It is obvious that Amazon wishes to replace all its employees for cheaper alternatives. That is true for all big companies. How realistic is this plan that is the question.
American companies lie so often about the feasibility of future capabilities that it is becoming just background noise. If the plan is not realistic, if it is not based in well argued projects, then they are just lying to the public and to investors. Currently the bar is so low, that anything counts as "we just though that it was possible" so it is not illegal. That should be solved.
Robots can't unionize so of course they hope to replace everyone in the US.
None of it will matter anyway, they're shoveling enough money to the right people to have any regulations or oversight squashed, nevermind the sheer number of jobs that will be lost, I might be wrong but it would be a dent in the national unemployment numbers ?
I'm supportive of effort to mechanize work, but humanoid robots always seemed like a "horseless carriage" approach to me. The human body is powerful in its adaptability but most industrial processes are better enhanced by purpose-built machines.
Normally I'd be against this kind of thing, but Amazon warehouse work is notoriously abusive and people would be better off out of it .. if they had alternatives.
It's so strange that a site full of software developers reacts so harshly to the idea of robots. What exactly is it you people think you are building? You automate stuff for a living.
Is it okay to automate sales and customer service and marketing, but warehouse workers are where you draw the line? Do you have any idea how many jobs this industry has already "killed"?
Well, a the scale at which AI and other things are proceeding to replace humans just for the sake of saving money for few top earning people. It's horrible. I shall say you should ban AI for most of the things where it can help solve issues! Now that's upto to humanity how it want to keep people eating food or have a proper life
Amazon doesn’t do a good job of handling workers. So I guess this is a good thing. Mistreatment is a bad thing.
Prices will be lowered. And the appeal of warehouses will go up this way. But for the remaining workers, I don’t think Amazon will come up with a better work environment. I don’t think they have that skill set.
isn't the dexterity and precision of the human hand to robotics as the problem solving ability of the human brain is to LLMs? Like, are robotics even close to that level of performance?
> Job losses could shave 30 cents off each item purchased by 2027.
This is incredible. It's far less than I would imagine. It represents how well optimized the warehouses are. If we roughly estimate a median product price to be $20, then the automation represents less than 2% cost saving. Of course, Amazon is at a scale that this is still net positive despite all the R&D cost. But if automation was to reduce the cost of living, there are probably better areas to focus on.
They won't be destitute. Population collapse is coming, it's imperative we automate anything we can, so those workers are freed up to work in non-automatable jobs. 94% population loss in South Korea over the next three generations. Similar numbers in South America as well.
Maybe, in three generations. That’s a long time from now. And these job losses are happening in the next decade, during a population peak, at least in the US.
Before people bring their pitchforks to this headline, take a look at existing automation in factories [1][2] and ask yourself why would we ever want humans to do something that robots can do this well? Also despite the fact that humanoids are all the hype now (and included in the article), note that amazon has been investing in much more specialized approaches for quite some time [3][4].
There are so many things we can be doing with our time, and moving objects from a left-bin to a right-bin simply does not need to be one of them. The real question is if we have the collective will to get all these folks education and opportunities to do something else before they feel too much pain in the near term.
> if we have the collective will to get all these folks education and opportunities to do something else
I hear this often, but have not read a single explanation of what the "something else" is that these people are supposed to do (a "something else" that we aren't also actively trying to replace with AI or AI driven processes). Barbers? Nail salons? I think we have enough of those already.
Every time this comes up there are the people who say, "but look at the Industrial Revolution, all the farmers found new jobs; so certainly everyone laid off by AI will find new jobs too".
I would like to hear, from one of those believers, _what_ type of _new_ jobs these laid off warehouse workers are going to get? (And no, they won't become AI prompt engineers.)
I have not heard a single satisfactory answer to this very simple question. And if no one has any idea of what type of _new_ jobs are opening up, then it's highly unlikely to happen.
In the Industrial Revolution, billions (for that time) were being spent on creating whole new types of jobs (i.e., factories). Which companies today are spending any money on creating new jobs?
> At the Shreveport facility, more than 160 people work as robotics technicians, and they make at least $24.45 an hour. Most of Shreveport’s 2,000 employees are regular hourly workers, whose pay starts at $19.50.
And this is for a prototype plant where you would expect the need for more and top-qualified technicians. (Most likely this does not count the robotics installers and tuners which might be from a different sub-company and classification - but still.) This might change when demand for qualified robotics technicians keeps increasing.
Another noticeable thing was that even with this automation push, Amazon is mostly planning to hire LESS. Not really reduce yet. It seems they are still growing beyond the potential improvements of robotics.
Still another is the insane capital-intensiveness of retail now! Wow.
> And this is for a prototype plant where you would expect the need for more and top-qualified technicians.
