> Did humans with computer replace humans without computer?
Yes, they did. Or rather: everyone was forced to catch up and those that didn't just got left behind.
Those of us who saw the PC revolution still remember the time when typewriters were an everyday artifact. We also saw how everyone was forced to choose between updating or being left behind - no matter how fast your secretary was, a human with carbon paper is no match for a human that slightly tweaks a template and sends 10 copies to the printer. And a human with a calculator will always be slower than a human with Excel.
The only important caveat here is that businesses and organizations tend to become inflexible over time. For example there are plenty of businesses that still use fax machines today. Obviously that is inefficient and that businesses should be at risk of competitors undercutting them.
But in reality you'll see that poorly run businesses can end up continuing for decades.
So we have entered into this weird situation where Hollywood actors and writers are demanding huge compensation for work that is becoming relatively cheap to produce with new technology. It is going to be interesting to see this play out.
> So we have entered into this weird situation where Hollywood actors and writers are demanding huge compensation for work that is becoming relatively cheap to produce with new technology. It is going to be interesting to see this play out.
Thing is, while actors can be replaced or massively augmented by AI, writing by definition cannot until we have actual AGI solved. No matter what you ask ChatGPT, its outputs are as finite as its training material is.
And even for actors, people are already beginning to loathe too much CGI, see the decline of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. As long as there are enough people actually preferring live humans, Hollywood execs can get f.cked with their dreams of collecting the hundreds of millions of dollars they pay actors for themselves.
>As long as there are enough people actually preferring live humans
I don't think that's a high bar. Maybe they prefer A class live humans, but there are certainly plenty of "filler" holes that most people won't ever perceive as missing.
The last plumber I hired had a website, spotted a leak with a flir camera (and had a pile of interesting niche electronics), and sent me an invoice he generated through an app on his phone via email... Maybe there are places where you can hire some analog types on the cheap, but where I am the computerized ones are way more efficient.
Even if those people aren't using computers at their job (and I even disagree with that), they still use computers. A baker with a computer and internet access has access to more recipes than a baker without a computer. A baker with a website and an online presence is finding more customers than a baker who only exists in the real world.
As a matter of fact, the new boiler my plumber (who has a webpage and I found online, mind you) recently installed has computer chips and circuits. My plumber seems very technically literate and knowledgeable about the tech as well.
Police offices are now using AI to catch people. Even before, they were using computers in criminology for DNA samples.
So all of the professions you listed use computers all the time for their job. Both directly and indirectly. A baker without internet, a plumber with no computer knowledge, a police office stuck using analog tools are all worse off than their tech savvy counterparts.
> A baker with a website and an online presence is finding more customers than a baker who only exists in the real world.
I can say for sure that this is simply not true. There are bakeries without websites that make a killing, while at the same time there are smaller ones in the same areas trying to drum up business online with less success.
I view the parent's comment as a statistical statement (e.g. better off on average), not a literal absolute statement. That's usually what people mean when they make statements about large sets of people/things.
You're picking exceptions to the rule and claiming that those exceptions invalidate the whole rule. Sure some bakeries are just better than others, a good bakery with no website will do better than a bad bakery with a website.
But all things considered, having an online presence always helps your business. A fantastic bakery with a website will get more customers than a fantastic bakery with no website.
I think you picked the worst example ever. The success of a bakery is based on 3 things:
1) location
2) location
3) location
Everything else doesn't matter. Nobody goes online every day to see "Gee, I wonder which artisanal bakery I'm going to drive to today, and I'm going to make my decision based on which bakery has the flashiest website".
If websites mattered, then small businesses wouldn't have the crappiest websites ever.
Wow, only location, huh? Doesn't matter if their product is actually good? And I guess if there are two bakeries in the same location (happens every day in these places called "cities"), I will just pick randomly then.
If you really think bakers don't benefit from using computers, then you're just not thinking very hard. I always look up the reviews of the bakeries I go to if I'm buying a cake or something. I wouldn't risk buying something at a bakery without checking online if it's worth it or not.
>If websites mattered, then small businesses wouldn't have the crappiest websites ever.
If websites DIDNT matter, these small businesses would not have websites at all. I'm not saying you need a good website. You just need any website for discovery. Your example actually supports my arguement - why would small businesses be wasting time with websites unless it helped them?
> I wouldn't risk buying something at a bakery without checking online if it's worth it or not.
You wouldn’t risk spending on $7 on a loaf of bread to try out whether a bakery is good or not?
I’m sorry but that just sounds ridiculous on its face. The average reviewer has no taste to begin with.
> You just need any website for discovery.
No, what they need is to claim ownership of a Google Maps entry and a Yelp page. I don’t know if I’ve ever visited a bakery’s website in my life, but I've found plenty by searching Google Maps.
The last thing I bought from a bakery was a $50 dollar cheesecake for a birthday party. And you can bet I looked up reviews from at least 5-10 different bakeries. And also visited their websites. But sure, whatever you think.
