IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Why automate?
When you can use humans in 3rd world countries to do your bidding for next to nothing?

It's funny because when I worked at SABRE, we tried to improve process workflows, by trying to convince the company to only enter items one time.

However, based on the labor rates they were getting for foreign data entry, the automation was STILL too expensive.

If you cause a world pricing collapse, and get labor rates really low worldwide, then need to automate a lot fewer things.

The machines have to get to be a whole lot less expensive than 3rd world labor.
A pretty low mark to reach.

Glen Austin
Expand Edited by gdaustin Sept. 19, 2003, 01:32:10 PM EDT
New Not necessarily a low mark to reach.
It's been going on for some time, now.

With the onset of the Industrial Revolution, machines perfomed a lot of tasks cheaper than using slaves. Still, for repetitive mechanical work, people turned out to be the cheapest form of PLC (Programmable Logic Controller). In time, mechanical controllers started to replace their flesh counterparts.

Enter the microprocessor and the curve really takes off. CNC lathes turn out the same or better quality parts than a master machinist could a decade before. Robots paint and assemble cars. I'm sure everybody here knows the things computer controlled machines do now.

So.. for the time being, and not a very long time in the scope of things, the third world wages tip the balance back toward flesh again. Eventually the cost of revolutions, unrest and increasing wages will tip the balance back to metal/silicon.

I guess my point is that machines will always get cheaper and people will cost the same or more to maintain. It doesn't bode well for people.

The funny part is that all these 'labor saving' machines, washing machines, vacuums, and such were supposed to relieve the housewifes burden. Now they still spend as much time cleaning and washing clothes, and they work a 9 to 5 as well.
New It's the repetition that makes machines cost-effective.
Hugh writes:

With the onset of the Industrial Revolution, machines perfomed a lot of tasks cheaper than using slaves. Still, for repetitive mechanical work, people turned out to be the cheapest form of PLC (Programmable Logic Controller). In time, mechanical controllers started to replace their flesh counterparts.


Emphasis added.

Well said.

It's easy to farm out repetitive work on mature products to low-skill low-cost workers or to machines. It's very difficult to have unique products, or products that evolve quickly, to low-cost contract manufacturers. It's been this way for a long time, since at least [link|http://www.netstate.com/states/peop/people/ct_sc.htm|Samuel Colt's] day.

Until there are general-purpose machines that can be inexpensively and rapidly reconfigured to do tasks that people do now, there's going to be a need for humans to manufacture products that aren't commodities. And when such machines are available, there's going to need to be skilled people to reconfigure and work on them. So I think the days of machines taking over vast swatches of the US economy are a bit farther off.

Change in an economy is always disruptive. More should be done in terms of providing unemployment insurance and retraining to laid-off employees. Ways should be found to allow change to the US economy and to its trading partners that are fair to both (e.g. removing trade barriers on both sides) - most US industry shouldn't be protected, but US employees should have effective minimum guarantees that they won't be destitute if they're laid off. Ways should be found to force industries to adapt to changes in technology while protecting the employees from crushing unemployement - even if that force is merely the removal of protections (like tarrifs on steel, large displacement motorcycles, sugar, or textiles). Finding ways to do these things will be very difficult because they're inherently political not economic.

The US and US business should invest more in rapid high-quality manufacturing techniques that improve efficiency, reduce time to market, and allow greater customization. It's things like this that will allow them to better compete with low-cost manufacturers since they'll always have longer supply lines and poorer communications with US customers.

My $0.02.

Cheers,
Scott.
New Yeppers on that.
When the IBM Proprinter (dot-matrix) first came out (~20 years ago) it was manufactured here in Charlotte. It was supposed to be a totally automated assembly line. The printer was designed to be assembled by robots. It was called DFAA (Design for Automated Assembly. [link|http://bits.me.berkeley.edu/mmcs/PROPRNT3/WELCOME.HTM|The case study].

