Does Amazon's Clickworker Platform Exploit Its Workers? (techrepublic.com)

500,000 people signed up for Amazon's Mechanical Turk, one of several online microjobs platforms that "let companies break jobs into smaller tasks and offer them to people across the globe," reports TechRepublic. But though these workers have trouble communicating directly with Amazon, in any given month about 20,000 of them may be active, "part of an invisible, online workforce -- one that is increasingly in demand for their vital role in helping train intelligent machines."

But are these platforms part of a disturbing new trend? Long-time Slashdot reader Paul Fernhout writes: Hope Reese and Nick Heath at TechRepublic ask: "do they democratize work or exploit the disempowered?" The article says: "Just over half of Turkers earn below the US federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour, according to a Pew Research Center study." The article quotes people who believe "it will become increasingly common for computer systems to orchestrate labor." That trend was also was the beginning of Marshall Brain's "Manna" short story.

Comments

Basic Income

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it easy to exploit independent contractors? What about Uber, aren't they contractors? I don't know if they're being exploited. But maybe the solution is to tax the rich, including rich companies, to help pay for a basic income of sorts.

Something like...
For citizens and permanent residents
$750/month/65+ year old or Social Security, whichever is higher.
$500/month/22-65 year old
$250/month/21-
With a 10% tax on AGI.
If we scrap S.N.A.P., increase those figures by $200/month/person.

Having a guaranteed income of sorts, even a minor one like this, would help independent contracts, artists, etc. People with unstable incomes.

I figure this could cost $1.2 trillion per year. Any thoughts?

Re:Basic Income

[drinkypoo]

So Britain's system of universal, government-run healthcare drives people to suicide and... you think that's an argument for universal, government-run healthcare?

Even assuming for the moment that is true, it's irrelevant; the comparison should be whether such a system drives more people to suicide than a system in which they can't get health care at all. Right now there is an immense profit motive in fucking over the patient. For example, one acquaintance just posted about getting basically no medical care (they were denied medication because of an out of state but perfectly valid prescription, in spite of every state being constitutionally obligated to respect the laws of other states) and charged a thousand dollars for the privilege of being fucked over. You don't think that drives people to suicide? Going further into debt in exchange for not getting health care?

If you want to make some kind of meaningful comparison, be our guest. Until then, please fuck off.

Re:Basic Income

[BarbaraHudson]

Can't you even read past your preconceptions? It's not the health care system in Britain that is driving people to suicide. It's the cutting of benefits to those who need them the most.

And as for your "as a crook, you ought to know yourself", coming from an Anonymous Coward, that's Apple-style "courageous." I have no criminal record whatsoever. That's a matter of public record, since you can't serve on a jury if you have a criminal record or are charged with a criminal offence. You can't say the same.

Why US minimum wage as standard?

[MightyYar]

Why the heck us the US minimum wage as a standard to compare against? These people can be anywhere in the world - better to compare to their local minimum wage... Or better yet, typical wages for this type of work in their locality.

Re:Why US minimum wage as standard?

[dinfinity]

From TFA:
"Who are Turkers? [...] About 75% are Americans, roughly 15-20% are from India, and the remaining 10% are from other countries."

Exploitative by design?

[swb]

It seems like these systems are exploitative by design, even if exploitation wasn't explicitly the goal. They're designed with every possible algorithm and available data to maximize labor output at the lowest possible cost. Individual workers are operating at extreme information asymmetry and against a system which does not negotiate and only offers a take it or leave it choice.

While this reduction in labor costs may have some broader macroeconomic value, making some goods or services cheaper and more widely available it seems like the end result would ultimately just look like labor exploitation.

Re:Exploitative by design?

[ThatsMyNick]

I used to do turk when I was in college (years ago). All I did was academic surveys and tests for academic studies. I dont think it was anywhere close to minimum wage, but I had fun and I enjoyed doing it. Some of them will also invite me for follow up studies. I can tell for sure those researchers did not intent to exploit, nor did I felt exploited. It would good beer money.

Re:Exploitative by design?

[khallow]

It seems like these systems are exploitative by design, even if exploitation wasn't explicitly the goal. They're designed with every possible algorithm and available data to maximize labor output at the lowest possible cost. Individual workers are operating at extreme information asymmetry and against a system which does not negotiate and only offers a take it or leave it choice.

I sure hope these systems are exploitive. Labor is only empowering when it is exploited. And what is forgotten is that workers exploit the system as well. They get money which they value more than their work. And another name for mutual exploitation is cooperation.

The information asymmetry and those algorithms aren't that extreme or that relevant. Individual would-be workers get plenty of information from such markets just from pricing and work requirements. And they have better knowledge of their personal condition and what options, including regular work, that they can do instead.

Also, take it or leave it still allows for a lot of negotiation. As I implied earlier, there are multiple potential employers out there. And if the payout isn't good enough, the potential employer will either have to offer more or just leave it. Negotiation enters the picture, if they choose not to leave it themselves.

It's really sad to see such widespread misunderstanding of labor economics. The world is becoming a vastly better place precisely because peoples' labor can and is exploited. It not only empowers people and allows them to better their lot in life, it creates more opportunities for labor-based exploitation and empowerment. There are few human activities with that kind of positive feedback.

Things like Mechanical Turk fix the very problems that you complain they have. I think it would be better to get out of the way rather than than issue a complaint that really boils down to there being desperate people. There won't be less desperate people just because we interfere with and obstruct some of the means for lessening such desperation.

Really bad jobs

[gweihir]

I had a look at it a while back, and the only way to get to a salary you will not starve on seems to be to do the jobs so badly and fast that they just barely get accepted. Actually following the description on what you should do will get you paid much lower than that minimum wage.

How to build that Muslim database

[Anonymous Coward]

"You could be tagging faces in a crowd, but maybe something is being built for a malicious purpose or something," she said. "You don't know what you're doing, exactly, because there's no information."

I've seen a few stories how big software are saying they won't build a Muslim database. Well, here's how to do it - and no one will know the difference.

"Your assignment is to pick all the women with hijabs."

Your assignment is to match these photos with names."

"Your assignment is to find the men in their family"

Easy peasy and all for less than minimum wage.

Uh, no, that's not how it works at all

[rsilvergun]

You couldn't possibly be more wrong if you tried. Same with that drek Forbes wrote. Minimum wage sets a price floor on wages. It does this to stop a race to the bottom while forcing the rich to horde a bit less of their wealth (which has been a major problem in all of human civilization: how to pry money from the 1%'s hands and get the economy moving).

The thing is, work still needs to get done and the merchant class still wants to make money. Warren Buffet said it himself (paraphrasing) that even at 90% taxes he'd still make money. Hell, America's most productive years were when the top marginal rate was 90%. So long as we have a merchant class spreading wealth around benefits all but the ruling class.

Now, we do still have an idle rich and ruling class. We just don't like to acknowledge them (and you can be they don't like being acknowledged). Go ahead. Eliminate minimum wage. Take out worker protections, Unions and all the safe guards workers fought and died for. Welcome back to the time of kings. To the robber baron era. Thanks.