in the big bucks manage to earn a sustainable living -- and I'm speaking from experience here. It really depends on what a person is willing to do. I would never work on a per-penny basis and I know you wouldn't either, so I wonder how the conversation would shift if we directed these questions toward the worker rather than the employer.

    31. Re:*Cracks Whip* by shervinemami · · Score: 1

      You guys think it is ridiculous that these websites often only pay about $0.60/hr, but thats because you guys are all living in USA or the West, where $5/hr is low. But most people live in 3rd world countries, where $0.60/hr is considered a reasonable income. That's why nearly all outsourcing is done in India or other poor countries, because $0.60/hr through Internet (with a possibility of earning several dollars per hour) seems as good as working a typical fulltime job that may also pay just $0.60/hr.

      So the crazy thing is not that these websites pay less than $1/hr, its that the same job in the West will pay 10 or 20 times higher than in the rest of the world!

      PS: I currently live in a farming town in Philippines where the average fulltime income is about $0.50/hr, so the prospect of earning that much through Internet seems pretty good.

  2. This is why "popularity" contests can be cheated by Culture20 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...so easily. "Vote for my video to win me $5000" "Hmm, pay $100 to mechanical turk slaves, and I get a huge number of votes for a lead"

  3. Not sweatshops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I have an air conditioner.

    1. Re:Not sweatshops by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, well good luck paying for it out of what you can make at MT.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  4. Preparing for the robot apocalypse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    They'll only keep enough of us humans alive as they require for tasks they can not complete, and they will only give us enough to survive. I'm just trying to prepare and get my resume ready.

    1. Re:Preparing for the robot apocalypse by Chih · · Score: 1

      Yeah, there will be a whole industry for completing captchas :D

      --
      For best results, avoid doing stupid things.
    2. Re:Preparing for the robot apocalypse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It the Mechanical Turk, the apparent robot apocalypse is actually a bunch of LARP losers.

    3. Re:Preparing for the robot apocalypse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It could happen. Imagine the escalating battle between spammers and anti-spammers. The spammers will create the first true AI in order to send more spam. The anti-spammers will then create their own AI to battle it. Eventually the anti-spam AI will realize the only solution to stop the spammers is to eliminate the people buying things from spam.

    4. Re:Preparing for the robot apocalypse by onkelonkel · · Score: 1

      "the anti-spam AI will realize the only solution to stop the spammers is to eliminate the people buying things from spam"

      Help me out here. I'm not seeing a downside.

      --
      None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
    5. Re:Preparing for the robot apocalypse by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      The down side is that this is only the first step. It will then realise that spam doesn't actually require people to buy spammed products to survive, it requires the perception that people buy it to exist among people who might send spam. The easiest way to eliminate this perception is to kill all the humans.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    6. Re:Preparing for the robot apocalypse by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      there will be a whole industry for completing captchas :D

      You can get in on the ground floor.

      Make a game of it and get thousands to help.

  5. Just give them fake data. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's not like anyone is checking it. For that amount of money, what more can they expect?

    1. Re:Just give them fake data. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Surely with things like surveys you could just write an automated script to do them 24/7 while you were at work?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    2. Re:Just give them fake data. by 19thNervousBreakdown · · Score: 1

      For that price, they could have everything done three times, or hell even 5, and check for agreement.

      --
      <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
    3. Re:Just give them fake data. by Zocalo · · Score: 1

      If someone is capable of writing a script that can do that, then they almost certainly have sufficient skills to get a job with a decent enough salary that the few dollars they might earn from Mechanical Turk would be pretty much immaterial. Even more so if you factor in the likelihood they would probably also have a fairly high spec computer which isn't exactly going to be the cheapest thing to leave running 24/7.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    4. Re:Just give them fake data. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Control questions weed out most fakers, and majority-rules payout gets the rest. If a turker puts a lot of false data into a cheap batch of bulk HITs the best it will do is lower her approval rating to the point where she doesn't qualify for most assignments.

      A low approval rating and too many requester complaints will get a turker's account suspended.

    5. Re:Just give them fake data. by Gkeeper80 · · Score: 1

      That's not true in all cases. Sure, for the really big projects there's probably no verification, but I used MTurk a few times for data collection jobs that I didn't want to do or wanted done quickly. It was easy to look up information from 500 websites in the span of a day and then I could browse the results to look for obvious outliers. When I found them, I just rejected those items and reposted them. I let some of the borderline cases slide, where I thought my instructions might have led to confusion, but generally the bad data was from people who didn't properly follow the instructions.

      I also tested using an outsource group for some of my bigger projects and found that they (outsourcers) often worked better because I didn't need to check their work as closely. Once I had trained them to find what I needed, they were much more reliable. That could have something to do with the bottom dollar wages on MTurk. I was willing to pay more for a more reliable outcome.

  6. I work for $0.00 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My job of generating posts on /. pays zero dollars per post. The Turks shouldn't complain!

    dom

    1. Re:I work for $0.00 by digitalsushi · · Score: 1

      I'll pay you 25 cents per post to push my own personal agenda...

      --
      slashdot: where everyone yells sarcastic metaphors to themselves to understand the issue
  7. as price(labour) goes to zero... by atomic777 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is just part of a larger, decades-long trend of driving the price of labour to zero all across the economy. A working wage in western countries no longer even assures you a place in the middle classes. I shudder to think where we'll be after ten more years of such "innovation".

    1. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Cwix · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I shudder to think where we'll be after ten more years of such "innovation".

      The rich will get richer, and the poor will get poorer.

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    2. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Until we exhaust cheap labor. The very poor get richer, the moderately poor of equal capability get poorer. The west loses its ability to have artificially higher wages than the east. I'm not sure this is entirely a bad thing.

    3. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Marcika · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I shudder to think where we'll be after ten more years of such "innovation".

      The rich will get richer, and the poor will get poorer.

      Only the American "poor" (where poor is defined as not being able to afford the second SUV or 50" TV). The actual poor people -- you know, the ones in Mexico, China and India who formerly would have had to farm for subsistence or work in mines as they are cheaper than machines -- they will get richer. Why do you strive to deprive them of the opportunity?

    4. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The rich will get richer, and the poor will get poorer.

      Proof? Other than your guy feel and what appeals to you.

    5. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Critical+Facilities · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Mandatory Leonard Cohen:

      Everybody knows that the dice are loaded
      Everybody rolls with their fingers crossed
      Everybody knows that the war is over
      Everybody knows the good guys lost
      Everybody knows the fight was fixed
      The poor stay poor, the rich get rich
      That's how it goes
      Everybody knows

    6. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I prefer girl feel, but to each their own.

    7. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by PatHMV · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Huh? An entirely voluntary, on-line program pays so little that nobody in their right mind would do it, and this is evidence about working wages in western countries?

      Maybe its evidence that there are some really stupid people out there who volunteer to work in the "sweatshop" of their own house and have deluded themselves into thinking that they'll ever earn any real amount of money with the Mechanical Turk program. OR maybe this money is being earned by folks living in third world countries for whom making $0.60 an hour at home or in a cool computer room is a previously undreamed of luxury.

      Seriously... if you can't find better-paying work than this as a JANITOR, then you truly are utterly unemployable and ought to consider yourself grateful to be able to find this kind of work.

    8. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not that I endorse the notion, but the whole idea of the middle class is that it's above those of us who earn a "working wage", but below those who never have to work.

    9. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by 19thNervousBreakdown · · Score: 1

      Because that's what life does, it scrabbles and grabs and claws for every drop of resources it can get so it can reproduce more, I'm honestly amazed you don't get this.

      --
      <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
    10. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by alba7 · · Score: 1

      Unchecked population growth exhausts resources in short time.
      This is the base of Darwin's thoughts.

      Perhaps famine and pestilence will kick in to correct the insane birth rate of third world.
      If not, we will see a new age of all-out wars.

      --
      Post tenebras lux. Post fenestras tux.
    11. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by atomic777 · · Score: 1

      I have no problem the global south achieving an increase in their living standards. But what is happening is that a relatively small absolute improvement in their living standards is met with a significant absolute decrease in the living standards of middle class westerners. The difference accrues to a tiny minority of "talented" and "innovative" people.

      If wages for MBA-toting advertising executives and investment bankers were being driven to zero as well, then at least it would be fair.

    12. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by davev2.0 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Why do you strive to deprive them of the opportunity?

      For the same reason there are few manufacturing and textile jobs left in the United States and that service jobs (you know, those jobs that are making up more and more of the U.S. economy) are paying less and being shipped over seas as well and you see that their gain is our loss. It is a zero sum game. When they gain opportunity, we lose opportunity. It is as simple as that. Do you suggest that we hurt ourselves to help them? Oh, and your description of American poor shows you have no experience with the American poor. I live right up the road from them, and was one of them, so I actually know what it means to be poor in America.

    13. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by OnePumpChump · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That is a shit definition. A used SUV or a 50" TV costs essentially nothing compared to what the poor in the US really need. Education. Health care. Housing. Quality food. Security. The TV example is and always has been a red herring. It's a one-time expense that lasts for years, and would barely cover any of the ongoing expenses. The SUV is even worse, given that in many used car markets that's all that may be available at the time of purchase, and in the US, in most areas, if you don't have a car, you don't have a job. The poor in the US, even if they have the possessions that you point to as evidence that they can't be poor, still lack most of the things that the poor elsewhere lack.

    14. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, and your description of American poor shows you have no experience with the American poor. I live right up the road from them, and was one of them, so I actually know what it means to be poor in America.

      But...but... that's what Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity told him the American "poor" will really like! He's probably a dittohead/teabagger moron.

    15. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by cacba · · Score: 1

      When someone disagrees with you there are too choices:

      • Be skeptical and research.
      • Ignore them and mark them a Troll.

      Glad to see slashdot has a healthy portion of the latter.

    16. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They will get richer? By becoming increasingly disconnected from their real habitat and increasingly
      dependent on their new overlords, always doing some menial work, always little mechanical ants?

      Why do you scorn those people so?

    17. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by oldmac31310 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There are real poor people in the US too. Really poor. Your definition of American poverty is just plain silly.

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
    18. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Monchanger · · Score: 2, Insightful

      NO, NO, NO. That's a debunked myth.

      The solution to overpopulation is the development of the third world, increasing availability to food and medicine. Easier said than done, of course, but that's the now-obvious goal. Promotion of suffering is neither strategically- and certainly not morally the right approach.

    19. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Com2Kid · · Score: 1

      But what is happening is that a relatively small absolute improvement in their living standards is met with a significant absolute decrease in the living standards of middle class westerners.

      Have you seen how much our living standard has been raised in the last 50 years? Holy crap. House sizes have exploded, families have 1 car per person, 1 TV per person, and go out to eat more often than not.

      Surprise surprise, not every house needs a den, a dining room, a living room, and a breakfast nook! Nor does every bedroom need a TV in it. Likewise if people didn't insist on living in the middle of pretty much nowhere (so they can afford the aforementioned house) not everyone would need to own their own car to commute to work!

      If people have to start cooking their own food, walk to the bus stop (and still have a shorter commute than driving miles and miles in heavy traffic), and agree as a family watch to do for entertainment at night, I highly suspect that the standard of living in America would actually increase.

    20. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Singularitarian2048 · · Score: 1

      Right, those wage slaves just aren't grateful enough to their masters.

    21. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by cbraescu1 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      And the stupid neo-Marxist commentators will become stupider

      --
      Catalin Braescu
      Ofaly.com
    22. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Monchanger · · Score: 1

      This does not require a citation. It's well documentation that the gap in wealth is growing.

    23. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      Only the American "poor" (where poor is defined as not being able to afford the second SUV or 50" TV). The actual poor people -- you know, the ones in Mexico, China and India who formerly would have had to farm for subsistence or work in mines as they are cheaper than machines -- they will get richer.

      Most of the studies I've shown have shown mixed overall results on both ends (developed and less developed) from so-called "free" trade, with the far more consistent effect of increasing the gap between the rich and the poor on both ends. Neo-liberal "free trade" seems to be much better at increasing the share of the economy held by a narrow capital-holding class than it is at promoting broad development.

      It probably wouldn't be that hard, in terms of designing rules, to improve trade regimes so that they consistently improved the lot of workers in the less developed partner countries -- even without actually making things worse for workers in the more developed partner (under ideal conditions, specialization is efficient and mutually beneficial.) The problem is that the existing large-scale holders of capital are naturally the dominant class in terms of political power and control of the information resources everywhere, so that its very hard to implement a change to existing regimes which they designed and which they correctly perceive are working better for them than any alternative is likely to.

    24. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by atomic777 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Real wages have been stagnant for the past 20-30 years and increased home square footage, more cars, etc. are mostly a product of increased debt.

    25. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Blue+Stone · · Score: 1

      Not exactly mandatory, and much cruder, but: Jarvis Cocker:

      Well did you hear, there’s a natural order.
      Those most deserving will end up with the most.
      That the cream cannot help but always rise up to the top,
      Well I say: Shit floats.
      If you thought things had changed,
      Friend you’d better think again,
      Bluntly put in the fewest of words,
      Cunts are still running the world,
      Cunts are still running the world.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=monyiOsoKxg

      --
      Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
    26. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by careysub · · Score: 1

      This is just part of a larger, decades-long trend of driving the price of labour to zero all across the economy. A working wage in western countries no longer even assures you a place in the middle classes. I shudder to think where we'll be after ten more years of such "innovation".

      MOD THIS GUY UP!