When all was said and done, it turned out to be cheaper to assemble them manually by employees in less than 3 minutes. Summer hires (college students of which my daughter was one) averaged a printer every 2 minutes.
Alex

"Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something." -- last words of Pancho Villa (1877-1923)
New Printer assembly

Expose in the [link|http://www.sjmercury.com/|SJ Murky Nukes] a few years back that addressed the issue piecework pay for small electronics assembly. Not overseas, but in the US -- specifically, in Silicon Valley.

\r\n\r\n

As Alex said: with short product runs, varying assembly procedures, and other issues, humans (particularly if paid sub-minimum wages) are far more cost effective than assembly robots. It costs more to build and program the latter than it does to show a worker "here's the assembly process".

\r\n\r\n

There are cases in which machine tools can be designed to produce custom products -- another article I recall covered this as a niche in which Germany (not a low-wage location) was producing very small production runs of machined products using high-tech processes and skilled labor. Here the advantage was ability to produce high-value equipment in a timely fashion. And the combination of skilled labor and automation made it possible. This is probably a five year old example by now, I'm not sure what the current status of this is.

--\r\n
Karsten M. Self [link|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com|kmself@ix.netcom.com]\r\n
[link|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/]\r\n
What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?\r\n
[link|http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/|TWikIWETHEY] -- an experiment in collective intelligence. Stupidity. Whatever.\r\n
\r\n
   Keep software free.     Oppose the CBDTPA.     Kill S.2048 dead.\r\n[link|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html]\r\n
New Think about this for a minute....
Machines are good at making the same thing over and over again with very low variation in specification. Machine lathes, auto parts, plastics, etc.

However, machines to do these things are VERY expensive, so they have to be able to mass produce a lot of parts.

Machines have a much more difficult time with tasks like assembling parts, primarily because logic has to be programmed (that humans already have) to figure out the direction and position of a bolt on a belt, for example. There are machines capable of this kind of activity, but they are even more expensive than the machines that make the same part over and over again.

I think Saturn has machines that weld and assemble cars.

The part that scares me in the near term is that fact that humans have almost completely been removed from decision-making processes, like credit.

I helped automate a major West coast bank's loan system. The system took an electronic loan application, went and collected information from about 5 different systems (prior banking history, credit scores, etc.), then sent the whole XML bundle to a company that then basically made the credit decision.

Now, imagine if the Department of Homeland Security did the same. Now, imagine that someone who didn't like you decided to report an erroneous event on you that you were a terrorist. The system would probably report your every credit card transaction, when you gassed up your car, and all your air travel. It really would be 1984.

I read an article in Wired or FastCompany or some magazine like that a few years ago about a man who was experimenting with chip implantation (in the body). My fear is that the Dept. of Homeland Security might eventually require such a thing (under the guise of reducing medical records costs), then be able to track every person in America, within a few feet.

That kind of thinking makes me want to flee to some remote part of the world, buy only in cash, and have a different name.

New I think that this forks into 2 different process streams
if that is the word.

One stream is the machine path. The first ones are expensive, but they get cheaper and more adaptable to different tasks. It is an evolutionary process (my opinion only, of course.) I don't see much that will keep them from being built, first for dangerous and unpleasant tasks, and later just because it is cheap enough and they can. A lot of good, and much more not so good Sci-fi has been written about life on the asymtotic side of the development curve.

The other stream is the human social development that goes with this. The adaption of automation seems to be faster than our society can adapt. Our society has the "work ethic" that says that everybody has to work/produce to be a valued member. As jobs disappear, more of our citizens are devalued. And this trend is accelerating as well. It is my opinion that if society does not adapt, it will fail catastrophically. The way things are going, I expect to see revolution or some sort of collapse in my lifetime, and I plan to get off the bus in another 25 years or so. In any event, we are way past any kind of a quick fix.

Yet another .02
Hugh
New Second Stream
The revolution in computing with "Services" is in the second stream.

Companies want computers that can qualify loans. Decide what kind of a risk you are, and what the macroeconomic conditions are. Decide who is a threat, and who is OK. This kind of "profiling" will just proliferate.
The next 5 years are about getting rid of managers who used to make these decisions, and getting computers to do them. And order stuff, and schedule people and equipment, and machine time, and hospital beds.

