|
 My response: quote:This ignores all the benefits that come with being in the army— quoting from goarmy.com: http://www.goarmy.com/benefits/total-compensation.html How'd I do?
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 02:36 |
|
|
Maybe we should make life less lovely for our soldiers instead of complaining that burger flippers don't have it lovely enough?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 04:59
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:Maybe we should make life less lovely for our soldiers instead of complaining that burger flippers don't have it lovely enough? Maybe we should make life less lovely for people in America in general instead of treating people like depreciating consumer durables.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
Don't forget that the "minor burns" can actually be pretty bad; the Hot Coffee lady had to have surgery for what happened to her, and I imagine workers don't have it much better.Taaaaaaarb! posted:Maybe we should make life less lovely for people in America in general instead of treating people like depreciating consumer durables. Also this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
You could also just go full-tilt and hit them with the labor theory of value. If they want to know what a McDonalds worker is "worth" I bet dividing yearly earnings by worker-hours is going to give you a number a heck of a lot higher than $15.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
http://www.pizzamarketplace.com/article/111444/Pizza-delivery-driver-fifth-of-10-most-dangerous-jobsquote:Labor bureau: Food delivery among most dangerous jobs in the nation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 05:12
|
|
|
Augster posted:
This was excellently done. By pointing out information from a third party the individual is likely to find credible, and specifically not attacking their intuitions (however flawed they are) as Taaaaarb! describes, or introducing ideas that will seem foreign and therefore automatically wrong, as Mornacale proposes, you're more likely to actually make a facebook forwarder change their mind. I promise, it can be done!
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 05:48
|
|
|
Got a response:quote:Look, I feel for the fast food workers, I do - part of the reason I joined the Army was because I found fast food work miserable. But the reason fast food workers get paid so little is because it's not exactly a complex job - as it is, we're already seeing a lot of minimum wage jobs in fast food or retail get automated for that reason. Economists are predicting 90% of all such jobs will be gone in 20 years for that reason. You raise those wages, you just speed up the process. You put low wage workers against no wage workers, it doesn't take the Wall Street Journal to figure out who will win in the end. I can't find a source for that claim. Is there anything more to this than "Eh their jobs will be gone soon anyway, they should all join the army."?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 06:19
|
|
|
"No wage workers"? I thought he was talking about robots or something, but I guess he wants to revive slavery.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 06:21
|
|
|
Augster posted:Got a response: I'd argue that food prep is a pretty serious job, what with all the health regulations and you actually providing a service to people. Ask him about being replaced by a drone http://gizmodo.com/5879621/the-military-is-replacing-humans-with-giant-drone-surge edit: better article http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/01/obama-defense-plan-fewer-troops-and-more-drones
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 06:28
|
|
|
Breadallelogram posted:"No wage workers"? I thought he was talking about robots or something, but I guess he wants to revive slavery. He's clearly talking about automated replacements. He's just calling them no wage to make his comparison clear. Of course, automated isnt no wage either, because you have to perform maintenance.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 06:30
|
|
|
He might be referencing the Oxford report that states "45 percent of America’s occupations will be automated within the next 20 years." http://www.technologyreview.com/view/519241/report-suggests-nearly-half-of-us-jobs-are-vulnerable-to-computerization/ Low/semi-skilled jobs are expected to be hit especially heavily.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 06:39
|
|
|
Presenting this in terms of the military being automated will, again, get perceived as an attack. Attacking that oxford report (whose method of getting that 45% statistic looks pretty darn near worthless) is also not going to sway him. The best route I might suggest is to say(with examples from the text, as inoffensively as possible) that the meme he's forwarding seems to work by putting fast food workers down- by attacking and dehumanizing them through comparison with soldiers. It's already reading like he's experiencing some cognitive dissonance, which is a good thing. You probably won't be able to get him out of the terrible efficient markets counterfactual justification he has going, but it may have the effect of getting him to consider these things more critically before he forwards them. If you are able to get a source for that 90% in 20 years statistic, do share. But remember, asking folks for their sources is almost always taken as an attack on their credibility. The best jujitsu in this sort of situation is to get them to doubt the credibility of the forwarded message, in a way that makes them distrust or disconnect from the message and not you. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 07:30 on Feb 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 07:26
|
|
|
Ask him if no veterans have ever worked in a fast food job, and whether there should be decent jobs waiting for the troops after they come home from a war.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 07:56
|
|
|
justanotherconservative posted:Just to ensure I don’t give the wrong impression, I actually don’t hate Bill Nye. I think he’s mistaken on many points and is guilty of some very unscientific conclusions, but I actually have great respect for him as an educator. I loved watching Bill Nye’s television show, and would happily plop myself down in front of the TV to soak in the science. Science Rules! His show was one of the best educational shows ever put on public television, and his enthusiasm for the natural world was infectious. He could communicate complex scientific principles in words simple enough for a grade school kid to grasp.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 08:16