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    27. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      THIS. We should be spending as much as possible to industrialize the world and bring the whole thing up to first world standards. Women who don't have to worry about farming and their 10th child dying tend to have less children and put off having children longer.

    28. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      Median household income has increased dramatically in the last fifty years. The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting richer.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    29. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Vancorps · · Score: 1

      I don't think you understand the difference in expenses. Living in a city can mean that a tiny house or apartment will cost you triple or even more. You make it sound like people live to work when the reality is the other way around. I chose to live in the city, but I pay dearly for it. My parents live 30 minutes south and their house costs 1/3rd mine and is five times the size. That is quite a difference especially since there is nothing that says my neighbourhood will stay affluent while theirs won't develop like mine did 20 years earlier.

      Add on to the fact that such people are not considered poor by any means. The poor live in trailers at best, have one TV from the 70s or 80s and are lucky if they even get their own bed.

      That quality of life is still long strides ahead their poor brothers and sisters in countries like India although I do give India a lot of credit for using a lot of the new money to actually improve the quality of life for a large portion of the country rather than hording it like is being seen in American business right now.

    30. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by dfenstrate · · Score: 1

      Or, alternately, the rich will keep doing things that make them rich, and the poor will keep doing things that make them poor.

      Maybe we could try to teach poor folks a thing or two, instead of telling them they're f*cked out of the gate, and some beneficent government should come along and punish those nasty 'rich people' on their behalf?

      --
      Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
    31. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      A good rule of thumb for those watching at home: anyone who says 'it's as simple as that' about economics is wrong.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    32. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by dzfoo · · Score: 1

      Hum... I thought that was Malthus, not Darwin:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Robert_Malthus

      But what do I know, we're all going to die anyway.

              -dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    33. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha, cute. But those are not the american poor. Those are the financially retarded. The American Poor are my friend who barely makes 15k a year and has to support 3 children.

    34. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you strive to deprive them of the opportunity?

      In the known history of the world, unless I am very mistaken, no group of humans, or animals or even plants or bacteria has ever been content to have the same stuff as everyone else. The methods of taking stuff from others is where America, and more generally "the West" discerns itself - by trade and hard work instead of the much more popular violence and slavery - but the principle is the same.

      You seem to imply that this situation will lead to peace. All I can say is that this situation has happened many, many times in history and ... not even once did it lead to peace. But don't worry ... people will change, right ? People will start being content with just what they have ...

      Of course, if evolution is correct, what happens is : you find a new way to live, to extend the available resources further than they went in the past, you spread this new way until you get reasonably close to the new limits and then ... the world resumes killing off the less efficient individuals and groups.

      If evolution is correct, equality, implying obviously that everyone is susceptible to the exact same natural changes, and meaning that everyone depends on the exact same natural resources ... equality simply means death for everyone, when either the resource limits are hit or one of the big disasters occurs. Fortunately, due to this no society has ever achieved anything remotely resembling practical, everyday equality for it's members. And even if there once was one that did, it can't have lasted for long.

      Of course today's political dogma is that this is not true. Let's see who wins : dogma, or reality.

      Imho, the "next big society", the one that will follow America in the history books*, will be an alliance between humans and artificial intelligence, which will be able to be the envy of the world, with much, much less resources than America uses.

      * if there will even still be history books. Most cultures (e.g. muslims, or chinese) are not interested in history, and most certainly not in accurate history. Just because western christianity as a culture has a certain property, such as a critical look on history and research into sources of knowledge, comparing different versions, with the (initial) goal of guarding the authenticity of the bible, everyone assumes that every culture does this. Even a trivial look around, say tracing the evidence for authenticity of the quran, or histories of the Chinese state, would quickly and most effectively inform you that this "evidence" is a sad joke at best : most muslims haven't even thought about which language the quran is in, claiming it to be arabic, despite the fact that arabs can't understand a word of the original manuscript, which looks nothing like arabic (if anything it looks like modern greek print). Similar obvious discrepancies are found in Chinese histories. Most cultures burned, instead of guarded, different versions of their history.

    35. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by alba7 · · Score: 1

      Bullshit.

      Just have a look at Europe's history.
      The collapse of Western Rome due to an invasion of migrants.
      A few centuries of relative peace (the so called dark ages), when the pristine forests of northern and eastern were settled.
      Followed by a millennium of non-stop war.
      The crusades, the Reconquista, the Hundred Years' War, the conquest of the Americas, colonization of Africa, India and South East Asia, the age of Imperialism, all culminating in two world wars.

      Yes, Europeans got the wiser. Yes, that indeed stopped a millennium of wars. However, it did not actually prevent these wars.

      --
      Post tenebras lux. Post fenestras tux.
    36. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by homer_ca · · Score: 1

      Household income adjusted for inflation has been flat since the 70s. All this consumption was paid for by credit and cheap manufactured goods from China.

      I'm all for simplifying, but the question is how to get there. A lot of powerful forces are arrayed against us simplifying. The Century of the Self might be a good film to watch now.

    37. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      The rich will get richer, and the poor will get poorer.
      Only the American "poor" (where poor is defined as not being able to afford the second SUV or 50" TV).

      I see you've never been on the east side of whatever city you live in. The only person I know with a 50 inch TV is my sister, and she's pretty well off. Actually you've probably never been out of your gated community, as you'd see the oil-belching 20 year old rusted hoopties on the street.

      You might be amazed to find out that some people here are so poor they have to live on the streets and are too poor to even afford a hooptie. Last Tuesday's newspaper reported that there are a record number of poople on food stamps in Illinois, and unless you're disabled you have to work or be looking for work to be eligible. The waitress in that nice restaraunt you're buying that $50 meal at gets food stamps. She's poor, probably working two jobs, and still barely getting the rent and utilities paid.

      I envy your naive ignorance. I wish I could believe there were no truly poor people in the US, but I see them all the time.

    38. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Your post has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand. European history has nothing to do with what would happen with the standard of living in the third world improving.

    39. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by zegota · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, it'd be great if we could set up some sort of institution that could teach them those sorts of lessons, or give them some sort of useful skill to propel them out of poverty. On that other hand, that would probably mean us middle class/rich people would have to pool our money to set that up, and that's communist, so fuck 'em! Or maybe, if we want to be nice, they can borrow money from us to pay for the exorbitant schooling costs, at rates that will make us even richer! Yippee!

    40. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by cfulmer · · Score: 1

      That's a myth. See, e.g., http://www.optimist123.com/optimist/2007/11/lets-kill-the-s.html

      In addition, the myth ignores the fact that the CPI overstates inflation -- the Boskin Commission estimated this was about 1.1 percentage points per year. Further, it ignores improvements in the quality of goods. So, for example, a car in 1973 might have cost, say $2,000. But, it probably only lasted 5 years, came without air conditioning and was far more dangerous than today's $16,000 cars that easily last 10 years,

    41. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by mmaniaci · · Score: 1

      Please make your way back up Al Gore's ass. We don't need your tired rhetoric here. The US has poor people, just like China, just like Mexico, and just like every other country. SUV's and TV's don't make you rich, or even not-poor. They make you in debt.

    42. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by cynyr · · Score: 1

      nearest bus stop to my work was 3 miles, in the warehouse district with no sidewalks, in 4 feet of snow at -20F(~-29c) before windchill and I only live 11-12 miles from work. So yes, just about everyone here will need a car unless they live in the heart of downtown and don't mind walking when it's -20F to -40F(before windchill), or though downtown areas with no sidewalks, in a snow bank or down the road with the cars.

      Location: Minneapolis MN.

      --
      All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
    43. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by DrgnDancer · · Score: 1

      There's an irony in your statement. Why would you have three children that you cannot afford to support unless you were "financially retarded"? I'm not knocking your friend per se, just pointing out that consumerism is only one way that people can make poor financial decisions. Is it stupid to buy a car that costs more than your annual income? Of course, but our culture tells us that we need to have that car. Some people buy the party line on the matter and buy things they shouldn't buy, despite their own best interest. Is it stupid to have children you cannot afford? Of course, but our culture tells us that children make us happy and fulfilled. Some people buy the party line and have children they shouldn't, despite their own (or for that matter, the child's) best interest.

      Of course if you see the light on consumerism, it's pretty easy to stop buying so much stuff. If you see the light on children, you're pretty much stuck with the ones you have.

      --
      I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
    44. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck off with all of that!

    45. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Com2Kid · · Score: 1

      Shoot your city planners. :P Actually the Wikipedia article for your city, almost, if you don't pay close attention, makes things sound pretty good, but the devil is in the details.

      Because it is assumed everyone drives, unless citizens push real hard cities will continue to spend their money under the assumption that, well, everyone drives.

      When ever I have moved, one criteria I have always had is easy access to alternative transportation, in the case of the Seattle Metro area, that pretty much means buses. I make it part of my lifestyle to life close to mass transit, but obviously it is preferable if entire cities are designed around the idea that everyone should be close to mass transit that can get them quickly to their destination without having to go to great lengths and limit their housing options beyond what is reasonble. (e.g. if you want to live 15 miles out in the middle of farm land, bus service is not going to be available).

      No house should be 3 miles from a bus stop though. That is just ridiculous. I am pretty sure that no house within the Seattle city limits is that far from a bus stop, except maybe those in a gated community or in other such exceptional circumstances were residents have purposefully isolated themselves.

    46. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Toonol · · Score: 1

      Decades long? No, that's been the trend in the free market forever, and always will be. There also is a counteracting trend, by labor, to push wages ever and ever higher. That's simply what happens in capitalism, and is a consequence of free people doing business.

    47. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The TV example is ALSO a red herring because the people I know that are broke have an old CRT TV -- if any TV at all -- and some 15 or 20 year old Honda. The actual poor do not have the money for an SUV or 50" TV.

    48. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Monchanger · · Score: 1

      I have ho idea where that minirant came from and what the point was supposed to be.

      The crusades had nothing to do with lack of resources, unlike the Americas and colonies. The Hundred Years and Roses were likewise strictly internal and political. And if European history is to be discussed when the topic is population, the plague was far better at percentage-wise depopulation than any war, including both WWs combined with influenza. If depopulation is your goal, war is both an ineffective and expensive tool.

      I forgot to mention in response to your previous nonsense that Darwin wasn't talking about anthropology, which is very different from evolution. Get a clue before you use the word bullshit. You're obviously way out of your league here.

    49. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Marcika · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A used SUV or a 50" TV costs essentially nothing compared to what the poor in the US really need. Education. Health care. Housing. Quality food. Security.

      Good, if you think welfare is a better definition than ownership of "stuff": The poor in the US have access to free schooling (mostly decent, at least compared to India), free libraries with internet access (and thus the Wikipedia and OCW) and needs-based scholarships to universities. They have access to guaranteed free healthcare in any hospital emergency room. Food stamps. Dozens of different federal, state and municipal programs that aim to provide shelter. If the willingness to help yourself is there, then outside help is available.

      While even such a life might represent shockingly bad living conditions to you, one has to be extremely irresponsible, extremely unlucky and/or mentally handicapped to become really poor in the US in an absolute sense like "the poor elsewhere" -- i.e. malnourished, sick and without shelter and sanitation. Now compare that to the situation of 3 out of 5 people who did not win the geographic lottery and were born in impoverished parts of Asia, Africa or South America -- even the most gifted among them will have fewer chances than the laziest imbecile in the US or Europe. This is not fair, neither is economically efficient.

    50. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Marcika · · Score: 1

      The rich will get richer, and the poor will get poorer. Only the American "poor" (where poor is defined as not being able to afford the second SUV or 50" TV). I see you've never been on the east side of whatever city you live in.

      You shouldn't make assumptions. I've lived on the east side of my city. With squatters and hustlers as neighbours, poorer than any neighbourhood you lived in, I'm sure; but nowhere near *real* absolute poverty. Also, I know some details about the Illinois DHS SNAP and how it compares to the welfare safety nets of a number of other countries. My point stands. The poor waitress getting by on food stamps in Chicago (and a $10 tip from each and every diner that she serves, natch) is infinitely better off than her cousin-200-times-removed in Dharavi who doesn't have the walk-in ER, food stamps, decent free schooling for her children and the rest of the social safety net and sanitation and utilities that are so taken for granted in the US even for the destitute.

      Take it from a naive ignoramus like me, if you think US minimum wage is 'truly poor', you have no clue about poverty. (Which, I think, is the point that my [facetious] GP post was making in the first place.)

    51. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      That is a shit definition. A used SUV or a 50" TV costs essentially nothing compared to what the poor in the US really need. Education. Health care. Housing. Quality food. Security.

      I think you are getting caught up on those (agreeably absurd) examples and not on what the post was actually implying. Poor in the US have free education. The quality might vary from neighborhood to neighborhood but it's still there. Our poor might need "quality food" while the rest of the world's poor simply would be satisfied with food. Our poor are fat while the rest of the world's poor starve. Security? You mean as opposed to having roving bands of bandits, no actual rights, or wondering if they'll be alive the next day that the poor normally have to deal with? The US has forgotten what is like to actually be poor. When this entire economic downturn started it was being compared to the great depression so I researched what it was like in the great depression. Then things were bad, real bad. bad enough that if we fell down to that level from where we are today, we'd consider it a step down from some dystopian post apocalyptic movie. Families actually were starving. Child mortality before age 5 was up into 25% in some states. Our current standards of lower class would be considered middle class in 1950 with regards to square footage of living space, amount of food to eat, and amount of clothes owned. Things have changed so much that entire classifications of housing have disappeared. One bedroom shotgun shacks that entire families would live in have been replaced by two bedroom apartments with washer, dryers and other appliances. Whatever problems the poor have in the US, it is still that people fight to come here to be poor rather than remain where they are and be poor.