The banking and mortgage industries are way ahead. Other industries are catching up quickly.

In 25 years, the economy bus will have already crashed, you won't be able to get off. In 25 years, computers will largely decide "if you qualify", "if you are someone".

I want to get off, too. But, I'd like to get off now. Or at least in 10 years. But, that's my problem. I just refinanced a 30 year mortgage, with the hope that I can somehow get it finished in 15 or even 10. I won't retire until 2032, but I'm being told that my best earning years are behind me at age 39.

You need to get your money and put it away in the next 10 years. Pay off debt, don't buy so much more stuff.

Hold off on buying electronics as long as possible as the prices for that will fall, as Moore's Law continues to work. But, beyond technology products, the quality will just get worse, as the work is exported. Furniture, refrigerators, washer/dryer, carpet, homes, etc. Buy the best quality of those that you can afford.

A large portion of the baby boomers retire in 10 to 15 years. Consumption HAS to fall in the U.S., as these people need to save for whatever retirement they'll have. Social security (and possibly the whole U.S. gov't) will be broke in 15-20 years. Exports have to RISE to save our economy. We have to produce and convince other countries to buy.

I don't know how that really happens. The dollar may have to fall very dramatically. We have to convince others to buy U.S. goods vis a vis foreign goods.

My father proposed that we enact laws "requiring" a balance of trade. In other words, if China imports 10 billion in goods to us, then we must export 10 billion in goods to them. If Japan wants to sell 100 billion here, they must buy 100 billion from us. The idea is to not let the balance of trade go so far askew that we net export billions out of our economy, like we do now.

I don't know what the answer is. I just know it has to change.

Glen
Expand Edited by gdaustin Sept. 20, 2003, 11:13:05 AM EDT
New Heh.. Not the bus I was thinking of
I take your point about the economics. Given employment at my current rate, I should be completely debt free in 4 to 5 years, house, cottage, cars, the works. My wife and I have been saving for our 'golden years' for some time now, so we're doing ok in that respect.

I am more concerned with society crashing in a huge way then a mere economic melt-down. I've been broke before and was, in many respects, a lot happier than when I was bucks up and working too hard to enjoy it.

In 25 years I will be pushing 80, or daisies. If not daisies, I think I would probably rather quit at that point while it is still my choise. For the last few years my wife and I have been taking care of her folks and dealing with cancer, death, broken bones, dementia and such. If it comes my turn, I don't think I want to play. That was the getting off the bus reference.

Cheers,
Hugh
New But always in the narrow-trained Econ mind -
the bottom line is solely numeric. This is a closed-system of thought and it is bogus within its own axia / 'constants', those plugged into the spread sheets. Specifically (and my continual point about such specialties as tend to mesmerize via their pseudo-accuracy of the numeric kind) Econ is no more a 'closed system' than is medicine.. inasmuch as the entire human and material infrastructure! is the milieu in which it pretends to operate via those cheap formulae. How does one assign a variable to the velocity of money term, for [Visceral Rage X how many acting out]?

By definition then, theories which horribly oversimplify all of life are bound to create the asinine black/white slogans (whether couched in political or econ language) as maintain the evident class structure and especially -- its current extremes; the now not so slow-extinction of any semblance of a 'middle-class' (even with both 'working').

Yeah, we can toss around a few ideas in harmless and insignificant places like the Web, but in the greater environment? IMhO it remains sheer language murder - and 'debate' within fucked language referents - guarantees that inability to get beyond slogans.. as so characterizes Murican popular approach to every recalcitrant problem that has a name. Shit.. we're still riding the infinite Growth (and Efficiency!) is the road to Prosperity metaphor! - an ass without horse attached.

(Oddly, I note that the most innovative ideas re countering the converging Mega-Corporate control of all necessities of life VS decentralized small and local answers - seems to emanate from conferences in India!)