|
|
|
Let him know that there are some astrophysicists who do indeed question the Big Bang (due to stuff like the horizon and flatness problems, at least according to Wikipedia). Also, ask him what "natural laws" he's talking about, as well as what he thinks the Scientific Method is. Finally, ask him to provide a specific example of a report being ignored purely due to ideological reasons.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 10:01
|
|
|
Wanderer's stupid Conservative friend posted:"unsanctioned origins theory to gain any acceptance within their ranks, no matter how plausible, and continue to push this flawed theory on students across the world, with not so much as a footnote to acknowledge the holes and contradictions in the theory itself." Would this 'unsanctioned origins theory' happen to begin with 'it says in the bible' and end with 'So that's how everything happened and it cannot possibly be wrong'? What holes? What contradictions in the theory of evolution? If you need proof of evolution, you have it right in front of you. Actually right inside of you. Germs evolve and change. That's why the H1N1 pig flu caused such a panic. There hadn't been a big panic over it before, it was because it *evolved* into the strain H1N1. That's why you need a new Flu shot every year, because the flu virus mutates and evolves over the year. That's also why sometimes you'll just get the flu anyway because the flu you were vaccinated against *evolved* past the loving vaccines. If you know a hole in the Theory of Evolution, I challenge you to bring it up. And no, 'If evolve why monkeys  ' doesn't count because it doesn't change the fact that our species happened to branch off, we evolved for our purposes and the others didn't have to evolve the way we did. They evolved to survive in their environment, and we evolved into ours.Edit: Also if he mentions Intelligent Design, laugh in his loving face. Intelligent design is to science as robbing the poor is to charity. E-Tank fucked around with this message at 11:40 on Feb 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 10:47
|
|
|
It kinda makes sense if you read "The Big Bang Theory" as the sitcom.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 11:13
|
|
|
Dr Pepper posted:No I get that. I just don't see how that in any way invalidates the choices people make. Again, explaining why and how something happened does not change the fact that it happened. Why I chose to make this post and how doesn't change the fact that I chose to make it. A good explanation I've heard, that I think I've found a good way to put into words is this. The entirety of the history of the universe, from its inception up to, very recently, me reading these posts, led to me deciding to raise my arm in the air, and then raising my arm in the air. The important thing, and the thing that we are really arguing over, is that that causal chain, from the beginning of the universe up until now, could not have led to anything else. the fact that I, from my perspective, decided to raise my arm in the air isn't free will, because it is what had to happen. And with a giant computer, you could have predicted it would have. (I do admit that last point it mostly philosophical wankery) EDIT: Most recently in the causal chain, I saw XyloJW's post. Why did I choose not to finish the thread before posting? 
Eridine fucked around with this message at 11:41 on Feb 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 11:35
|
|
|
E-Tank posted:And no, 'If evolve why monkeys I actually don't mind when people use this argument as it really highlights a poor understanding of the details. When it comes up feel free to point out that both the human-chimp common ancestor and ape-old world monkey common ancestor have been roughly dated (using molecular and fossil methods respectively) and both are thoroughly extinct.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 13:39
|
|
|
andrew smash posted:I actually don't mind when people use this argument as it really highlights a poor understanding of the details. When it comes up feel free to point out that both the human-chimp common ancestor and ape-old world monkey common ancestor have been roughly dated (using molecular and fossil methods respectively) and both are thoroughly extinct. "Do you have any cousins? Are they all dead?"
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 14:35
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:"Do you have any cousins? Are they all dead?" "Yes. It was a horrible accident. Why are you mocking my dead relatives. You monster." 
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 15:29
|
|
|
Augster posted:Got a response: Costs associated with "automated" processes replacing workers: -Design and manufacturing -Installation -Maintenance -Energy -The fact that robot cooks do not exist Even supermarket checkout lines have a person sitting there to fix the machines when people break them. These automated machines aren't going to hit low-skill low-pay workers. It would cost way more than $15 an hour to create and install a machine that does everything an entire staff of low-wage employees do. Then you have to hire technicians to keep them working, who would demand as much as the entire staff to do the high-skill job. After all that, you still have to pay the electric bill. Or, you could just hire a bunch of people for $10 an hour and save yourself all the hassle. Just because technology can do something doesn't mean it can do it cheaply enough to be worth it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 16:05
|
|
|
andrew smash posted:I actually don't mind when people use this argument as it really highlights a poor understanding of the details. When it comes up feel free to point out that both the human-chimp common ancestor and ape-old world monkey common ancestor have been roughly dated (using molecular and fossil methods respectively) and both are thoroughly extinct. "If Americans descended from Europeans, why are there still Europeans?"
