Slashdot Mirror
Amazon Is Hiring Fewer Workers This Holiday Season, a Sign That Robots Are Replacing Them (qz.com)
Amazon is hiring around 100,000 additional employees this holiday season, which is fewer than the company added in either the 2016 or 2017 holiday seasons, when it brought in 120,000 additional workers. "Citi analyst Mark May says he thinks the reduction in seasonal hiring is strong evidence that Amazon is succeeding with plans to automate operations in its warehouses," reports Quartz. From the report: "We've seen an acceleration in the use of robots within their fulfillment centers, and that has corresponded with fewer and fewer workers that they're hiring around the holidays," May told CNBC. He added that 2018 is the "first time on record" Amazon plans to hire fewer holiday workers than it did the previous year. "Since the last holiday season, we've focused on more ongoing full-time hiring in our fulfillment centers and other facilities," Amazon spokesperson Ashley Robinson said in an email, adding that the company has "created over 130,000 jobs" in the last year. "We are proud to have created over 130,000 new jobs in the last year alone."
Amazon bought robotics company Kiva Systems for $775 million in 2012, and began using its orange robots in warehouses in late 2014. By mid-2016, it had become clear just how big a difference those robots were making. The little orange guys could handle in 15 minutes the sorting, picking, packing, and shipping that used to take human workers an hour or more to complete. In June 2016, Deutsche Bank predicted Kiva automation could save Amazon nearly $2.5 billion (those savings dropped to $880 million after accounting for the costs of installing robots in every warehouse).
Amazon bought robotics company Kiva Systems for $775 million in 2012, and began using its orange robots in warehouses in late 2014. By mid-2016, it had become clear just how big a difference those robots were making. The little orange guys could handle in 15 minutes the sorting, picking, packing, and shipping that used to take human workers an hour or more to complete. In June 2016, Deutsche Bank predicted Kiva automation could save Amazon nearly $2.5 billion (those savings dropped to $880 million after accounting for the costs of installing robots in every warehouse).
Following the last big industrial rev there was about 80 years of joblessness until new tech came along.
Interesting, but I can't quite find references to those 80 years ... would you mind providing some pointers ? Thanks !
There's a very, very easy answer to your question about what to do for the next 80 years. You need to be the owner of capital. Buy stocks or otherwise invest in the companies that make mad profits from the upcoming industrial/manufacturing/robotic/AI revolution. Stocks, bonds, mutual funds and other investments were explicitly designed so that normal plebes get a piece of the prosperity that capitalism provides.
Oh, you're not putting part of your money towards investments? Enjoy the next 80 years of poverty.
when the world doesn't need ditch diggers?
The unemployed people can stay at home and read about economic fallacies.
Look, if you don't need to pay someone to do warehouse picking, then that money will go toward lower prices and/or higher dividends, putting that money into the pocket of someone else who will either spend it or invest it, thus generating jobs elsewhere in the economy.
The difference is that the warehouse picker was adding nothing to the total amount of goods and services produced, but the new job will, thus leading to a rise in living standards.
And for all that say they'll be new jobs, what? I want specifics.
Then buy some tarot cards. Nobody can see the future. Do you think a farmer in 1880 could see that his great-grandson would be a video game developer?
Following the last big industrial rev there was about 80 years of joblessness until new tech came along.
This is absolute nonsense. The last big surge of automation led to dramatic and nearly immediate improvements in standards of living.
Look up what a typical American makes. Then realize if you have a meaningful amount of investment capital, you are better off and have more economic ability than 65% of "normal plebs." The type of investment you are referring to, i.e. complete job replacement when automation takes it, is limited to single-digit percentages of people already living far better lives than all but a handful of us could feasibly enjoy without post-scarcity magic.
Oh, you're not putting part of your money towards investments? Enjoy the next 80 years of poverty.
Might as well say "Oh, you weren't born with legs? Enjoy your wheelchair."
Good god how do you remain so stupid. Take a course in history and economics at your local college. Pick up a book. Read the financial news. Why do we have to answer these fucking questions for you.
There is nothing in history that provides a solution for the next (and likely final) iteration of innovation, so stop pointing at the fucking history books and expecting to find an answer. Yes, economic and industrial revolutions have come along in the past to create jobs for not-so-bright people, but the next iteration of innovation is to replace every job that uneducated humans perform today. Just replacing nothing but cashiers in the US affects 3% of the employed population, and we're working quickly to eliminate that profession. Looking at the ten largest occupations that comprise over 20% of the employed workforce, I don't see hardly any of them surviving the next decade or two.
Amazon will continue to work to fully automate their warehouses, eliminating a few hundred thousand jobs. Drones will eliminate a vast majority of delivery drivers currently employed by Amazon/UPS/USPS, etc. How many more school shootings will happen before virtual schools are the preferred delivery method for education? You only need one talking head per 100,000 students in a MOOC-format class, so that cuts down on the need for thousands of teachers. (Oh, and school sports will be deemed far too dangerous and expensive thanks to our litigious society, so don't assume football will be the reason your local high schools stays open. It won't.)
And then "good enough" AI will arrive, which will decimate the rest of the educated workforce.