A recent one re the proliferation of Corp-built dams + World Bank funding sans local vote, and an exploration of some of the human consequences of a particular long-running war - featured a woman with a name defying phonetic approximation {possibly containing arund and rai}. She brilliantly and concisely demolished all Argumentum from 'economy-of-scale' lobbed at her. Alas.. the Supreme Court of India appears to be even more FUBAR than the USSC, given the tale of this particular one (of >2000!) Indian dam projects.

Still, and even if doomed - it was such a treat to hear the English Language used well and succinctly: a treat hardly ever to be experienced in the US outside of some student mock-debate. A treat even if she closed upon a ref. to what happens next:

after.. {their adopted Gandhian non-violent} sustained protest is finally greeted with an Ashcroftian non sequitur - violence is that last resort, always. I think that's the crux of why the above topic will receive no sane attention - momentum and the comfort of familiar self-delusion will substitute for the risk of any honest discussion. Race to the bottom, with blinkers.

Your comments here -
More should be done in terms of providing unemployment insurance and retraining to laid-off employees. Ways should be found to allow change to the US economy and to its trading partners that are fair to both (e.g. removing trade barriers on both sides) - most US industry shouldn't be protected, but US employees should have effective minimum guarantees that they won't be destitute if they're laid off. Ways should be found to force industries to adapt to changes in technology while protecting the employees from crushing unemployement - even if that force is merely the removal of protections (like tarrifs on steel, large displacement motorcycles, sugar, or textiles). Finding ways to do these things will be very difficult because they're inherently political not economic.
- IMhO are an excellent example of just What sort of thinking cannot occur in the US, under current habits so engrained as possibly to have become a common branched DNA in the neurons of babes. All the implications would be submerged in a blizzard of argot from legal, econ, politico and other specially-obfuscating doggerel.

As to,
The US and US business should invest more in rapid high-quality manufacturing techniques that improve efficiency, reduce time to market, and allow greater customization. It's things like this that will allow them to better compete with low-cost manufacturers since they'll always have longer supply lines and poorer communications with US customers.
Isn't this simply a restatement of, infinite Growth is the road to Prosperity?

(I don't see the language-murder concept as even being on the radar, by any euphemism as might serve. Habit. Mental laziness. Is that mass resignation -by '03- or mere ennui over the lying pointlessness of so many Corporate 'positions' - which you accept or ~starve?)


Ashton
Babelfish - a seminal name for Our Time; wasted on a mere translation ap..



Edit typo
Expand Edited by Ashton Sept. 20, 2003, 03:26:42 AM EDT
New I think you're thinking of Arundhati Roy
Ashton writes:

A recent one re the proliferation of Corp-built dams + World Bank funding sans local vote, and an exploration of some of the human consequences of a particular long-running war - featured a woman with a name defying phonetic approximation {possibly containing arund and rai}.


I think you're thinking of [link|http://www.arundhatiroy.org.uk/|Arundhati Roy]. My wife read "The God of Small Things" recently and enjoyed it.

As to,

The US and US business should invest more in rapid high-quality manufacturing techniques that improve efficiency, reduce time to market, and allow greater customization. It's things like this that will allow them to better compete with low-cost manufacturers since they'll always have longer supply lines and poorer communications with US customers.


Isn't this simply a restatement of, infinite Growth is the road to Prosperity?


No. I'm simply arguing that the US needs to compete in areas where it makes sense to do so. Just as it makes little sense for a Mom and Pop store to compete with Wal-Mart simply on price, I think it makes little sense for an industiralized country to compete with a developing country simply in terms of the cost of labor. The US needs to produce things in ways that take advantage of its strengths. It's not about inifinte growth, it's about having any production here at all. :-/

Cheers,
Scott.
New Exactly - thanks.
Because of the rapid pronunciation of the moderator and less than sterling sound, I missed the connection to THAT "Roy" - speaker made that a long-a sound! and didn't mention the book.. (haven't read Gods.. yet, but it's been on my list)

No argument with your last point, of course. Even were 'we' magically transformed into a nation of adults capable of independent thought, next April 1 -- inertia alone makes that an uncommonly sensical point to note - as in, D'Oh.. Mr. CIEIO.