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
Xombie posted:Just because technology can do something doesn't mean it can do it cheaply enough to be worth it. The trend is that the cost of technology goes down over time and as it matures it becomes simpler and easier to maintain. Yes, right now it would cost more but will that still be true in 20 or 50 years? I doubt it. Self-service checkout lanes do have a person sitting there but that person can presumably push through more customers than a regular cashier. If he or she can push through twice as many customers then a cashier job has been lost. I worked at a ferry company where in the span of 10 years we went from having 12 people at high volume departures to... 2 people and a bunch of machines. 1 person to oversee check-in and handle harbor/ship communications and 1 person to direct traffic to the boat. When I left they were in the process of installing automated booms and light signalling so the boat crew could direct traffic from the lanes themselves and they could get rid of one more person on land. It's not just the customer service people that get hit either - now you need fewer people in HR, accounting and management too not to mention less office space. I'm sure the company that maintains the machines use man hours on it but I doubt if it's even 1 full time job for a technician. Now that place was ideal for automation so it just happened there first - automating super markets, cafés and fast food joints is more complex but I see no reason why it won't eventually happen there too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 17:28
|
|
|
TerminalSaint posted:He might be referencing the Oxford report that states "45 percent of America’s occupations will be automated within the next 20 years." http://www.technologyreview.com/view/519241/report-suggests-nearly-half-of-us-jobs-are-vulnerable-to-computerization/ Low/semi-skilled jobs are expected to be hit especially heavily. Currently, people need to work two jobs in order to just get by. Arguably, if a person could make a living wage at one job, then the labor force could stand to lose half the jobs without greatly increasing poverty.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 17:32
|
|
|
KKKLIP ART posted:Reactions to the Coke Super Bowl commercial are predictable. How dare you song a song about America in any other language than English? Goddamn those fuckers singing songs about America in anything other than one of the Na-Dene, Eskimo-Aleut, or Amerind language families. VitalSigns posted:I refuse to believe that anyone is seriously complaining that Hawaiian lyrics are un-American. Thanks to this thread and Reddit's politics sub, I'm no longer amazed at the depths of stupidity of many of the people in the US and elsewhere. Walter fucked around with this message at 18:08 on Feb 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 18:02
|
|
|
Anosmoman posted:The trend is that the cost of technology goes down over time and as it matures it becomes simpler and easier to maintain. Yes, right now it would cost more but will that still be true in 20 or 50 years? I doubt it. The entire argument I was making was about context. Which is what you're making the mistake of ignoring here, too. When you talk about shipping, you're talking about people operating existing machinery. The process for automated cooking doesn't even exist yet. Even it did, it would be an extremely complex process with a lot of mechanical parts, which would take decades to be efficient enough to replace a low-wage worker. We'll see 3D printers for food before we see a robot cooking a burger. Even programs for the repetition of the process would not be adequate, because of food safety regulations requiring accountability. The only place that a machine could efficiently replace a person in a fast food joint is for taking orders, which only comprises a fraction of the staff. And, like checkout lines, you'd still need to hire someone to show people how to use the machines and clear the errors that inevitably pop up. You'd be firing one or two people per shift, at most. The savings for the company are not there. Just because a machine can do one job efficiently doesn't mean that machines can do all jobs efficiently. Total fast food automation is still such a fantasy as to be not worth considering for real-life issues. Xombie fucked around with this message at 18:21 on Feb 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 18:19
|
|
|
Xombie posted:When you talk about shipping, you're talking about people operating existing machinery. The process for automated cooking doesn't even exist yet. Even it did, it would be an extremely complex process with a lot of mechanical parts, which would take decades to be efficient enough to replace a low-wage worker. We'll see 3D printers for food before we see a robot cooking a burger. Even programs for the repetition of the process would not be adequate, because of food safety regulations requiring accountability. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IAT8BAcD14 There's a lot of elasticity in consumer tolerance for lovely prepackaged food. You're not considering that McDonalds prefabricated burgers could become even more disgusting yet profitable if they stick to a bare minimum price point. boner confessor fucked around with this message at 18:32 on Feb 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 18:29
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IAT8BAcD14 I would not say that the process used to pre-package food is "efficient" in any sense of the word for incorporating into a restaurant. Putting aside the time and product loss it includes, even the process in the video is only profitable due to scale. Xombie fucked around with this message at 18:38 on Feb 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 18:34
|
|
|