And no, we don't have an answer. No one covering the "financial news" can even spell "unemployable" yet, much less have a viable answer for it. And the parent already referenced how well "history" did with this kind of change last time. Nukes will likely fly before we survive 80 years of abject poverty. At the current rate of political stupidity, we'll be lucky if we're not facing another Civil War soon.
Or programmers.
I do a lot of CRUD-centric applications (tracking, work-flow, reporting, management info systems). With a good stack I'm quite productive and spend more time on analysis than diddling with code. With bad stacks I spend way too much time diddlying with code, and more stacks seem to be like that these days, partly because the choice of JavaScript widgets available makes PHB's crave ever fancier eye-candy that makes for ever more fragile/leaky systems that need ever more people to fix.
If automation either takes over the grunt work or creates more logical standards with fewer parts, a good many programmers will be let go since fewer are needed for the same position. The analyst/coder hybrid will disappear or shrink, leaving just analysts. 2 analyst/coder hybrids can then be replaced by 1 analyst.
Admit it, there's a lot of redundancy, BS, & bloat in most our stacks/techniques that can be factored out yet still do the necessary job. AI may have less incentive to add or keep unnecessary bloat; bots aren't biased for job security like we are.
Sorry, but humans unconsciously make selections/recommendations that make themselves more "needed". It's seen in the medical field also. I cannot predict what future AI will look like, but there's a decent chance it won't have this same bias, and thus factor itself better. Genetic algorithms may "evolve" stacks to fit company conventions tightly based on existing applications, for example. Fewer humans would then be needed to program with it. Our current stack manager stuck us with bloating microservices even though we don't need them because he thought it was "cool". AI probably won't. He should be fired by bots.
Field info (DB schema) is often replicated all over typical stacks, for example. DRY Principle says I should only have to state field info in ONE place, not ten. There are tools that duplicate the field info into the parts of the stack, but duplication only simplifies creation of code, not maintenance.
(I've kicked around ways to factor such, but most code tools are too file-centric or too hierarchical. Files are obsolete, I believe. Better code repositories would look more like RDBMS's so that we can use set theory on field info, UI layout, and event code instead of hierarchies. Set theory is more powerful than hierarchies and OOP inheritance. The future will eventually take us there, I believe. We are doing it wrong; stuck in the "tree past" out of habit. The Sets are coming. AI may discover this fact and our existing tools will dumped into landfill to be ridiculed the way we ridicule vinyl records and the ET cartridges. Field info/changes can then be entered into one place, and Boom! done. Go home and have sex and don't come back to work: a Set bot is in your chair now.)
Table-ized A.I.
The final era of innovation? Really? Why not log in to post that? It's unsubstantiated nonsense.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Alright smart guy riddle me this....what EXACTLY are you gonna do with the average 100 IQ person? You can't wave a magic wand and make a person with 100 IQ into a rocket scientist, their brains simply do not function that way. Can't make them into an engineer, can't make them into programmers, hell even the army is having to slowly but surely raise its minimum IQ requirements because there is simply too much high tech involved (and if you want to see the truly horrific results when the US army tries to take those below the minimum? Look up "McNamara Moron Corps") and there is simply less and less that someone with anything less than a high IQ is gonna be capable of performing.
So what EXACTLY do you propose to do with them? Put them in camps? Sterilize them? Whether you want to accept it or not we are RAPIDLY reaching the point where you don't need a single human between the raw material and the store shelf. You can have a machine mine the materials or plant the crops, take the material via robot truck to a factory where lines of machines can process it into a finished product which goes again via robot truck to a automated warehouse. For fucks sake dude we are ALREADY at the point where they have automated burger flippers that are WAAAYYY BETTER than anything you would get in a fast food joint, you know what Mickey D's and the like haven't already switched? Because the government PAYS THEM in the form of subsidies it gives to those workers, for fucks sake man the FIRST TRAINING VID you see when you start work at Walmart is "How to get government subsidies" and if it wasn't for the US government essentially paying half their wages? Those people would already have been replaced!
Whether you want to wake up and see the Mac truck that is heading at society at 1000MPH plus doesn't change the fact that you are gonna have millions of people that are gonna be of zero use in a robot dominated society. Its the story of John Henry only we got the moral of the story wrong, the real moral was that it doesn't fucking matter if you literally work yourself into a grave as the machine will just keep going. It won't get tired, won't ask for sick days or for time to see its kids, won't ask for raises or care about working 24/7, it'll just do what its told day in and day out....and if you can't see how many corps are practically foaming at the mouth and chomping at the bit to get this tech so they can get rid of the hassle of all those workers they gotta pay wages and insurance and have to deal with getting hurt or sick on the job? Then puff puff pass dude, you been hitting the shit far too long!
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
That A) sounds like the bullshit you get from the singularity community, and B) only sees one side of humanity. It is true humanity is bad, but humanity is also good and can cooperate when we need to. It's how we got here, after all.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Owners start to see a significant drop in sales.
Do you mean like the drop of sales when the steam engine was invented?
Oh, wait, that didn't happen. Sales went up.
Or the drop in sales when the automatic loom was invented?
Oh, that didn't happen either. Sales went up more.
Or the drop in sales when agriculture was mechanized?
Nope, that didn't happen either. Sales went WAY up.
Or the drop of sales when assembly lines and electrification became come?
Nope. The economy boomed.
So your theory that "rising productivity causes sales to decline" doesn't seem to be connected to reality.