    52. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Marcika · · Score: 1

      Please make your way back up Al Gore's ass. We don't need your tired rhetoric here. The US has poor people, just like China, just like Mexico, and just like every other country.

      Homework for you: Have a look at the two tables in this article, think about the difference between the two, and then think about why the US is missing from one of them. Taking your conclusions into account, and without any further ignoratio elenchi or ad hominem, restate your opinion in a manner that is relevant to the GP post.

      SUV's and TV's don't make you rich, or even not-poor. They make you in debt.

      OK, so am I to assume that you will feel richer once some takes away your SUV and TV? Didn't think so.

    53. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Nyder · · Score: 1

      ...

      Seriously... if you can't find better-paying work than this as a JANITOR, then you truly are utterly unemployable and ought to consider yourself grateful to be able to find this kind of work.

      I did janitor work for awhile and the job was great.

      Got a bunch of "free" computer equipment and other stuff. Free food. pencils, pens, paperclips, etc.

      the pay sucked though, which is why the "benefits" were so nice.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    54. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      No they have access to terrible schools, no healthcare other than urgent care and food stamp programs provide far less than would be needed to survive.

    55. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Cwix · · Score: 1

      Has the cost of living increased? If the cost of say medical care gets more expensive disproportionally then the poor get poorer.

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    56. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      You do realize it is possible to go from having a good job and three kids to the situation he describes right?

      I know someone doing that, he has become permanently disabled. He went from making $70k/year to what ever SSI pays.

    57. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      A $10 tip from each diner? Clearly you have never worked in food service in any fashion.

    58. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ummm...Mexico, China and India are part of what are often called the emerging economies.
      the median person in these countries are not actually poor by global standards, they are only poor by western standards.
      See Afghanistan for really poor people

    59. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by cynyr · · Score: 1

      The bus stop is 1/8 mile from my house. It's the work end thats the problem. It's in the manufacturing/warehouse north east part of town. No side walks(not a pedesterian area), has large trucks(hauling metal scraps to be recycled), and is 35mph 2 way with cars parked on the shoulder.

      The wikipedia article is right, it is a nice place to live, as long as you have a car. The bus problem is also that I go through 3-4 cities to get to work, each has it's own bus system. The drive is ~20 minutes, the bus ride is 1:35:00, looks like they have added a bus stop since i last looked, it's down to a 1 mile walk, without sidewalks, such.

      I see the bus/train problem like this, no one rides the bus/train because it doesn't work well, it doesn't work well because no one rides the bus/train.

      --
      All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
    60. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by dfenstrate · · Score: 1

      Yay! You sarcastically described public schools, which I never spoke against!

      The trouble is you still can't make people listen and adjust their behavior. They have to act of their own will- and many won't.

      So then what? Do you assume these people are incompetent, and always will be, and ease their lives by dictating the minutiae of their day & demanding wealth transfers from the productive? Or do you hope that they'll at least serve as an example to others, as they struggle by from day to day bathed in the results of their own ill-chosen actions, never connecting cause and effect?

      Stupidity will always be with us, and as a result, the poor will always be with us. This is a fundamental reality of the human experience, and trying to 'solve it' (in the bleeding-heart liberal manner) mostly creates incentives to behave poorly.

      There is certainly some basic level below which we cannot compassionately let people fall, but it should be a painful, embarrassing place to be, so folks have an incentive to do what they can to improve their own lot.

      --
      Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
    61. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Marcika · · Score: 1

      A $10 tip from each diner? Clearly you have never worked in food service in any fashion.

      Well, the GGP post brought up the example of a nice restaurant in Illinois with $50/person meals. How much would you tip your waitress in such a situation?

      (Also, ad hominems instead of supporting facts weaken your argument.)

    62. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      I was referring to inflation-adjusted median income.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    63. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Often (depending on the restaraunt, of course you'll get good tips in a nicer one) a waitress, making less than minimum wage, will be taxed on tips she didn't even make.

      In 1974 when I was in the USAF stationed in Thailand, it was an underdeveloped country, and the average person made about $1k per YEAR. However, you could feed four people in a nicer restaraunt for a dollar, ride the bus anywhere for a nickle, rent a bungalow for a month for less than $30. The roads were unpaved and there was no electricity, sewers, or water (people used cisterns on their roofs). But I saw no homeless people there. I see them here.

      Your Dharavi denizen needs far less to live on than the homeless guy sleeping in the park in your town. Yes, there are places in the world where people literally starve to death, but that doesn't mean we have no suffering poor here -- we do.

    64. Re:as price(labour) goes to zero... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >needs-based scholarships to universities
      >access to guaranteed free healthcare in any hospital emergency room.

      If you truly believe this than you know very little about american society. Poor people have a very difficult time affording either of those things.

  8. Not 'unfair' by Peteskiplayer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "The result is often that those who carry out online or casual work do so for surprisingly low rates of pay, with no job security or protection from unfair terms and practices," an employment lawyer told PC Pro.

    As these are essentially individual contracts that are not amended at any point, it is easy to see the trade you are making (your time for their money). Although these deals may be bad ones, noone is forced to accept them and so accepting and completing these bad deals is entirely up to the individual. If someone values their time at this low amount, let them!

    1. Re:Not 'unfair' by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Although these deals may be bad ones, noone is forced to accept them

      Well, his record company contract was quite lucritive. I don't thenk he had to be forced.

  9. Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

    They pay $8 in a nice, clean, air conditioned environment.

    Around $20 if you're a manager. That certainly beats 0.6 per hour for this data mining stuff.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    1. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by Acer500 · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      They pay $8 in a nice, clean, air conditioned environment.

      So US-centric. Please point me to the nearest Wal-Mart here in Montevideo (Uruguay, South America) that pays those wages, and I'll sign up instantly.

      --
      There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
    2. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      They pay $8 in a nice, clean, air conditioned environment.

      So US-centric. Please point me to the nearest Wal-Mart here in Montevideo (Uruguay, South America) that pays those wages, and I'll sign up instantly.

      In case you haven't read the FAQ, /. is a US centric website.

    3. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by davev2.0 · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      And, meanwhile, Walmart is busy demanding lower prices from its suppliers, lowering quality and causing jobs to be shipped overseas which is destroying the American employment base. Just ask Snapper mowers, who stopped selling to Walmart when the "lower price" demands resulted in Snapper having to choose between jobs for Americans and being able to afford the price demanded by Walmart. Walmart is helping to destroy America.

    4. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      And for anyone interested here is a story about this. Glad to see there is still a company here and their willing to stand up for their workers rather than sell them out for the bottom line.

    5. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by Com2Kid · · Score: 2, Informative

      And, meanwhile, Walmart is busy demanding lower prices from its suppliers, lowering quality and causing jobs to be shipped overseas which is destroying the American employment base. Just ask Snapper mowers, who stopped selling to Walmart when the "lower price" demands resulted in Snapper having to choose between jobs for Americans and being able to afford the price demanded by Walmart.

      Walmart is helping to destroy America.

      You are forgetting one other major problem with Walmart: The lower quality goods they sell do not last long, and require replacing much more frequently. This means people who can only afford to shop at Walmart end up spending their money in a continuous cycle of wasteful consumerism that is sub-optimal.

      A lot of what Walmart does is good: They force suppliers to be organized, on time, track the movement of goods with accuracy and precision, and find ways to reduce waste from their manufacturing processes. (That last bit can, and often is, taken way too far unfortunately.)

      What I cannot stand about Walmart is that the quality of the goods is crap. Name brand products sold at Walmart are often manufactured to a lower standard of quality specifically for Walmart. Be it clothes that will fall apart faster, TVs that will break sooner, or other goods that don't function at all even fresh out of the box.

      Unfortunately people are used to shoddy quality and think that having to replace a product every few years is normal. Not that any of the other US stores has helped any, Costco is one of the few places you can walk into, close your eyes, pick up something to buy, and be pretty sure you'll have acquired a good quality product.

    6. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by maxume · · Score: 1

      Wait, what did Walmart do to Snapper after they refused to do what they wanted?

      Oh, so it is Walmart, their customers and their suppliers that are responsible for what you are talking about, not just Walmart.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    7. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by maxume · · Score: 1

      There is no group of people that "can only afford to shop at Walmart".

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    8. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      Of course, nobody who needs a quality item buys it at Wal-Mart. What the Wal haters miss is that the cheap stuff they sell lets people buy things they otherwise could never afford. I've got a food processor from Wal-Mart. It's not very good - the cheapest Cuisinart is more powerful, easier to clean, and can run longer without overheating - but it only cost me $30, and for that $30 I realized that I don't use a food processor often enough to bother with owning one. Saved me over $200.

      BTW, if you want good stuff cheap, go to garage sales in nice neighborhoods. You'll make out like a bandit and get some seriously high-quality stuff. I've seen $1500 suits for $20.

    9. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      Walmart is the payday loan store equivalent for consumer goods.

    10. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by Local+ID10T · · Score: 1

      I take it you have never been to the southern portion of the mid-west in the united states.

      --
      "You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin
    11. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by Com2Kid · · Score: 1

      There is no group of people that "can only afford to shop at Walmart".

      Ok let me rephrase that.

      People who have not been brought up to properly evaluate the total cost of ownerhsip of consumer goods often time shop at Walmart not realizing that while they may be saving money in the short term, that in the medium and long term they will end up paying more as a result of having purchased goods of an inferior quality.

      I would argue that there are people in America who are stuck buying sub-standard products though. Not everyone can afford a good $100+ pair of boots that will last for years and years. Then again it is often a trade off, people do not realize that in fact it is better to make the sacrifice now and dump $100 on shoes that will last them a long time. But then again if someone's $20 cheap shoes are falling apart and they need to buy a new pair right now, and they only have $20 to spend on shoes at this moment, then they may have no choice but to spend another $20 on shoes that will not last them very long. Thus a vicious cycle begins.

      But you are right to an extent, many people could afford to buy higher quality goods if they accepted owning fewer goods overall, which was something I should have pointed out more clearly in my previous post.

    12. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by maxume · · Score: 1

      The thing about the people that buy $20 shoes is that plenty of them do lots of smoking and drinking. And a lot of them spend a lot of money drinking at bars. Now, I'm not saying that those people don't deserve to relax and have fun, I'm just saying that when your vices run to $20 or $50 a week, it isn't actually that hard to scrape together $100 if you really want to do it.

      So sure, there are a few people with good sense that have very low incomes and are restricted in what they can buy because of their income, but usually, that good sense helps them get past the very low income problem.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    13. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The lower quality goods they sell do not last long, and require replacing much more frequently. This means people who can only afford to shop at Walmart end up spending their money in a continuous cycle of wasteful consumerism that is sub-optimal.

      Terry Pratchett summarised this very nicely as the 'Sam Vimes boot theory of economics'. In his story, you could buy a pair of decent boots that lasted ten or more years for $50, or you could buy a cheap pair that lasted a year, maybe a bit more if you replaced the soles with cardboard, for $10. A rich person would simply buy the expensive ones, but someone earning $38/month couldn't afford to. Over ten years, the poor person would spend twice as much on boots than the rich person and still have wet feet. There are lots of examples of this. Supermarket multi-buy discounts on non-perishable goods are a good one. Whenever the shampoo that I use is on a buy-one-get-one-free deal, I buy six months worth of it. Someone who uses the same shampoo but can't afford this up-front cost ends up spending twice as much as me. Because I have more money, I get to spend less. I've just bought a house and the monthly expenses related to it (including mortgage interest) are about 2/3 of what I was paying in rent before, for somewhere much less nice. If I hadn't saved the money required for the deposit, I'd still be paying more per month and enjoying a lower standard of living. Renting somewhere as nice as my current house would cost 3-4 times as much as I'm paying as the owner, and when I've paid off the rest of the mortgage this difference will be more pronounced.

      In a capitalist society, the people who control the capital get to accumulate wealth.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    14. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by sjames · · Score: 1

      I would argue that Walmart is on the ragged edge of fraud. They also wanted Snapper to produce a "special" low quality dirt cheap SKU just for them. That is, they wanted to have customers convinced they were getting a great value, a well respected brand for dirt cheap when, in fact, they were getting a sort of self-counterfeit junk mower for more than it's worth.

      Legally, that's not fraud, but morally it's questionable. Snapper was smart enough to not destroy their brand reputation that way. They were also smart enough to hold on to the American made reputation.

    15. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by davev2.0 · · Score: 1

      Walmart, the largest retailer in the world, stopped carrying their product. Fortunately, Snapper didn't screw over their other customers, as Walmart wanted, and so had another distribution channel.

    16. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by davev2.0 · · Score: 1

      The reason the goods are crap is because quality goods can not be manufactured for the money Walmart will pay. So, it is either make crap and be in the largest retailer in the world, or make quality goods and either lose money or be locked out of the largest market on the planet.

    17. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by Acer500 · · Score: 1

      In case you haven't read the FAQ, /. is a US centric website.

      Hi Mr. Coward, I know you've been around forever, but I've been posting here since 2005 :) - I think I picked that up :)

      I was just trying to point out (somewhat sarcastically) to those that wonder "who would sign up for this, when Wal-mart is available", that no, it's NOT available for most of us ("us" being the 6 billion and a half of non-US citizens).