Xombie posted:I would not say that the process used to pre-package food is "efficient" in any sense of the word for incorporating into a restaurant. Putting aside the time and product loss it includes, even the process in the video is only profitable due to scale. Who better to leverage scale than fast food, an industry which already trucks precooked food to franchisees to the point of assembly and sale? I would even say Darden Group restaurants would try this if it didn't shatter the illusion that Olive Garden/Red Lobster's food was actually cooked and not just fancy frozen meals.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 18:36
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:Who better to leverage scale than fast food, an industry which already trucks precooked food to franchisees to the point of assembly and sale? Because these massive factories cannot be shrunk down to the size of a single store and still keep product margins. Unless of course you're using some shrink-ray on it to make very very tiny burgers. McDonald's pre-packages quite a bit of its food using factory processes. Cooking at the store is still more efficient and cost-effective when done with a low-wage human being. Making one assembly line automated for putting together chicken nuggets is one thing. Buying hundreds of thousands of robots to drop them into a deep fryer is another.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 18:38
|
|
|
I don't know where exactly to put this, but does anyone have a link to the dumb online post about how evolution violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics and how we would need some huge external energy source constantly pumping into the earth in order to make it work. The answer was very very obviously "the sun, you dumbass." IIRC it was quoted on some website that collects dumb conservative/religious posts/arguments. My google-fu is failing me at the moment though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 18:43
|
|
|
Xombie posted:Because these massive factories cannot be shrunk down to the size of a single store and still keep product margins. Unless of course you're using some shrink-ray on it to make very very tiny burgers. Sure, but you don't need a whole factory to assemble a burger from prepackaged components. You can cook a frozen pizza in your microwave. Xombie posted:McDonald's pre-packages quite a bit of its food using factory processes. Cooking at the store is still more efficient and cost-effective when done with a low-wage human being. For now. But in 1955, McDonalds cooked all of their own food in house. Their dominance of fast food comes because they leverage production line technology, and I don't see it stopping any time soon. I think you're thinking of the difficulties of creating an android-like appendage to work a kitchen designed for a human. I don't see any reason why there can't be a relatively compact self contained unit for specific entirely robotic cooking applications, especially if you don't have to process the raw inputs into a finished, frozen food product on site. Imagine a device that you pour frozen nuggets or fries into and it spits them cooked out the other side. How small could it be? Fridge sized? At a certain point human labor would have to be really drat cheap to compete with a device that will fry things on demand. Three minimum wage shifts for a year is still $70k. You could cut down labor costs to just robot tenders, fridge stockers, and troubleshooters and still come out ahead in the long run. You're right in that the relative pittance you're legally forced to pay employees will be an impediment against automation but technology is relentless and I don't see that argument as a conclusive statement against automation of menial jobs. Especially not when the job is relatively simple, such as cooking fast food. EDIT: Another factor you may not be considering is that there's a lot of leeway to make food simpler to cook. While it would be difficult to create a cost effective robot to mimic the activities of a human, the standards for kitchen design and food quality could easily be modified to accomodate robotic production. Like I said earlier, there are plenty of people who can't tell that Olive Garden's food is almost all boil-in-bag. Xombie posted:Making one assembly line automated for putting together chicken nuggets is one thing. Buying hundreds of thousands of robots to drop them into a deep fryer is another. McDonalds execs would murder orphans for the chance to sell a corporate branded fryer robot geegaw to tens of thousands of franchisees. boner confessor fucked around with this message at 19:32 on Feb 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
gently caress You And Diebold posted:I don't know where exactly to put this, but does anyone have a link to the dumb online post about how evolution violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics and how we would need some huge external energy source constantly pumping into the earth in order to make it work. The answer was very very obviously "the sun, you dumbass." IIRC it was quoted on some website that collects dumb conservative/religious posts/arguments. My google-fu is failing me at the moment though. http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=8255&Page=9 First hit with the google query "second law of thermodynamics closed system the sun dumbass"