My sincerest hope is that {simply} Roy is not assassinated. Even soon, as surely is being contemplated.. where such thoughts are a daily mere part of strategy. Too many people Love Her, and more and more are listening.

It's my life-long observation that, those who have accumulated the Most - are most frequently ill; they crave Even More, no matter how large already is that Most-share - of all the (mere material crap + Power) there is.
(Illness is the euphemistic word, of course)

Were Roy's ideas -- as I heard those so clearly expressed re the matter related above -- to galvanize action of the vastly larger pool than the Owning Class (among whom are many with minds too - but more importantly - with developed consciences as the 'ill' people know not of) --

I see generated that Fear within the power-Insane which always leads to actions divorced from any social sense at all. Because they Can. Again.
(Also recently viewed another take on the life of Pancho Villa ;-)

Oh well. Personally, I'd much prefer to go out fighting on such a barricade than to own my own Gated Community and Lear Jet. What could be a more honorable death than that?



Ashton
New The problem
The problem isn't really with economics or economists. Economists, the resonable ones anyways, understand that their models are just models.

Ultimatly, the problem doesn't lay with the partisan fanatics that twist models to produce the results they want either. Fanatics can be found in every field, and there is no way to get rid of them.

The real problem (like so many) is actually with education. Schools that don't teach people to think, don't teach them to have a healthy suspicion of all black/white slogans, and don't teach them that the brain is a muscle and should be exercised from time to time just for the practice.

Schools should be teaching reading, writing, rithmatic and rational thought as the 4'r. But most schools can barely cover the first three and have no idea how to teach the last.

(Oddly, I note that the most innovative ideas re countering the converging Mega-Corporate control of all necessities of life VS decentralized small and local answers - seems to emanate from conferences in India!)

You should check out some of the stuff going on in Argentina right now. Since the melt down a few years ago, a lot of facinating local movements have sprung up. Unfortunatly, they get very little coverage and when they do get covered they are often conflated with communism.

Jay
New In accord.
Except that, all my life I've heard the 'more education' mantra - as being the Largest Perk .. of a rich society with lots of personal time for its citizens.

As we've seen in the US, and for long enough to call it a clear trend: the time that once was availabale (before the 24/7 workday for-both-parents) was hardly employed for becoming more savvy about overseeing one's local or national government, and especially one's local manipulating CIEIOs.

Folks (a decade or so ago) Preferred! the overtime and the extra toys (with less time to play with them) to - say, Owning Your Own Time\ufffd. I saw that as a clear choice in most cases. And by now the 'personal time' has evanesced to the present absurd situation (experienced by most here, if I am able to read correctly).

So there could be no argument about the root-courses in education which you list - but in 2003 and the present local and international circumstances - I fear that any such renaissance shall be delayed yet further. Momentum. There is no fool like an old fool yada.

Believe we're running now and next on Sheer Luck. Things will just "happen to US".



May it hold a while; never mind agonizing about the word deserve..

Ashton
New Why use third world country labor?
Many have found that Offshoring causes:

#1 Low Productivity

#2 Low Morale

#3 Low Quality

and in some cases:

#4 Rudeness to customers, charging for parts under warranty, and other things that can wreck the business on a Help Desk environment.

Could be due to the fact that employees know they are being underpaid and overworked and exploited. They work the job anyway, but they just don't give it 100% effort, or try for the best quality, or try to be civil to customers, etc.



"Lady I only speak two languages, English and Bad English!" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"

New Employees Don't Have a Choice...
The bottom line orion, is that almost all of these people don't have a choice.

Some reasons:

1. This is a great job relative to what else they can get in their country. Some governments have policies that undesirable people should "disappear". That means that they are put in a place where no-one notices them until they starve to death. If you resist this treatment, you are killed.