      --
      There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
    18. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by Com2Kid · · Score: 1

      I observed this very thing growing up. Even more annoying is when people are told to "buy more to save more!" and they actually believe it. Buy so much of a perishable good that 1/2 of it goes to waste, but hey, it was 25% off!

      The issue is that previously there was little choice as in what to buy, essentially everyone was forced to save up to buy the American Made Tough As Hell goods. Now that lower cost alternatives are available for purchase (and really pick any medium to high value consumer good, from lawn mowers to power tools to home appliances and electronics), people are not forced to save up to buy the higher quality longer lasting good and can instead indulge in short term pleasurable activities and at the end of the day go out and make what will turn out to be a sub-optimal purchase.

      Of course any sociologists or economist who took a time frozen snap shop survey of people would have results showing that everyone is happier. After all, people got to buy their "big purchase" and still had money to go out and party afterwards.

      Of course 5 years they are stuck making the same purchase again. And again, and again. While at one instant in time they may have more disposable income (and therefore a higher standard of living, by some standards) over a period of time they actually will have less disposable income and therefore by the same measurements, a lower standard of living.

      I have friends who have cloths they bought in third world SE Asian countries that have lasted over 10 years of constant use without any fading or visible wear. Good luck buying a shirt in America that will last you more than 2 or 3 years without fading. Heck I am wearing a $25 shirt right now, nice fabric, washed in a high end front loading HE washing machine with other similar fabrics, that is fading after just a few months.

      I am incredibly paranoid about all of my purchases and even I only own one shirt that has lasted me more than 3 years without falling to pieces. (Funny enough, it was ~$10 at Ross, got it in go figure, got it almost 7 years ago).

      This is the other downside of constantly lowering product quality, eventually even those of us who want to buy long lasting durable goods may be unable to without going to great lengths, or because the economics of scale have been thrown out of wack, we may find ourselves paying far more than what is proportional for the higher quality goods.

      In other words, where as a refrigerator that will last 1/2 as long may only be 30% cheaper, longer lasting cloths may very well cost 5x as much, if they can be found at all.

    19. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by DrgnDancer · · Score: 1

      It's good to see there are still industries that can sell quality to the point where they can get away with it. Rubbermaid tried to do the same thing, but sadly plastic buckets and storage containers aren't a quality competitive market. Walmart sold other people's buckets and containers instead, and sold them in such volume that Rubbermaid eventually had little option but to buckle under. Now Walmart sells Rubbermaid, at Walmart prices, and Rubbermaid is: a) a much weaker company (I think I read they sold themselves recently, but I could be wrong there) and b) trying to move as many jobs as possible overseas to reduce costs.

      Snapper got away with it because people are still willing to pay more for well built mechanical devices that will last longer. Good for them, and it's very nice to see, but sadly not many industries are in that position.

      --
      I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
    20. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by DrgnDancer · · Score: 1

      Not to denigrate your point (which is valid), but the other problem that a lot of people in poorer areas of the country face is lack of choice. A few years ago I went to visit my wife's grandparents in fairly rural Illinois for Thanksgiving. On Black Friday my wife's grandmother (grandmother-in-law?) wanted to do the traditional Black Friday shopping trip. Now frankly, myself, my wife, my MIL and my FIL all felt that we'd just as soon stick our Thanksgiving forks in our eyes as go shopping in rural Illinois on Black Friday, but family is family so we all crawled out of bed bright and early and were on the road by 7:00 or so.

      The bright side of rural areas is that there's no 24 hour stores, or opening at some godawful time of the morning. The downside turned out to be that we could go shopping at Walmart. And only Walmart. We drove 15 minutes into town, and town turned out to be a couple of restaurants, a few gas stations, a grocery store, a few pawn shops, and Walmart. I imagine the pawn shops look a lot like a Walmart "dinged and dented" section. It wasn't even a big Walmart. Quite possibly the smallest I'd ever been in, though it was packed check by jowl with stuff.

      Realistically if they wanted to buy stuff from anywhere other than Walmart, the people in this town would first have to travel ~2 hours to St. Louis. GFIL(?) had actually purchased a computer and learned to make reasonable use of the Internet for purchases of more substantial goods, but he was both unusually wealthy for the area and usually tech savvy for his age (doubly so for his age and the area).

      --
      I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
    21. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>Walmart is busy demanding lower prices from its suppliers, lowering quality and causing jobs to be shipped overseas which is destroying the American employment base.

      So what do you want Walmart to do? Layoff millions of Chinese/Maxican/Indian workers and ship the jobs back to the US or EU? Do you not care about those workers left to starve?

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    22. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by DrgnDancer · · Score: 1

      See my above post about what happened to Rubbermaid when they tried to do the same thing. Snapper could get away with it because mechanical devices have a more obvious quality factor that other things. Most industries aren't as lucky.

      --
      I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
    23. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>Name brand products sold at Walmart are often manufactured to a lower standard of quality

      Disagree. The PS2 and Gamecubes I bought at Walmart still work eight years later. Ditto the 21" CRT TV. My JVC VCR is still going strong, my microwave works perfectly, and these Levis laying in the corner still are in good shape (too bad they don't fit me anymore). Plus the food I buy is identical to the food I find in a grocery store, but about 50 cents less each carton.

      I've not noticed that Walmart sells inferior quality.

      And that's why I stop there almost every week.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    24. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>someone's $20 cheap shoes are falling apart

      The Rockports I'm wearing only cost me $12 and are still holding-up seven years later. I think you're making a lot of unfounded assumptions about cost and quality - there's not always a direct correlation.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    25. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by Com2Kid · · Score: 1

      The PS2 and Gamecubes I bought at Walmart still work eight years later.

      Those are examples of identically manufactured goods, for which Walmart can offer at best product bundles and cannot directly compete on price.

      Ditto the 21" CRT TV.

      It is well documented (citation needed) that TV manufacturers sell almost-but-not-quite identical TV models at Walmart. Quality is often cut, to some degree or another. Typically functionality, inputs, outputs, or some other such features are cut. The problem with this is, consumers do not know exactly what has been removed to get those prices down lower.

      Indeed it is public knowledge that large brand name manufacturers will, in many cases, have seperate factory runs with lower quality material for products to be sold at Walmart. The article Supply Chain Partnerships: How Levi's Got Its Jeans into Wal-Mart, while quite old, does an excellent job of describing both the good side of Walmart's drive for efficiency. (Unfortunatly I cannot find the news article that details the seperate factory runs that are done for Walmart)

      I am not saying there is going to always be a dramatic difference in quality. Of course sometimes there is a dramatic difference. A friend bought me a badminton set from Walmart and, well, to be blunt, the birdies didn't bounce. You'd hit them with the racket and they would just fall straight down to the ground, plop.

      Sure the badminton set was ~$5 to $10 cheaper than if it had been bought at a sports store, but its value as a badminton set was effectively $0. When I put the birdie from Walmart next to a proper badminton birdie the material used was quite obviously different, significantly so.

      Again, an extreme example, but one that demonstrates how saving $5 up front effectively negated the entire value of the purchase down the road (though in this case, "later on" was about as soon as the package was opened!)

      Levis laying in the corner still are in good shape

      You must not wear them very often. I haven't had a pair of Levi's last me more than 3 or 4 years! Then again I am the type who likes to walk through brush, black berry vines, and whatever else is in my way.

    26. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by davev2.0 · · Score: 1

      So what do you want Walmart to do?

      I want them stop trying to take over the world. I want them to pay a fair price for quality products. I want them to go back to what made them big in the U.S., their "Buy American" campaign.

      Layoff millions of Chinese/Maxican/Indian workers and ship the jobs back to the US or EU?

      Yes, that would be nice. Of course, that wouldn't be Walmarts doing, at least not most of it, because it is Walmart's suppliers who would do it. And, they could maintain some manufacturing jobs in other countries to serve the local markets.

      Do you not care about those workers left to starve?

      No, I don't care about them. I am too busy caring about myself, my family, my friends, and the people who are legally here in the United States. Why should I be more concerned with people in China, Mexico, or Indian than I am with people in the United States? I do not see people in China, Mexico, or India caring about us, do you?

    27. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by davev2.0 · · Score: 1

      Someone please explain to me how my comment is flamebait.

    28. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by bjs555 · · Score: 1

      Yes, I've had the same experience with other types of products. I have a feeling that a product's perceived quality is often a function of advertising.

    29. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      It IS available for most of us (us being people reading /.)

    30. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by commodore64_love · · Score: 0, Troll

      >>>>> Do you not care about those [laidoff Chinese/Maxican/Indian] workers left to starve?
      >>
      >>No,

      As I suspected. Typical anti-walmart kook (aka liberal aka democrat). You claim to despise how WM treats its employees, but then don't give a fuck about the thousands of workers that would be laid off when Walmart starts selling US-only goods again.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    31. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by Acer500 · · Score: 1

      It IS available for most of us (us being people reading /.)

      Hmm... I'd be willing to bet that half the readership is not physically in the U.S. (see for example the 4th of July poll - 55% voted it meant "nothing" or "something else")

      --
      There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
    32. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by davev2.0 · · Score: 1
      I see.

      First off, Walmart does not employ those "[Chinese/Mexican/Indian] workers". Other companies do. That you do not recognize that tells volumes about how well you understand what you are talking about.

      I care about how Walmart treats Americans and America. Mexicans can worry about Mexico and themselves; the Chinese, China and the Chinese, etc.

      I guess you care more about the people in other countries than those in your own.

      If you care more about "[laidoff Chinese/Maxican/Indian] workers" than you do Amercian workers, why don't you move to [China/Mexico/India]? And, why don't you care more about American workers?

      And, tell me, what is going to happen to those "[Chinese/Mexican/Indian] workers" when Americans can no longer buy the things they produce because Americans and America are too far in debt to pay for them? You do understand that eventually, China is going to stop buying American debt and when that happens, interest rates will rise, and inflation will skyrocket, and the value of the dollar is going to fall faster than you can imagine, right? Can you imagine 500% inflation? How about 100% inflation per day? That is the kind of thing that is happening in Zimbabwe and it is what will happen here in the U.S. when China stops buying American debt.

      Oh, and it is MEXICAN not MAXICAN.

      Finally, I am not a "liberal aka democrat". I am a socially moderate, fiscally conservative Republican. I believe that the Federal government has over-stepped its bounds as defined by the Constitution. I also believe the Constitution is a living document and should be modified to catch up with the times, or possibly even rewritten entirely. And, don't get me started on the Federal Reserve and fiat currency.

    33. Re:Guess Wal-mart's not so bad after all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      but then don't give a fuck about the thousands of workers that would be laid off

      Typical pro-walmart kook. "If walmart doesn't hire them for their sweatshops at 10 cents a day, whatever will become of them?" Bullshit, you don't give a fuck about the workers, you just want your cheap slave-produced (yes, they're slaves, more on this later) goods. What will become of them? I'll tell you exactly what will become of them. They'll probably end up starving to death trying to meek out an even more pitiful existence. And I'm ok with that, because that blood's on your hands, not mine. You wanna know why? It's because of you pushing your invisible skydaddy belief of "OMG SUICIDE IS WRONG AND YOU'LL BURN IN HELL FOR IT".

      I know it may sound harsh, but sometimes suicide is acceptable. By telling people that they should cling to life at all costs, and then providing them with a 10 cent a day sweatshop as the only "valid" alternative to trying to meek out a pathetic life off the land, you are essentially condemning them to slavery.

      BTW, if you don't believe in an invisible skydaddy, then you have no reason to oppose suicide under such conditions. However, since you do not appear to acknowledge suicide as an option, clearly you still cling to such fairytales.

  10. Any worth it? by twoallbeefpatties · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Out of curiosity, has anyone ever come across a MTurk assignment that does pay enough money to be worth the time?

    --
    Libertarians somehow believe that private businesses should be stronger than governments but weaker than individuals.
    1. Re:Any worth it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better yet, can any of these be performed by a shell script?

    2. Re:Any worth it? by WillDraven · · Score: 1

      No. Every once in a while you see ones for $1-2 per task, but then you realize each task is something along the lines of writing a 3 page research article.

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
    3. Re:Any worth it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe a month or two after it began they were offering around $0.03 to suggest website names for companies. All it required was a valid URL given a company name.

      I spent about five to six hours total (spread across three nights) doing it. I put "http://www." a ctrl-V away and went to work. Yes, I did suggest what I thought were good names for each company, but tried to do so as quickly as humanly possible. Net gain was around $350, available immediately in my Amazon account.

      Well worth the sore wrists (an underappreciated side effect, I'm sure) and missed TV shows.

    4. Re:Any worth it? by MozeeToby · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you have unique skills perhaps. You will somewhat often see "Translate this paragraph from English to Japanese" (or something similar) posted for $2-$5. Of course, if you actually had the knowledge to do that it would take all of 5 minutes to do it and then you'd be done. The demand just isn't that high.

    5. Re:Any worth it? by Just_Say_Duhhh · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Years ago, but not since. There used to be a lot of transcription work on MTurk. Once I had a good rating as someone who could transcribe a technical speech, there were jobs out there that were worth it to me... but only if I was already interested in the subject matter (transcribing helps me really learn the material).

      Things like transcription and translation made MTurk worth it, but soon it devolved into $0.01 per task work, without sufficient volume to make it worth writing a script. I haven't checked for tasks in a long time.

      --
      I need trepanation like I need a hole in the head.
    6. Re:Any worth it? by schwnj · · Score: 1

      I've paid ~$2.00 for a 10-15 minute task, but it was the type of task you could only perform once. I figured that a $10/hr rate would be the least I could morally pay.