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=8255&Page=9 There it is! Thank you. My "evolution 2nd thermodynamics sun stupid quote" was bringing up wayyyy to many responses.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:Imagine a device that you pour frozen nuggets or fries into and it spits them cooked out the other side. How small could it be? Fridge sized? At a certain point human labor would have to be really drat cheap to compete with a device that will fry things on demand. Three minimum wage shifts for a year is still $70k. You could cut down labor costs to just robot tenders, fridge stockers, and troubleshooters and still come out ahead in the long run. McDonalds have had already had these for years because I can remember seeing automated fry cookers when I was in one and I haven't eaten McDonalds in 10 years probably. It required very little from the employee, just cycling the baskets from end-beginning I think.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:Sure, but you don't need a whole factory to assemble a burger from prepackaged components. You can cook a frozen pizza in your microwave. Once again: this sort of assembly is only affordable because it's a factory. It is not affordable in a smaller format. quote:For now. But in 1955, McDonalds cooked all of their own food in house. Their dominance of fast food comes because they leverage production line technology, and I don't see it stopping any time soon. They have these, it is called your microwave. People still go to McDonald's. The entire point is that they use raw ingredients. quote:Imagine a device that you pour frozen nuggets or fries into and it spits them cooked out the other side. How small could it be? Fridge sized? At a certain point human labor would have to be really drat cheap to compete with a device that will fry things on demand. Three minimum wage shifts for a year is still $70k. You could cut down labor costs to just robot tenders, fridge stockers, and troubleshooters and still come out ahead in the long run. There is zero evidence that this fantasy technology, which would still cost millions of dollars to develop, would in any way be efficient enough replace pay a human being $10 an hour to do. Again, it would not even necessarily be legal to use, due to food safety regulations. Robots and programs cannot perform quality control. There's also maintenance and losses. What happens when one of your workers is sick? You call in another worker. What happens when your fryer robot is down? You shut down the entire store until someone can come and replace the part. quote:You're right in that the relative pittance you're legally forced to pay employees will be an impediment against automation but technology is relentless and I don't see that argument as a conclusive statement against automation of menial jobs. Especially not when the job is relatively simple, such as cooking fast food. Again, saying technology will do it isn't the same thing as technology actually doing it, let alone in any time frame soon enough to be relevant to the issues of right now. You're making the same empty argument that Augster's friend is. Thinking of something existing doesn't make it actually exist. Technology has costs associated with it. quote:McDonalds execs would murder orphans for the chance to sell a corporate branded fryer robot geegaw to tens of thousands of franchisees. Not if it costs them more money than hiring low-wage workers. For the foreseeable future, that is the case. Xombie fucked around with this message at 19:51 on Feb 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 19:48
|
|
|
Xombie posted:Once again: this sort of assembly is only affordable because it's a factory. It is not affordable in a smaller format. MP3 players used to cost hundreds of dollars. Technology tends to get cheaper over time. Xombie posted:There is zero evidence that this fantasy technology, which would still cost millions of dollars to develop, would in any way be efficient enough replace pay a human being $10 an hour to do. Again, it would not even necessarily be legal to use, due to food safety regulations. Robots and programs cannot perform quality control. Yes, thanks for pointing out this argument is theoretical. It's also not hard to do automated quality control, especially with inputs that are known to be sanitary. Xombie posted:Again, saying technology will do it isn't the same thing as technology actually doing it, let alone in any time frame soon enough to be relevant to the issues of right now. You're making the same empty argument that Augster's friend is. Thinking of something existing doesn't make it actually exist. Technology has costs associated with it. Automats have existed for a century, dude. The only thing left to automate is heating up prepackaged food. You seem stuck on the idea that it would be difficult to insert robots into the current fast food business model. You're not really considering how much and how quickly this could change in response to new technology, which is ironic givent the example case here is an industry centered entirely around cheap substandard products produced with as little human input as possible. Xombie posted:Not if it costs them more money than hiring low-wage workers. For the foreseeable future, that is the case. That's up to the franchisees. McDonald's Inc. doesn't hire any fry technicians, they are in the business of selling licenses, branding, and product to McDonald's owners - and one of those product lines revolves entirely around automatic food makers. I'm not saying all McDonalds will be robot kitchens, but it's similarly absurd to me to think that bare bones wages are a obstacle to even further cost cutting in a highly competitive and low margin industry. boner confessor fucked around with this message at 20:04 on Feb 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 20:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 02:36 |
|
|
nsaP posted:McDonalds have had already had these for years because I can remember seeing automated fry cookers when I was in one and I haven't eaten McDonalds in 10 years probably. It required very little from the employee, just cycling the baskets from end-beginning I think. Right, and these cookers just time how long the food needs to be in the oil. They still require input from the employee to set up and start. Dropping food into oil is the easy part for a machine. Knowing how much food to cook and when, retrieving food from storage, making sure that the machine is actually working as intended, etc, are all still far easier and cheaper to teach a human to do than program the machine to do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 20:02
|
|