2. Countries like North Korea jail a dissadent's family. The parents and grandparents are killed, and the children are forced to work in slave labor camps for no wages and little food. ABC News documented cases where goods were actually manufactured in camps like these by children in North Korea. The goods were exported to China, and labelled as "made in China", and then exported to the United States. So, the toys you buy lovingly for your kids, may actually be made by some kid that will starve to death in the next week.

3. India is growing a middle-class by educating a lot of people in computers and technology. India "got it" about 10 years ago, and started pouring funding into their University system to educate a large population of techies. Now India is getting the payoff of lots of new jobs, just as America's baby boomers come into their prime earning years. But, in India, you don't have the flexibility that you do here in the states to just quit a job and change. The government regulates a lot of stuff, probably even who you work for. Many of these kids may even owe college debts to the companies they work for.
Expand Edited by gdaustin Sept. 20, 2003, 09:36:17 AM EDT
Expand Edited by gdaustin Sept. 20, 2003, 09:36:55 AM EDT
New Boomers >>> THE. G.I. BILL. <<<
The assholes have Utterly Forgotten WHY they became

BOOMERS and not BUSTERS !!

And.. this youthful dementia shows: from Shrub on down to the same generation's CIEIO glut of mindless Greed-heads.

(As Billy and his ilk carry aloft the torch of self-ignition; we don't learn from past OR present.
I think that's called congenital Dumbth, as in Q.E.D.)
     Another take on the Man | Machine question - (Ashton) - (44)
         The Rise of the machines - (orion)
         This is probably a natural evolution. - (mmoffitt) - (1)
             One doomed to failure - (orion)
         The absurd Progamme of Communist Party of Soviet Union - (Arkadiy) - (17)
             Different goals. - (inthane-chan) - (16)
                 The difference is in results - (Arkadiy) - (15)
                     Except this time real advances are being made. - (inthane-chan) - (7)
                         Perfect. - (Arkadiy) - (6)
                             Not quite true. - (inthane-chan) - (5)
                                 You assume that human behaviors are simple - (Arkadiy) - (4)
                                     Children working in factories - (orion) - (1)
                                         Another example - (JayMehaffey)
                                     Next step in chain - (JayMehaffey)
                                     I view any AI wishful thinking similarly.. - (Ashton)
                     Be judicious with "never". - (mmoffitt) - (6)
                         I wonder if we'll have reverse immigration soon - (Arkadiy) - (5)
                             Now? - (mmoffitt)
                             Won't work - (orion)
                             Already here - (tuberculosis) - (2)
                                 That's different . - (Arkadiy) - (1)
                                     Americans will never do that. - (mmoffitt)
         Why automate? - (gdaustin) - (16)
             Not necessarily a low mark to reach. - (hnick) - (12)
                 It's the repetition that makes machines cost-effective. - (Another Scott) - (11)
                     Yeppers on that. - (a6l6e6x) - (5)
                         Printer assembly - (kmself) - (4)
                             Think about this for a minute.... - (gdaustin) - (3)
                                 I think that this forks into 2 different process streams - (hnick) - (2)
                                     Second Stream - (gdaustin) - (1)
                                         Heh.. Not the bus I was thinking of - (hnick)
                     But always in the narrow-trained Econ mind - - (Ashton) - (4)
                         I think you're thinking of Arundhati Roy - (Another Scott) - (1)
                             Exactly - thanks. - (Ashton)
                         The problem - (JayMehaffey) - (1)
                             In accord. - (Ashton)
             Why use third world country labor? - (orion) - (2)
                 Employees Don't Have a Choice... - (gdaustin) - (1)
                     Boomers >>> THE. G.I. BILL. <<< - (Ashton)
         Glacial change of social mores | Accelerated machines? - (Ashton)
         Player Piano - (tuberculosis)
         I've long thought something like that - (ben_tilly) - (3)
             Oh, I expect . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (2)
                 (er IF not when) Shall attend thine enthronement Oh #1-ASIC -NT - (Ashton)
                 Re: Oh, I expect . . - (kmself)

The natural irony quotient of the Universe asserting itself in everyday life.
205 ms