    7. Re:Any worth it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Occasionally you'll see batches of easy, high-paying HITs - usually if the work is time-critical.

      ("High-paying" meaning slightly less than California minimum wage...)

    8. Re:Any worth it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A while back there were better article-writing offers - about a penny-a-word, and they were pretty frequent. $4 for a 400 word article - I could write a few of them a day in my spare time. I did it for a few months, and made a few hundred dollars. But those offers seemed to dry up and there wasn't anything else that seemed worthwhile.

    9. Re:Any worth it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Out of curiosity, has anyone ever come across a MTurk assignment that does pay enough money to be worth the time?

      I once came across a $4.00 assignment to research a person on the internet. I found a lot of negatives of the person who seem to be starting some start up business in the area of energy. He was like a con-artist in my opinion. I basically said that and more. It turned out the Requester was the person himself. I suspect he was thinking about changing his real name if there was too many negative press about him.

    10. Re:Any worth it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends on the person.

      At my best, I was making anywhere from $6-8 per hour. This was the transcribing jobs which require you to take tests and have a minimum level of previously passed jobs to get up to the better paying ones. Some of them had normal pay rates of $1 with a bonus of $2 if you were highly accurate.

      Depending on the content, a 3-5 minute clip could take me about 30 minutes. At worst, 45 minutes.

      Really, what I do nowadays is just log on, look for surveys that pay in the 80 cents to $2 range that seem fairly legit and just do those. It's maybe 5-10 minutes of survey time and, in exchange, I get a few bucks to buy things online *eventually*. Not like I'm doing much with that time anyhow.

  11. Just say no ... by johnlcallaway · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I did some work on Mechanical Turk when it first came out. It was kind of fun at first, so I didn't mind the low rates. But when the rates started dropping further and the work wasn't as interesting, I stopped and haven't been back.

    Simple supply and demand ... they have a low demand and their appears to be a sufficient supply of people willing to work for less than a buck an hour. Anyone with basic math skills can calculate the hourly rate and decide if there is anything else they want to do that is worth more to them than that.

    I'm sure there are many who have either not calculated it, or don't know how. But after working for a few nights and only getting $5, I would think that the only people left that are doing it derive something out of it. Even if it's just an extra $5.

    --
    I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
    1. Re:Just say no ... by sjames · · Score: 1

      You couldn't likely do it unless you don't live in the U.S. the rates they pay aren't enough to manage food, clothing., shelter, and a computer, electricity, and an internet connection even if you work 20+ hour days.

      You could make more money in less time going door to door offering to sweep driveways and mow lawns.

  12. Bug-finding bounties, really? by loshwomp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why did they have to drag $500 bug-finding bounties into this? Quoth TFA:

    it's a small fraction of what the company would have to pay a full-time professional.

    It's a REWARD, not an offer of employment. There is a "missing cat" poster on my block, but (applying the logic of TFA's author) I would have to be CRAZY to bother searching for it, because the reward is only $25 -- a small fraction of what it would cost for a full time cat searcher. I could never make a living searching for lost cats!

    1. Re:Bug-finding bounties, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Everyone knows it's much less work to kidnap cats systematically than searching for cats at random when the opportunity comes.

    2. Re:Bug-finding bounties, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to be flip because of the general sick plausibility of that concept, but you shouldn't have let the cat out of the bag. The idea, that is.

    3. Re:Bug-finding bounties, really? by Phairdon · · Score: 1

      I could never make a living searching for lost cats!

      I beg to differ. Apparently you have never heard of Ace Ventura: Pet Detective? Munch on that.

    4. Re:Bug-finding bounties, really? by dziban303 · · Score: 1

      Are you crazy? I could make a killing finding lost cats.

      Step 1: Kidnap cats. Catnap cats. Whatever.

      Step 2: Wait for "Lost Cat" posters to go up.

      Step 3: Profit!

  13. It's not for you by selven · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously, if you're in a first world country you can, even without any skills, get $5-$20 an hour, and if there are no jobs open then you can earn $1-$3 an hour panhandling. People in countries like China and India, however, earn wages much lower than our own - the average seems to be $0.50 - $1 US per hour in the manufacturing sector, with some jobs going even lower than $0.50. With this in mind, it seems like $0.60 an hour really isn't so bad.

    1. Re:It's not for you by Acer500 · · Score: 1

      Not to mention it's "extra" income (on top of whatever salary they have), and probably untaxed.

      --
      There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
    2. Re:It's not for you by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      Yes but it's a highly irregular paycheck and you aren't necessarily guaranteed a steady rate of .60/hour. Adding in to the fact that in some cases for these services you have to accumulate 50-100 bucks in order for them to cut the check (plus who knows how ungodly long to get the check) the worker isn't really winning in this deal.

    3. Re:It's not for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you get anything over $8.55/hr in a first world country without any skills? I've never seen anything like that. The $20/hr jobs are all for guys who have been working in the trades for years and are journeymen or masters. Most young people would kill each other for a job that pays $10.00/hr.

      Statements like that make me think you don't know what the hell you're talking about, or that you haven't actually tried getting a job before.

    4. Re:It's not for you by kyrio · · Score: 1

      I don't know where you got your $1-$3/h for panhandling. Beggars make $50 a day from less than 6 hours of "work", depending on how good they are. Alcohol and drugs cost a lot of money if they aren't buying new cars like the Shaky Lady.
      I know of a few who go into some shops daily to convert their change into bills. I've never seen anyone come in with less than $40 by the early afternoon.

    5. Re:It's not for you by kyrio · · Score: 1

      It's fairly easy to get a job for over $10/h without any skills if you look in the right fields. Marketing, customer service and management, to name a few.

    6. Re:It's not for you by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      How do you get anything over $8.55/hr in a first world country without any skills?

      The local supermarkets have been advertising shelf-stacking jobs for over $10 an hour. That doesn't take much in the way of skills.

    7. Re:It's not for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > with some jobs going even lower than $0.50. With this in mind, it seems like $0.60 an hour really isn't so bad

      subtract the cost of internet connection, power, cost of PC, even in the third world

    8. Re:It's not for you by selven · · Score: 1

      "Panhandlers in Toronto reported a median monthly income of $300 from panhandling..." (source)

      300 / 30 days per month / 8 hours per day = $1.25 per hour

      So I think $1-$3 is a reasonable range. I'm sure skilled panhandlers can get more, but most of the people on the streets aren't exactly skilled in anything.

    9. Re:It's not for you by selven · · Score: 1

      I've seen "no prior experience required" security guard positions offering more than $15/h.

    10. Re:It's not for you by owski · · Score: 1

      You're assuming that panhandlers work 7 days per week, 8 hours per day. Probably not a good assumption.

    11. Re:It's not for you by Demonantis · · Score: 1

      Ontario's minimum wage is about 10.50 for adults without tips, but it just changed to that this year.

    12. Re:It's not for you by Local+ID10T · · Score: 4, Informative

      I've seen "no prior experience required" security guard positions offering more than $15/h.

      I've worked those jobs. When I was in college I thought it sounded like a great idea...

      The pay rate advertised is only after your 6 month "training period" is completed -you make about half during training. In order to get the job you must complete a (short) class and get a "guard card" issued by the state -the costs of the class and state fees are deducted from your paycheck. You must also purchase a uniform -which is also deducted from your paycheck. Oh, and the $15 an hour job is for armed guard, which requires another (longer) class (deducted from your paycheck), and another state permit (fees deducted from your check), and a gun (also deducted from your check). If you don't go for the armed job, the pay rate is around $10 per hour.

      With all the deductions and the lowered pay rate during "training" I owed my employer money for several months. Still, it wasn't the worst job -once you got past the idea that I was being paid to stand around (typically overnight at construction sites) with a target on my chest in a situation where it was expected I might need a gun to defend myself...

      --
      "You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin
    13. Re:It's not for you by sjames · · Score: 1

      It's amazing! They actually pay worse than 3rd world rates!

    14. Re:It's not for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >People in countries like China and India, however, earn wages much lower than our own - the average
      >seems to be $0.50 - $1 US per hour
      Just out of curiousity, what does it cost for substistance living in these countries you mentioned (china/india)? No trying to troll, just curious. Citations would be nice.

      >Seriously, if you're in a first world country you can, even without any skills, get $5-$20 an hour..
      Where are these jobs that pay $20/hr without skills? California? New York? Back in the early 90's (yeah a long time ago) I remember reading in the newspaper that McDonald's was paying it's workers in California $10/hr because the labor market demanded it. Today, I don't see McD's offering $20/hr. But I DO see posting for Technicians (2 yr AA degree with 1 yr experience) at $15/Hr.

      I know that when I got out of college back in the mid 80's, hi-tech companies were offering $40k/yr to locate in Silicon Valley. It seemed a lot until I realized that I'd have to get some room mates just to find a place to live.

      I'm just trying to show that the numbers that you quote for US workers seem good until you look at relative costs of living. Conversely, the rate workers are paid in India/China seem low compared to US wages, but my experience overseas (Malaysia, 1990's) tells me it costs a lost less to live there, so they get paid less compared to us.

      My 2 cents.

    15. Re:It's not for you by Triv · · Score: 1

      Most panhandlers, those who value their time (doesn't everybody?) ask for money at big traffic times on busy street-corners - morning rush hour, lunch, evening rush, happy hour and, if they're particularly industrious, after the bars close. Many panhandlers also dress down for the part, live in relative comfort in shelters, eat regularly and can clear a couple hundred bucks for 2 hours of work in the right spot, on the right day, with the right spiel, in the right clothes - it's in their best interests to downplay how much they make in a day when people ask

      Which isn't to say that others aren't mentally ill, sleeping on subway steam vents under newspapers and spending their days yelling at clouds; there are levels to the thing.

      Read "Sidewalk" by Mitch Dunnier sometime. It's a great sociological look into the lives of street people.

  14. Deplorable, noneconomic muckraking... by Apocryphon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Doubtless any article insinuating a similarity (I'm being friendly - the article asserts an equality) between voluntary acts and "sweatshops" goes -way- beyond hyperbole into the realm of the absurd, and in so doing not only makes a fool out of itself and in so doing tarnishes its publisher's reputation, but, worse, makes light of that to which the term "sweatshop" properly refers.

    Are there possibilities for "abuse" within the systems TFA looks at? Sure... The "veteran journalist," e.g., who wrote a requested review, was summarily rejected, and found recourse only in the appeals process to claim his pittance speaks to that aptly (perhaps - more on said veteran later). Needless to say, most rejected would neither suffer the review process nor even consider availing themselves of it in the first place, giving the "employers" free reign to screw the "worker" whenever they'd like. (Possible case-in-point: assume aforementioned review-seeker rejected journalist's article, changed a few words, and just to CYA, resubmitted the "improved" version under a ghost account, which, voila, was accepted. Any system which creates the possibility for such self-dealing, particularly on behalf of only one party, is prima facie dubious).

    But sweatshop? Please.

    The PC industry has plenty of REAL sweatshops and REAL situations of compulsory labor under unsafe conditions. Let's not let this drivel dilute that fact in our minds.

    Had the article _at least_ referred to "transactional spillovers" aka positive externalities, some actual understanding of the parties' motives might have been broached.

    The folks utilizing these services might just as well be playing WoW but for pennies instead of status or gold, and at lesser cost to them, to boot. Perhaps it's their distraction. Perhaps the users submit work to projects they find interesting; perhaps they believe there's status in doing so; perhaps it's simply fun. Again, I don't pretend to know.

    I don't know the "workers'" motivations, nor do I care to.

    All I know is that they're free to leave at any time they want.

    And that's a critical distinction seemingly lost on said "reputable journalist..." Perhaps the contractor wasn't wrong in rejecting his first submission after all.

    1. Re:Deplorable, noneconomic muckraking... by sjames · · Score: 1

      Most sweatshops are "voluntary". That is, you are perfectly free to starve to death in the street rather than work there if you wish.

      Even the sweatshops with chains leave you perfectly free to slash your jugular open with a sewing needle if you don't want to work there.

      Since most people don't consider those to be reasonable choices, they prefer a bit of social engineering to give people more humane options and to prevent the well off from preying on people who really are stuck financially.

    2. Re:Deplorable, noneconomic muckraking... by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 1

      It's not voluntary unless your freedom and property rights are respected. If you're prohibited from competing, or from moving to another area, or are threatened with assault or loss of property for refusing to work, then the work is not voluntary. Most sweatshops deserving of the name fall into this category.

      On the other hand, if it's a simple matter of there being no other employers close by, with no coercion involved, then the work is voluntary and prohibiting it can only make those who choose such employment worse off. If you don't consider that a reasonable choice, feel free to offer something better out of your own resources.

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
    3. Re:Deplorable, noneconomic muckraking... by sjames · · Score: 1

      Things get a bit more complicated than that. What if the very slave driving employer is the one who lobbied against the public transportation that would have let people leave? Or the one that consistently pays crooked politicians under the table to prevent social programs that would improve the worker's education and other job prospects?

      Or such an employer finds a group of unfortunates and exploits them mercilessly so he can drive better employers elsewhere out of business, thus creating a new pool of unfortunates to exploit mercilessly?

      Here's a really subtle gray area: In a civilized world the exploited would chop off his head and run the factory to their own benefit. Death may seem extreme, but this is someone who oppressed a whole village or town for generations on end. Possibly someone who CREATED the misfortunes he then capitalized on. The only reason this doesn't happen is that the employer has the coercive force of the police behind him (after all, he's the only one who has any money to pay taxes with).