One would think, but that's not really the reality for the technicians. Amazon assuredly brought in some experienced techs from other facilities to help with launch, but most of the staff are just locals.
> At the Shreveport facility, more than 160 people work as robotics technicians, and they make at least $24.45 an hour. Most of Shreveport’s 2,000 employees are regular hourly workers, whose pay starts at $19.50
The associate pay sounds right, but the average starting pay for robotics technicians is in the low-mid 30s. The $24.45 figure is for apprentices, who are not a large part of any maintenance cohort.
The next disruption (possibly by Amazon) will be in getting products more directly from the point of manufacture to the point of use. Warehouses are an oversized cache for physical goods.
And this is why they don't care how many people they fire. The intention was always to automate the warehouses, and as long as they do it before they exhaust the workforce, turnover doesn't matter.
I know we’re living through turbulent times with a lot of disruption. I’m struggling to decide whether to keep my retirement investments in equities or move to something more stable. While AI and robotic automation clearly benefit corporate bottom lines, fewer people will have jobs. Who will be buying the products and services these companies sell?
33 comments
[ 1.8 ms ] story [ 55.6 ms ] threadAmerican companies lie so often about the feasibility of future capabilities that it is becoming just background noise. If the plan is not realistic, if it is not based in well argued projects, then they are just lying to the public and to investors. Currently the bar is so low, that anything counts as "we just though that it was possible" so it is not illegal. That should be solved.
I know this is just a start (and just enough to make the ROI worth it, probably), but it sounds particularly dystopian / late stage capitalism
None of it will matter anyway, they're shoveling enough money to the right people to have any regulations or oversight squashed, nevermind the sheer number of jobs that will be lost, I might be wrong but it would be a dent in the national unemployment numbers ?
But who cares, they're paying the right people.
Is it okay to automate sales and customer service and marketing, but warehouse workers are where you draw the line? Do you have any idea how many jobs this industry has already "killed"?
Prices will be lowered. And the appeal of warehouses will go up this way. But for the remaining workers, I don’t think Amazon will come up with a better work environment. I don’t think they have that skill set.
This is incredible. It's far less than I would imagine. It represents how well optimized the warehouses are. If we roughly estimate a median product price to be $20, then the automation represents less than 2% cost saving. Of course, Amazon is at a scale that this is still net positive despite all the R&D cost. But if automation was to reduce the cost of living, there are probably better areas to focus on.
There are so many things we can be doing with our time, and moving objects from a left-bin to a right-bin simply does not need to be one of them. The real question is if we have the collective will to get all these folks education and opportunities to do something else before they feel too much pain in the near term.
[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/Sino/comments/1iwgb19/a_dark_factor... [2] https://www.fortna.com/ [3] https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/operations/amazon-vulcan-ro... [4] https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/operations/10-years-of-amaz...
I hear this often, but have not read a single explanation of what the "something else" is that these people are supposed to do (a "something else" that we aren't also actively trying to replace with AI or AI driven processes). Barbers? Nail salons? I think we have enough of those already.
I forget the author, or the exact quote, but basically this. Brainless jobs should be automated, nobody should be an automaton.
This doesn't mean we give up on craftsmanship, but mass production and busy work should be eliminated from human roles.
I would like to hear, from one of those believers, _what_ type of _new_ jobs these laid off warehouse workers are going to get? (And no, they won't become AI prompt engineers.)
I have not heard a single satisfactory answer to this very simple question. And if no one has any idea of what type of _new_ jobs are opening up, then it's highly unlikely to happen.
In the Industrial Revolution, billions (for that time) were being spent on creating whole new types of jobs (i.e., factories). Which companies today are spending any money on creating new jobs?
And this is for a prototype plant where you would expect the need for more and top-qualified technicians. (Most likely this does not count the robotics installers and tuners which might be from a different sub-company and classification - but still.) This might change when demand for qualified robotics technicians keeps increasing.
Another noticeable thing was that even with this automation push, Amazon is mostly planning to hire LESS. Not really reduce yet. It seems they are still growing beyond the potential improvements of robotics.
Still another is the insane capital-intensiveness of retail now! Wow.
One would think, but that's not really the reality for the technicians. Amazon assuredly brought in some experienced techs from other facilities to help with launch, but most of the staff are just locals.
> At the Shreveport facility, more than 160 people work as robotics technicians, and they make at least $24.45 an hour. Most of Shreveport’s 2,000 employees are regular hourly workers, whose pay starts at $19.50
The associate pay sounds right, but the average starting pay for robotics technicians is in the low-mid 30s. The $24.45 figure is for apprentices, who are not a large part of any maintenance cohort.
Source: Amazon robotics technician.
The next disruption (possibly by Amazon) will be in getting products more directly from the point of manufacture to the point of use. Warehouses are an oversized cache for physical goods.