Technological advancements have allowed machines to replace not only manual human labor but also, increasingly, jobs that rely on calculation, judgment, communication, and even learning. From a capitalist perspective, machine work is more desirable because it increases productivity and decreases cost--computers don't take sick days, ask for raises, or complain about working conditions. But Carr observes that replacing humans with computers can lead to an increased disparity in wealth and power that comes with a reduction in middle-wage jobs. What problems arise when "power concentrates with those who control the programming"? To what extent do we adjust our own behaviors and skills to the machines we rely on to work for us?
Machines are the perfect employee and I understand why company owners want technology over people, but I do think it hurts everyone else. Everyone will have to adjust their skills to accompany the changing world around them. For example, “shoe making” used to be a common profession but now the job market has little use for someone with the skill to make shoes because it is done by machines. Also, in the Great Depression large scale farming put many small farms out of business, causing those farmers to find work elsewhere. People have been adjusting their skill set and behavior since the world began, technology is just the biggest and latest cause for all this change.
ReplyDeleteI think we see exactly the problem that Carr outlines: the "hollowing" of the middle class. The folks that control the programming get rich, advances in technology rob the middle-class of jobs, and the poor become more numerous and more destitute as a result. It's the tragedy of capitalism - the rich get richer at the expense of everyone else, and everyone else lets the system persist in the hope that they themselves will one day be wealthy.
ReplyDeleteThe phrase "seize the means of production" ran trough my head the entire chapter. Money is a little too emphasized in our society in my opinion. If everything gets automated, people will eventually starve and that's how revolutions start. It's not a question of what's right anymore, it's about survival. I think it would take a huge shift in ideology to get us off of that path though. People need to be seen as valuable and not the weak link in the chain. Machines have their place, I don't think it needs to be in the heart of everything though.
DeleteI agree with Abbie completely when she says that machines/computers are the perfect employee from a capitalist perspective, but capitalists have to start thinking about the bigger picture here: there is a very small percentage of the population that can afford to lay off the majority of their workers in order to "employ" machines. In the long run, when capitalists continue firing a large number of employees across the nation or even world, the decrease in middle-wage jobs will eventually cause a decrease in demand for the goods supplied by capitalists, resulting in a surplus of goods and a decrease in the price of goods, which will ultimately not turn as big of a profit for the factory owners and venture capitalists as they had once hoped. This is just one of the many problems that can arise when power concentrates with those who control the programming.
ReplyDeleteWe must force our behaviors and skills to adapt to the machines on which we rely in order for said machines to work for us. Carr gives readers an example of artillerymen in World War II having to "shift identities" from soldiers to technicians in order to take out the Nazis after realizing that the Nazi's "new generation of automated weapons" cannot be taken out unless the soldiers adapt to what life had thrown at them, changing their behaviors and skills to a great extent without hesitating.