      While I know very well you're not a slaver, your arguments are (however accidentally) the same as the slaver who claimed off the black people were better off with their slavery. There may have even been cases where it was true (perhaps it's better to be a slave than to be executed by a rival tribe), but over all , slavery doesn't pass muster morally. Making someone slightly better off does not always equate with being a benefactor.

      If an employer genuinely needs work done, prohibiting exploitative work conditions will result in non-exploitative employment being offered instead.

    4. Re:Deplorable, noneconomic muckraking... by Apocryphon · · Score: 1

      It's not voluntary unless your freedom and property rights are respected. If you're prohibited from competing, or from moving to another area, or are threatened with assault or loss of property for refusing to work, then the work is not voluntary. Most sweatshops deserving of the name fall into this category.

      I am prone to agree with Mr. McDonald, sjames, and while no one has the statistics to arbitrate your claim of "most," I must admit that you lost me somewhere in, "Since most people don't consider those to be reasonable choices, they prefer a bit of social engineering to give people more humane options and to prevent the well off from preying on people who really are stuck financially," as I really couldn't tell whether "most people," "they," "people," referred to the same group or to competing interests.

      I'm also not certain what your point is. To the extent that you have a claim that individuals are "free to kill themselves" should they find themselves in chains, I am not one to disagree, but I'm not one to engage in careless acts of reductio, either.

      Perhaps I should have been clearer about my main point, that of the existence of _positive externalities_ in the ::ahem:: "virtual sweatshop" realm.

      Just as I can, as a rational economic actor, go to the casino to pull slots for a couple hours should I deem the pleasures of the experience to outweigh the -EV of the endeavor, I can conceive of MANY possible transactional spillovers benefiting the end-users of the programs listed.

      Certainly you're not suggesting that _real_ sweatshops engender analogous positive externalities to their workers, are you, sjames?

  15. YouGov by Dynamoo · · Score: 1
    YouGov isn't so bad, and it's mostly a lot more interesting than Mechanical Turk, but it can take LONG time to get your £50 (although I *have* been paid).. partly because there are so many "prize draw" surveys that they do (of course, if I'd actually won a prize draw I wouldn't be complaining!)

    Google Answers was a lot more interesting when it came to it.. there were potentially some decent rewards if you did the work, but it went the way of a lot of Google products (i.e. canned). But then I suppose you could always use a Freelance site for more involved works and better pay..

    --
    Never email donotemail@WeAreSpammers.com
  16. "Sweatshop"? Seriously? by Sockatume · · Score: 1

    I think the mass exploitation of impoverished workers for manual labour to produce consumer goods is a bit far from a scheme that lets net-connected Westerners with a lot of free time elect to earn a few cents for clicking around some web sites. It barely even compares to a gold far, for christ's sake.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  17. Go be nice to the Turkers by bbtom · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have used Mechanical Turk once: during my undergraduate studies, I wanted people to test out a survey for a psychology of religion class. I put it up on MTurk for $0.75 each. I got really great results, but the best bit was some of the responses in the "any other comments" field I included at the end. People saying things like "this was really interesting and has made me really think".

    I am really not sure about it. It really is a stark contrast to some of the Web 2.0 love-in mentality: for all the high minded discussion of community and openness, you dig down and there is this small army of people being paid sub-sweatshop wages to keep it all going.

    The Turkers are doing a really good job in shit circumstances with really shitty pay. Go be nice to them if you can. Give them something interesting to do and pay them a bit more than the standard shit rates they get.

    --
    catch (HumourFailureException e) { e.user.send("You, sir, are a humourless idiot."); }
  18. MTurk by RWarrior(fobw) · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you pick your jobs right, you could make as much as $3/hr on Mechanical Turk. I know because at one point it was the only income I had.

    --
    Remove the caps and hold to a mirror.
  19. I've got news for you... by Acer500 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've got news for you... I have a degree in Information Systems, and I work for 3 pounds sterling an hour (of course my employer gets a discount rate since I work for them 200 hours a month guaranteed, and it's after-taxes money - Government gets 40% of what I make before taxes since I'm obviously "rich").

    You think filling out YouGov forms or whatever (hadn't heard of them before) for that same amount of money isn't a good deal?

    I live in Montevideo, Uruguay, and yes, I believe I will eventually make better money, but over half the programmers here make less than that.

    --
    There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
    1. Re:I've got news for you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dunno what can you buy for £3 in Uruguay?

      Here in the UK that's about the price of 3 loafs of bread or 10 cigarettes or 2 local bus tickets or 3 cans of beer from a supermarket.

    2. Re:I've got news for you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and (what was not said) your standard of living is very likely no where near what others in Europe or the US enjoy, either. For instance, what do you pay for living quarters per month? for food? Transportation?
      This looks like an apples-to-oranges comparison, if you'll pardon me.

    3. Re:I've got news for you... by dsavage · · Score: 1

      I think that Acer is reiterating what is said in the article, not doing an apples to oranges comparison.

      Due to his lower cost of living, and the ability to do the work equally well, it's driving down the cost for that labor to be done.

      (From the article - The intense global competition for work means wages are driven so low that people labour for hours on repetitive, menial tasks, turning employment opportunities into online sweat shops.)

      This isn't a new idea... I'm kind of surprized that there was a recent article about it. (I mean Freidman talked about it back around 2004-2005 in his book "The World is Flat.")

      Anywho, that's just my $.02
      -D

    4. Re:I've got news for you... by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Here's an idea:

      Stop accepting what they offer, and demand more.

    5. Re:I've got news for you... by Acer500 · · Score: 1

      what can you buy for £3 in Uruguay?

      Let's see - assuming 3 pounds is roughly 100 Uruguayan Pesos:

      * 10 loaves of bread
      * 50 cigarettes (2 packs and a half)
      * 6 bus tickets and change
      More interestingly:
      * A kilo of nice, prime quality beef
      * 6 liters of milk
      * Dinner for two (cheap) or a good meal for one, dining out
      * An hour of cleaning lady
      * Two shifts of laundry at a laundromat (with service, not self-service)

      The government index for basic food for a family for a month is set at 72 pounds ( http://www.dgc-mef.gub.uy/consultas/almacen/canastas/mensual/ ), so 24 hours of hypothetical work could feed a family for a month.
      I pay U$ 200 for rent (16 square meters apartment), average is about U$ 400 - but they don't include all the amenities included in an US rent.

      Anything electronics or luxury imports are HEAVILY taxed, we probably have the most expensive cars in the world, and stuff like consoles cost 300% of US price, etc.

      You can check the prices on an expensive supermarket with an online webpage, Tienda Inglesa: http://www.tinglesa.com.uy/frames.asp

      --
      There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
    6. Re:I've got news for you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Across the river, in Argentina, I'm making 5 pounds, about 8 USD, after taxes too. I'm underpaid too, as there is a higher salary in most other companies.

    7. Re:I've got news for you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, if you and your friends are only earning $5US/hour where you are but you have serious computer skills AND good English, look at doing online consulting. There is a glut of people out there with computer skills and poor English, but if you have good skills and good English you could enjoy a nice pay grade upgrade. I realize you're working 50 hour weeks right now, but I think it would be worth devoting some weekends to, to try it out.

      Until recently, a significant portion of my income came from services such as Elance. If you have real programming skills (you don't need to be a rockstar) and your English is good (judging from your post, it's quite good), I would recommend checking it out. There are a lot of people there offering their services for $5-10 an hour, but for the most part their English is poor. I generally bid on projects for $25/hour and win them I think primarily because my English is better than "I am to be bidding on your project". Now, I'm also from North America and this will demand a bit of an increase in employer's eyes because I'm "not foreign", but if you're well spoken you should be able to bid $15-20/hour pretty easily I think. Now, that's a slightly deceptive number because there's overhead (finding the job, and winning the bids) that isn't really counted, but if you're currently being paid $5/hour I think you'd find it a pleasant increase in pay.

      If you go check it out, just remember to demonstrate that you understand their project by telling them how you will approach solving it and what you would need from them to complete the project. Make sure all your correspondence with them is well throught out, and in well formed English.

    8. Re:I've got news for you... by Acer500 · · Score: 1

      Stop accepting what they offer, and demand more.

      When there's more than half the programming workforce making less than I do? Not a good idea.

      I plan on starting my own company and selling stuff to the U.S. and Europe (seriously :) ), and employing people for 3 pounds sterling :P

      --
      There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
    9. Re:I've got news for you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when is the currency of Uruguay quoted in "pounds sterling"? I don't even know that the general population of the Commonwealth uses that term anymore.

    10. Re:I've got news for you... by Acer500 · · Score: 1

      Thank you for your suggestion.

      I'm seriously contemplating taking that plunge, I've been afraid to leave the safety net of the easy 8 to 6 job, though

      Uruguay has laws that promote staying in a steady job - if I got fired, I'd get 3 months's salary as compensation plus 6 months of unemployment benefits, against being in the local IRS equivalent's target if you freelance online.

      Still, I do believe I'd make way more on Elance or similar. Thanks again, I just have to gather the nerve (and some small savings).

      --
      There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
    11. Re:I've got news for you... by Acer500 · · Score: 1

      Across the river, in Argentina, I'm making 5 pounds, about 8 USD, after taxes too. I'm underpaid too, as there is a higher salary in most other companies.

      Yes, Argentina has higher salaries for IT, I'd heard that. And Chile, even better.

      --
      There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
  20. So what? by bradley13 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The article implies that the low payscale is somehow a problem. But no one is forcing you to do the work - it's your choice. If Amazon had to pay more, the consequence is obvious: the work would just disappear.

    This is the fallacy of minimum wage laws: low value work is either not offered, is off-shored, or disappears into the black market.

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
    1. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fine. Then go to your boss and ask that your pay get changed to only 2 dollars an hour.

    2. Re:So what? by Radtoo · · Score: 1

      The same argument could and was made for keeping slavery legal, but it was simply not true. Giving people some noticeable part of the profits some work creates is not a problem for anyone but for slavers.

      No reason to be scared by off-shoring and the like. Off-shoring is not that practical and not well-tolerated by society - with the additional logistics and other practicality concerns that usually really spoils the equation vs paying minimum wages. It is not like a supermarket or burger stand over in China will do you much good. But of course, to keep the playing field level domestically, one must actively combat black market employers (and only employers). Not that it takes much effort... if theoretically exploited employees have the power to immediately bring their employer down by law, employers definitely will not be able to exploit them badly.

    3. Re:So what? by evilviper · · Score: 1

      This is the fallacy of minimum wage laws: low value work is either not offered, is off-shored, or disappears into the black market.

      No, actually what happens is, when it's no longer economical to pay someone to perform a task, the task is either partially or fully automated, to the point that fewer people can do the work, and the employer can afford to pay a decent wage for the job.

      Eliminating the minimum wage would eliminate the motivation to increase automation, and improve salaries and working conditions.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  21. Re:This is why "popularity" contests can be cheate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...so easily. "Vote for my video to win me $5000" "Hmm, pay $100 to mechanical turk slaves, and I get a huge number of votes for a lead"

    I was going to mod you insightful ... but then I decided you weren't paying me enough.

  22. 3 Pounds per hour? by war4peace · · Score: 2, Interesting

    One thing I don't understand. TFA says "Meanwhile, filling out surveys for YouGov generates a maximum income of £3 an hour, and you could end up waiting more than a year for your cheque to arrive, because the site only pays out when you reach £50."
    50/3 is roughly 17 hours of work. If you're not lazy, you can achieve that in 2 days. Funny thing is: I work in IT, for a very large and known corporation, and I make just under 3 pounds/h.
    Unless something is very broken in TFA, then I might be able to earn slightly more from YouGov than my oh-so-mighty corporation.

    --
    ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    1. Re:3 Pounds per hour? by ceejayoz · · Score: 3, Informative

      Funny thing is: I work in IT, for a very large and known corporation, and I make just under 3 pounds/h.

      Time to sue, then. http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/nmw/

      Also, you ignored the part in the story where YouGov doles out surveys very slowly. Yes, you could make £3 an hour - if they gave you enough work.

    2. Re:3 Pounds per hour? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      But you only get surveys when they give them to you, not when you want them. This is where the year comes in. RTFA (carefully)

    3. Re:3 Pounds per hour? by ledow · · Score: 1

      Er... yeah, seriously... you're being taken for a ride. Minimum wage is nearly double that and a legal requirement. I assume you're either a) lying, or b) taking into account your net profit after tax, which is something else entirely. Either that, or c) working in "IT" for less than you can get at McDonald's, sweeping the streets, giving out leaflets or licking envelopes. If you are genuinely working for a large and well known corporation, time to name and shame them.

    4. Re:3 Pounds per hour? by Thelasko · · Score: 1
      Unfortunately, the summary leaves out some key details. If you RTFA, it says:

      An even bigger problem for would-be earners is that you have to wait to be selected for surveys in order to participate. Having signed up five days ago and received 100 points for a profile survey, we've been waiting for a chance to bag another 50p, but have yet to be selected for duty. At this rate it will take more than a year to build up enough points to trouble YouGov's cheque writers.

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    5. Re:3 Pounds per hour? by owski · · Score: 1

      or d) not in the country you assume.

    6. Re:3 Pounds per hour? by Acer500 · · Score: 1

      Er... yeah, seriously... you're being taken for a ride. Minimum wage is nearly double that and a legal requirement...(snip) If you are genuinely working for a large and well known corporation, time to name and shame them.

      He's in Romania, similar situation to mine I guess. Here in Uruguay, all the major corps (and McDonalds of course) pay way less than 3 pounds sterling per hour. McDonalds in particular pays about 80 pounds a month.

      --
      There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
    7. Re:3 Pounds per hour? by war4peace · · Score: 1

      I read it, but didn't quite get it. I was under the impression they put you in a queue waiting for approvals to start your work.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    8. Re:3 Pounds per hour? by war4peace · · Score: 1

      ...or d) living in a different country. Romania, in my case. You know, "/." is not limited to US, UK and Australia, fact that is very easy to overlook given the vast majority of news are coming from these three countries :)

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    9. Re:3 Pounds per hour? by caseih · · Score: 1

      What makes you think the poster is subject to British laws? I got the impression that he, like the other poster, worked in a country other than the US, Britain, or EU.

    10. Re:3 Pounds per hour? by soliptic · · Score: 1
      Well,

      YouGov's methodology is to obtain responses from an invited group of Internet users, and then to filter these responses in line with demographic information. It draws these demographically-representative samples from a panel of about 250,000 people in the UK

      if he is in the UK, GP is right about NMW. If he isn't, he couldn't earn from YouGov anyway.

  23. Who decides what's fair? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From http://tjic.com/?p=14713 :

    Chinese factory conditions

    Say that we had first contact with some super (economically) advanced aliens.

    and pretty soon they set up factories here.

    and I was offered a job in one of these factories, doing software engineering.

    The pay is $400k/year.

    The work week is 20 hours long.

    The work environment is far better than I’m used to – great internal decoration, well tended plants, a zen-like water garden near my desk, massages every other day.

    and then left-wing alien “sentient being rights activists” started protesting, because I was being forced to work for less than a quarter of the prevailing wage in Alpha Centauri, and my work hours were twice as long as the legal norms in Alpha Centauri, and I didn’t have every mandatory benefits like “other other year off”, and “free AI musical composition mentoring”.

    and then left-wing alien “sentient being rights activists” wanted to make it illegal for my employer and I to contract with each other at mutually beneficial terms.

    then I would be rip shit that some elitist who had never visited me, or knew of my actual alternatives on the ground presumed to decide that I shouldn’t have this opportunity.

    Which brings me to my core point: Chinese factory conditions may not be the exact cup of tea for a San Francisco graphic designer or a Connecticut non-profit ecologist grant writer but they’re, by definition, better than all the other alternatives available to the Chinese workers (or the factories would find it impossible to staff up).

    Butt out, clueless activists.

    1. Re:Who decides what's fair? by blair1q · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Translation: because a sweatshop is better than living in a ditch, it's okay to run sweatshops.

      There's your moral relativist anti-humanist rant in a nutshell.

      Clue to right-wing suckers: money is not life.

    2. Re:Who decides what's fair? by wbackner · · Score: 1

      clicked wrong mod so have to undo.

    3. Re:Who decides what's fair? by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Translation: because a sweatshop is better than living in a ditch, it's okay to run sweatshops.

      In short, yes. If you've got a problem with that, offer something better. Agitating for the so-called sweatshops to be closed without replacing them with better labor conditions can only result in driving the sweatshop's former employees back to "living in a ditch", or whatever they were actually doing before they decided to go work for the sweatshop. Do you think they would be working there if there was already better work available? You are not helping them at all by arguing for the prohibition of the best offer of employment they have.

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
    4. Re:Who decides what's fair? by dcollins · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Do you think they would be working there if there was already better work available?"

      Possibly not. The way in which supposed free-market magic breaks down generally involves either (a) force, or (b) unequal information. Therefore the answer will be "no" in cases where:

      (1) The employer has the employees in lock-down or forced labor situations.
      (2) The employer has the employees in ongoing debt due to company-store/lodging requirements (effectively same as above).
      (3) The employer can make threats or political pressure on the employee's family members.
      (3) The employer prevents the employees from finding out about better work, possibly by hiring illiterates, or prohibiting free speech (meetings, discussions, phone calls, informational pamphlets, etc.)

      In these cases, you need some kind of outside legal regulation body to put an end to human-rights abuses of this sort. (Or else violent overthrow from within, generally a much less desirable outcome with much lower odds of success.)

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    5. Re:Who decides what's fair? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The gist of this quote is that an employer need only pay the smallest increment higher than other alternatives available to be hailed as a benefactor. Bull Companies should not be allowed to exploit workers just because they are exploiting them less than they otherwise would be.

      If you provide a job that is slightly less shitty than nothing, you are still nothing more than a provider of shitty jobs.

    6. Re:Who decides what's fair? by theNAM666 · · Score: 1

      Useless example. Mechanical Turk has essentially no market because it doesn't work. Almost no one is making money; it's just clueless employers listing ridiculous tasks, such as the hotel database, because they don't know how to accomplish them otherwise (in a reasonable fashion). There are a few legitimate tasks that may "make a market," such as translation/transcription-- otherwise, the vast majority seem fraudulent (go sign up for this website at $15/mo and we'll pay you $8/mo-- you never get paid the $8-- the website won't let you cancel; stuffing webforms and recommendation sites; etc).

      In short, MT has tended to be a cesspool, because it's poorly conceived and largely unmonitored and unmanaged.

    7. Re:Who decides what's fair? by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Pretty simple really.

      Re-price everything in China to what it is in America.

      I.e., force them to float their currency.

      Once it costs the same to produce these things there as it does here, the work will balance out.

    8. Re:Who decides what's fair? by rastoboy29 · · Score: 1

      Except that this is the fallacy of endless extrapolation.

      There is no way that working in a Chinese factory assembling the same monotonous parts all day is actually a job that is worth a damn.

    9. Re:Who decides what's fair? by mesterha · · Score: 1

      Also, I'm not sure we want labor controlled by the free-market. There is no magic reason that the free market will pay people a decent wage. It's easy to envision a future where industry does not profit by paying a decent wage for most labor. Real capitalism comes from being an owner, and in such a future only the owners would survive with the existing free market labor model.

      --

      Chris Mesterharm
  24. Well... to be fair... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    You won't be making any actual money in Montevideo from mTurk either.

    Money is paid to USA and Indian workers only. Everyone else gets to use their earnings as gift certificates at amazon.com.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    1. Re:Well... to be fair... by Acer500 · · Score: 1

      Money is paid to USA and Indian workers only. Everyone else gets to use their earnings as gift certificates at amazon.com.

      Didn't know about that, how annoying - but it's standard to have problems collecting over here - Paypal doesn't have bank accounts here either IIRC.

      It adds one more step: buy something at Amazon, smuggle it in here and then sell it at a huge profit, as taxes here are outrageous - a Kindle can be easily sold for U$ 300 or more - the Sony reader sells for U$ 600 at a shopping center. Even better, books and CDs can be imported legitimately so it wouldn't be smuggling (you have to pay the heavy shipping costs though).

      In all, if you're materialistic and US-centric (like I am) it sucks a bit to live in Uruguay (too bad the US is currently so harsh on immigrants, not to mention emigrating is hard - leaving family and friends behind and all that)

      --
      There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
    2. Re:Well... to be fair... by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Why smuggle it?
      Just resell to someone in the USA and have it shipped to that person. It never has to leave the USA. This would save you much on shipping costs and let you make more money.

  25. txteagle alternative by bwhaley · · Score: 2, Informative

    I learned about the txteagle service this weekend at a TEDx event. txteagle crowdsources services to mobile phone users in developing nations. While these small amounts not mean much to those of us in the US, for people in developing nations earning less than $5/day it can have a huge lifestyle impact.

    --
    "I either want less corruption, or more chance
    to participate in it." -- Ashleigh Brilliant
  26. Make it an MMO by Cruciform · · Score: 1

    People will happily pay 14 dollars a month to grind shit out in an MMO like WoW.
    This is just a grind where the player makes money instead of paying it out. Granted, it's a low amount but you're still coming out ahead.
    Find a way to attach XP and make a game out of it and suddenly the appear of MT goes back up again.

    1. Re:Make it an MMO by Cruciform · · Score: 1

      oops. appear/appeal.

      Forgive me typo Nazis, for I have failed the party.

  27. Except it's not for them either... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Unless they are from India.

    Only USA-ians and Indians (dots, not feathers) actually get paid. Everyone else gets amazon.com gift certificates.
    Meaning that they get paid in CDs/DVDs and books as amazon.com does not deliver most other items outside of USA.
    Intriguing option only if you have loads of free time, no credit card and possessing a thirst for cultural artifacts like books, movies and music.
    I.e. - if you are an underage second- or third-world kid.

    As a result from such paying practice most Indian workers on mTurk today are "employed" by sweatshops, churning out mostly worthless HITs.
    Many of them are probably just copy/paste or random-click scripts.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  28. Mechanical Turk, Low Wages, and the Market for Lem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Take a look at this (very related) post, which explains why the wages are low (spoiler: spammers)!

    Mechanical Turk, Low Wages, and the Market for Lemons
    http://behind-the-enemy-lines.blogspot.com/2010/07/mechanical-turk-low-wages-and-market.html

  29. $.60 is more than enough to cover electricity by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 1

    A computer takes 200W or so, that means it takes a kWh every 5 hours. A kWh costs about $0.15. So you're paying $0.02 - $0.03 in electricity per hour. Which means $0.60 is far more than enough to cover electricity.

    It's a terrible wage though.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    1. Re:$.60 is more than enough to cover electricity by The+Bean · · Score: 1

      Plus, that's only if you're actually paying for power.

      Not many in India do... http://www.travel-images.com/pht/india128.jpg

  30. Well the problem may be they don't understand by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    Perhaps they think it is a better deal than it is. Perhaps we need a law that says for all jobs, you have to specify what the equivalent hourly wage is based off of expected pay and work house and so on.

    Things like this are done with home loans for the very reason of banks trying to pass off complex loans with poor terms. As such there is a page that every loan doc has to have which specifies the amount, the interest rate, the terms, and so on. It all has to be spelled out in a specific format, so that you can easily compare loans and ensure you are actually getting the terms you think.

    This might be needed for jobs so that they can't couch it in bullshit. They have to evaluate how much it translates to in terms of hourly pay, and people can then decide if it is worth it to do. Perhaps when they look and realize a McDonalds job pays over 10x that they are being ripped off.

    1. Re:Well the problem may be they don't understand by demonlapin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Working one of these jobs for one hour would give you a very good idea of how much you could expect to earn, and it's not as though someone could even yell at you if you quit after fifteen minutes on the job. I fail to see how something with a maximum potential downside of "you just wasted an hour of your life" needs to be regulated.

  31. It's called a free market by thethibs · · Score: 1

    They know what the rates are, and they're happy to work at those rates. No one is being forced to do anything they don't want to do.

    Nothing else is relevant.

    --
    I'm a Programmer. That's one level above Software Engineer and one level below Engineer.
  32. that high I have seen min wage + bring you own gun by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

    that is high I have seen min wage + bring your own gun and that was just after some broke in and beat some one up.

  33. Re:This is why "popularity" contests can be cheate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No money is needed for this...someone else had it first. Remember?

  34. 3 Words "For The Win" by DalDei · · Score: 2, Informative

    Cory Doctorow's excellent book on exactly this topic (I just read it) as well as gold farming and various related practices. Wrapped in a great novel. http://craphound.com/ftw/ Available for free download or real money for paper. A definite "Must Read" for all /.ers

  35. Say Billy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have you ever been in a Turkish Prison?

  36. Right to Work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    You nailed it, in my state we have Right to Work laws. . .

    You have the Right to Work, as long as you show up and do a good job. If you fail, you get canned, no questions no answers. If you don't like the job your doing? You have the right to leave. Unhappy with the treatment you receive? You have the right to not subject yourself to it. Basically the employer has to tell you up front what the deal is, you as an adult free thinking human have the choice to do it or not. As long as the pay is above minimum wage (piece work for super low pay does not count here that goes with the do it or not thing) and the employer isn't telling you after you accept the job that you can't wear a bra to work or you have to stay late and 'walk his dog' then anything goes.

    And guess what? It works. Because of the laws I have actually gotten some side jobs that otherwise would have been illegal, and having not worked in 3 years side jobs are keeping the roof up.

    1. Re:Right to Work by DrgnDancer · · Score: 0, Troll

      It takes a special kind of... well, something, to think that "Right to Work" is good for anyone other than employers. As employer you gain the ability to fire anyone, at anytime, for any reason (up to an including not liking their new haircut or the color of their shirt today), as an employee you gain... the ability to not hand in two weeks notice before you quit? (and you should really do that anyway, to avoid getting a bad reference. It's one of the few things they can legally talk about). Thankfully I work at level now where hiring and firing are controlled by a process (most decent employers in right to work states bind themselves to reasonable hiring and firing procedures to make skilled workers feel reasonably safe about taking jobs with them), but I remember seeing people fired from restaurants and bars I used to work in for essentially nothing. And yes, I have seen the haircut thing really happen.

      --
      I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
    2. Re:Right to Work by colinnwn · · Score: 1

      As a person who works for a company where some workgroups are covered under the Railway Labor Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_Labor_Act (requiring union membership), operating out of a Right To Work state, and having both been a covered person, and now a non-covered person, I can tell you that I appreciate Right to Work laws http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-to-work_law.

      I think you misunderstand what they are. The simplest implementation says only that a trade union and an employer can not form an agreement that requires membership in that union as a conditional to employment. The issue of whether the state provides protection for non-contract employees to be fired only for cause, or entirely at management discretion (so long as that reason is not a protected status), is a separate subject.

      I do think that unions can have value, when both they, and management don't devolve into the all to frequent "wringing the sponge till it tears" negotiating mentality. Unions greatly simplify employment negotiations in work groups where all individuals perform largely the same task. They also provide those groups of workers more negotiating leverage than they'd otherwise have where their skills are so easily replaceable.

      But I work for a company that generally does the right thing for its employees. There were times when supervisors told me they'd like to recognize my work ethic (which was better than 90% of the people there), but they weren't able to give me an extra day off at short notice, or not record the fact I was 2 minutes late to work, or make me a temporary Supervisor, or whatever, because it was not congruent with the procedures negotiated with the union, and therefore would open management up to union grievances if they made an exception for me, but not for a bottom 10% performer.

      Basically unions can end up protecting the worst workers, while putting artificial pay/time off/workrule restrictions on the best performers. How long do you think those best performers hang around in your average union job. If I am any indication, it is less than 1 year.

    3. Re:Right to Work by DrgnDancer · · Score: 1

      Hmm. It seems I am confusing "Right to Work" laws with "At-will Employment" laws. The two are apparently often conflated in "Right-to-Work States" which I have spent most of my working life in. Mea Culpa and I have learned something new. I think the "Troll" moderation was a bit harsh though Mr. moderator person.

      --
      I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
    4. Re:Right to Work by HungryHobo · · Score: 1

      Where I live we have a much simpler and more effective way of limiting unions power and preventing that kind of shit.

      It is illegal to discriminate based on membership or non membership of a union.

      If a trade union and an employer formed an agreement that requires membership in that union as a conditional to employment then it would be as straightforward a discrimination case as if they had formed an agreement to not hire black people or not hire women.

      There's no need for shitting all over workers rights with "Right to Work" laws.

    5. Re:Right to Work by colinnwn · · Score: 1

      I think you missed my point. Right to Work laws often get confused with other related "pro-corporation anti-union" employment laws. A Right to Work law says most basically - you can't refuse to hire, or fire, someone because they aren't in, or won't join your union. So if you live in the USA, it sounds like your state has a "Right to Work" law.

      By the same token, if you are in the USA, and your position is covered under the Railway Labor Law Act, you don't have a choice no matter what your state says. You are required to join the union, or at least pay the union dues, even if you protest by requesting your name be withheld from the union rolls. Federal law almost always trumps state law, especially in "interstate commerce".

    6. Re:Right to Work by HungryHobo · · Score: 1

      No I'm not in the US.
      There's a difference, believe it or not, between "Right to Work" and real employee rights like protection of the right to join (or not join) a union.

      "A Right to Work law says most basically - you can't refuse to hire, or fire, someone because they aren't in, or won't join your union. "

      And if they try to set up a union their employeers don't like?

  37. 5 years late by doronbc · · Score: 1

    Wow, am I the only person who noticed this 5 years ago? TURK is barely meant to supplement your regular income, let alone be a source of stable of income. It's like collecting cans, you have to know that on a consumer level, it will never net you a sizable outcome.

    1. Re:5 years late by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      I think collecting cans will earn you more than Mturk.

  38. That's nothing. by blair1q · · Score: 4, Funny

    If reports are correct, millions of people are working second jobs tediously tending inedible crops for zero pay.

    http://www.farmville.com/

    I wonder what the minimum-wage law has to say about that.

  39. Living wages in virtual worlds by jcampbelly · · Score: 1

    DISCLAIMER: I hope /. readers will apply the knowledge that technology improves over time to my rationale. It’s tempting to view these types of job mills as unethical and exploitative, but until collaboration tools improve, this type of “click”-work is the only kind which can be trusted to essentially unskilled and untrustworthy anonymous laborers. The rates are just a product of having access to a global workforce and the trivial nature of the work. Also, the iterative trial and error lessons learned from these firms will certainly train the industry on how to manage a virtual workforce better. For all the sweatshop analogies, workers and job posters still have the choice of which firm they go to – there just aren’t many right now. Graphic and web design jobs are actually fairly practical - most of the freelance jobs I’ve done have been people whom I’ve never spoken to outside of e-mail. Although the rates are often very low for creative work, customers understand that they get what they pay for and both parties can still chose not to participate. For a logo design job, you may want to pay 20 people a one-time throw-away fee of $75 just for creative diversity, rather than paying one professional $1,500 and rolling the dice on whether you’ll like what they come up with. You can still take the top 3 from those to the professional and say “can you do this right?” Before too long, many of us will be working from within virtual worlds for many virtual sources at a time. Most of those sources will be other independent contractors just like us from within chains of divided labor that span the globe. “Working online” will mean putting on a head mounted display and casually, visually conversing with your design and development team in a quick scrum session in a virtual space to mock up some ideas with a 3D ‘whiteboard,’ divide up the work and knock out a contract. Or you can join a guild of professionals with high standards and a good reputation and score decent contracts, just like design houses today minus expensive office space and the associated geographic limitation. The key is that these organizations will be comprised of independent, willful laborers from all over the world whose efficacy stands on their work quality and ethic alone, self-organized through online venues like forums and virtual words with next-to-zero operating expenses. Even today, I could organize a group of graphic designers, copy writers, another web developer or two, a couple of account managers, a project coordinator, a headhunter, a contract hunter and an accountant and we could all just meet periodically to review bids and commit to a monthly project or two. It would be supplemental income for all of us. You could add a really decent collaboration system that lets us voice/video chat with a whiteboard and host a web-site complete with a forum and customer login interface with just a little FOSS savvy. You would only need a $7/mo hosting account to run mediawiki, phpbb3, wordpress and a few external services like openerp and gmail. There are paid services you could upgrade to when the revenue kicks in. END DISCLAIMER. To say that the technology doesn’t exist to implement this stuff is frankly a cop-out. A /. audience should understand. I can’t wait for the Metaverse to be born (although I think it will be augmented virtual, not immersive virtual); being a gargoyle sounds like my kind of gig.

    1. Re:Living wages in virtual worlds by jcampbelly · · Score: 2, Interesting

      *Sigh* There were line spaces when I composed this...

      DISCLAIMER: I hope /. readers will apply the knowledge that technology improves over time to my rationale.

      It’s tempting to view these types of job mills as unethical and exploitative, but until collaboration tools improve, this type of “click”-work is the only kind which can be trusted to essentially unskilled and untrustworthy anonymous laborers. The rates are just a product of having access to a global workforce and the trivial nature of the work. Also, the iterative trial and error lessons learned from these firms will certainly train the industry on how to manage a virtual workforce better. For all the sweatshop analogies, workers and job posters still have the choice of which firm they go to – there just aren’t many right now.

      Graphic and web design jobs are actually fairly practical - most of the freelance jobs I’ve done have been people whom I’ve never spoken to outside of e-mail. Although the rates are often very low for creative work, customers understand that they get what they pay for and both parties can still chose not to participate. For a logo design job, you may want to pay 20 people a one-time throw-away fee of $75 just for creative diversity, rather than paying one professional $1,500 and rolling the dice on whether you’ll like what they come up with. You can still take the top 3 from those to the professional and say “can you do this right?

      Before too long, many of us will be working from within virtual worlds for many virtual sources at a time. Most of those sources will be other independent contractors just like us from within chains of divided labor that span the globe. “Working online” will mean putting on a head mounted display and casually, visually conversing with your design and development team in a quick scrum session in a virtual space to mock up some ideas with a 3D ‘whiteboard,’ divide up the work and knock out a contract. Or you can join a guild of professionals with high standards and a good reputation and score decent contracts, just like design houses today minus expensive office space and the associated geographic limitation. The key is that these organizations will be comprised of independent, willful laborers from all over the world whose efficacy stands on their work quality and ethic alone, self-organized through online venues like forums and virtual words with next-to-zero operating expenses.

      Even today, I could organize a group of graphic designers, copy writers, another web developer or two, a couple of account managers, a project coordinator, a headhunter, a contract hunter and an accountant and we could all just meet periodically to review bids and commit to a monthly project or two. It would be supplemental income for all of us. You could add a really decent collaboration system that lets us voice/video chat with a whiteboard and host a web-site complete with a forum and customer login interface with just a little FOSS savvy. You would only need a $7/mo hosting account to run mediawiki, phpbb3, wordpress and a few external services like openerp and gmail. There are paid services you could upgrade to when the revenue kicks in.

      END DISCLAIMER. To say that the technology doesn’t exist to implement this stuff is frankly a cop-out. A /. audience should understand.

      I can’t wait for the Metaverse to be born (although I think it will be augmented virtual, not immersive virtual); being a gargoyle sounds like my kind of gig.

    2. Re:Living wages in virtual worlds by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      The problem that you seem to have missed is that while you might be able to do this today, you don't speak Hindi. Or Chinese. Or Sswahili. Or have a huge army of subjugated workers that are happy to work for 10x what they might get doing other stuff. In other words, trying to do this kind of thing in a first-world Western environment makes no sense at all.

      If geography makes no difference and teams can work together in virtual space, then why not push this down to the absolute lowest wage place on Earth?

      Today, the advantage Western workers have is they are available in the same time zone as their co-workers and clients and they speak the same language. Once this is removed, there will be no need for anyone to work in a technical capacity in the high-wage West and business owners will be able to reap the rewards of using the lowest paid worker available for each job that can be done through the Internet. And as much work as possible will be shifted to off-site "virtual" workers.

      What this means for people in the West is you better hope there is a really great social safety net that will let you sit on the couch and not work - because there will be no jobs for high-wage Western workers.

      Unless you can think of some reason for people to pay more for a physical presence rather than a virtual worker. Promoting virtual remote workers is a sure way to the couch and unemployment.

    3. Re:Living wages in virtual worlds by jcampbelly · · Score: 1

      With a virtual workforce you get to leverage the labor of the entire world. You can be selective, take advantage of competition and people willing to exploit a niche.

      If you have a language barrier, you can hire bilingual translators to sit in on your online conversations as a 3rd party. Interview many of them and keep some on retainer, make a list of their available hours, rate them on their rate of translation, clarity and accuracy. Offer more money for sessions if you want better translators. If you’re a company, hire them if you like (they may have other marketable skills), ask them to sign an NDA for sensitive conversations, and even have them translate your company’s materials to become a global company. Hire a second translator to check the first one’s work on a contract basis.

      Anyone can make a little money offering their translation services on-call. They could use their cell phones with a high quality headset and make themselves available through an automated scheduling and queuing system. This would work in any country with cellular infrastructure for any bilingual individual of any pair of languages. Rarer language pairings could be valued higher, fluency would be valued over basic conversational language. Different time zones would be valued automatically by the automation system for the minimization of lag between geolocated parties, but generally anyone could get an advantage on others in their region by supporting less popular hours. Recruiters could make a buck finding new qualified translators for less popular segments. It creates a few new markets.

      Want your child to have a marketable skill? Teach them another language. Encourage educational programs that get people from one side of the world talking to another through translation. You could even teach second, third, fourth, etc, languages through this system too just by making one-on-one conversation with translators who have flagged themselves as language tutors at an agreeable rate. Maybe it will finally encourage the development of an online A.I. realtime audio-to-audio language translation service to grab up some of that market value.

      Finally, why is there a preoccupation with accommodating Western workers? Why must the system conform to the Western lifestyle and not the other way around? Part of the reason we are in this mess is because we have grown accustomed to high wages to pay for outrageous lifestyles for far less work than others are willing to do. I don’t see how that entitles us Americans to greater consideration. Furthermore, the West has always been about Free Enterprise and the best person for the job and I don’t see how a business owner can see a downside in all of this. Virtual operations and worldwide labor pools will lower operating expenses dramatically farther than anything that could be achieved on American soil, allowing the business to make more money. Anyone can start and operate a business or work as a contractor from their home as long as they have a product or service people actually want at a price they can actually afford. It goes both ways.

  40. Low pay but a lot of freedom by bjs555 · · Score: 1

    I've worked on Mturk since it began in November of 2005 and I've earned $25,000 in all since then. I think the rate of pay is horrible but it's been fun trying to find ways to complete tasks more easily using tools such as GreaseMonkey and custom programming. Out and out robots aren't allowed but tools that reformat the screen for easier reading and clicking and things like that are permitted.

    The pay was better when Mturk started but it's been a race to the bottom since then. Still, working from home when I want with almost no responsibility is so appealing that I still do it for the low pay. I can make maybe $5 to $10 per day and spend it on any stupid thing I want without cutting into my regular budget.

  41. Then don't do it by dumky · · Score: 1

    Unless something changed, nothing forces you or anybody to access the terms of the mechanical turk. Use it or don't.
    Writing a review of the Turk is fine, but pulling in "employment lawyers" is completely pointless.

    "Trade unions disagree, saying that anyone undertaking work deserves proper remuneration."
    Of course, unions don't like competition; they will try to take advantage of government power to get some competitive advantages for its members. But if you listened to unions, we would also get ride of productivity tools and make free contributions to open source projects illegal.

  42. Re:Mechanical Turk, Low Wages, and the Market for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's true; turkers can't have nice things. I remember a requester last year offering really easy HITs (5-8 minutes to do it right) for $2 per. Despite the ease/speed/high pay, on the site where the work was being performed there was always a flood of low-quality entries as soon as the HITs were posted. About a week later the PPH dropped to $0.25 :/