You're just doubling down on your own stupid argument and not providing any interesting rebuttals to what I'm saying. The reviewers are wrong, Yelp is wrong, the internet is wrong, bakers CANNOT benefit from using the internet! Go get your birthday cake from the first bakery you see, I don't care. You're not really raising good points. If anything, you're just highlighting how little you know about using the internet to find new businesses. The fact that you've never visited a baker's website just means you either don't care or know about picking high quality products when it matters. It's a you problem, not the baker's problem.
Fair enough, I wasn't thinking about expensive one-off purchases.
Still don't get why they need a website. An out of date menu showing prices from the 2010s, I guess? Just look them up along with reviews on Google Maps or Yelp and call them to order the cake. But hey what do I know, I've only done it dozens of times... this past year alone.
Instead of me trying to explain it to you, maybe just try it yourself.
You saying "I've never needed this and I never tried it, so I don't understand why anyone else would" isn't exactly a robust argument. In fact, why would I bother listening to your opinion on a feature you've never even tried? Most websites have info about hours, prices, products, FAQs that are up to date. Your mental model of what's in a website is wildly off, especially in 2023 when everyone's on social media.
This is just obviously not true. Any location which is good enough that a bakery could survive without any repeat business would have such high rents that no bakery would be able to survive (or at least, it would be very difficult).
You've only got two bakeries where you live? One 400km away and one down your block? You've never found a new restaurant online? You've never looked at reviews on yelp?
Idk what to tell you. Based on your example (only search results for bakeries are 400km away), the problem is where you live, not the internet.
I'm sure there are bakeries from here to the 400km away one. But even if they are 5km, why bother? Unless the nearby one is so bad that it can't be considered altogether.
If you live in an area where there's only one bakery in town, then there's no pressure at all for that bakery to improve their process. What is your point? I live in a city where it's common to see multiple bakeries on the same block and where I could visit a new bakery every week for the rest of my life.
Again, it sounds like your little town or wherever you live is just lame. If there is no competition, there's no reason to innovate. I'm sure every business in your (real or hypothetical) town is years behind the curve in every metric if your only factor for patronizing a business is "well, it's the only one close by".
> Do a plumber, a baker, a policeman need a computer to do their job?
Plumbers (and for that matter, all tradespeople) can get far more efficient at their jobs if they use computers to their advantage. Modern heating systems, i.e. anything above "a gas boiler that circulates water and fires up if the water gets < 70 °C and shuts off >90 °C" can't be designed these days any more without the aid of simulation software that accounts for the effects of insulation or the variety of air-conditioning systems. The more energy efficient, the more complex it gets to design and to operate. Carpenters these days don't do much measurement by hand - they design something in CAD and get exactly fitting wood parts out of their saw machines. Electricians, where do I even start with these, as modern homes are filled to the brim with smart tech. The only thing AI can't do for now is actually run cables and pipes, but give it 10-20 years and construction labor will be done by Boston Dynamic robots - we're already seeing giant 3D printers for concrete or brick-laying robots.
Bakers just the same. Most of bakery, with the exception of artisanal crafters that take pride and charge appropriate pricing, is automated these days - including the supply chain. There aren't that many humans involved in the production of staple foods any more, this is why everything has gotten so cheap and plentiful over the last decades. Some stuff, like picking asparagus, can't be done by robots yet, but that's bound to change.
And policemen... just look how much they're using computers already. No more "send a chopper and a dozen cars to follow a suspect", no more stakeouts, ANPR cameras and AI are enough (there's been a HN submission a week-ish ago about that).
Yes, all of these jobs can be done by computers, but far far less efficiently - and declining birth rates will put more and more pressure on all kinds of jobs to be either eliminated entirely ("paper pushers" and similar bullshit jobs) or be replaced by computers.
> Do a plumber, a baker, a policeman need a computer to do their job?
Yes, mostly. Very much so the police officer, which is why they generally have, for decades, had a computer terminal built into their patrol vehicles.
But, yes, modern workers (and esoecially business owners) in each of the other fields often use computers, even if not for what you might consider the core defining part of their job, for parts that are practically important to doing it in the modern environment, even if its just the computers almost everyone carries in their pocket.
Plumber A has a van and a phone number attached to it. They're also in the yellow pages.
Plumber B has a website with a real-time calendar of available dates and estimated rates for different jobs. They also buy relevant ads on Google and Facebook.
A is pretty much relying on word of mouth, might be excellent at their job but won't be getting much new business - young people (people under 40) don't especially enjoy cold-calling strangers for availability and rates.
I know that I'l pick B in an instant. I've called way too many tradesmen who have answered clearly while driving in traffic and then they start digging up their physical appointment notebook at the same time.
Yes they do. All plumbers rely on internet to get their job. Bakers advertise and are found by people on through their phones. Policeman, increasing rely on computers for data verification and all sorts of communications
I would argue that nowadays they do. Maybe not for the actual physical parts. But the running of a business (pretty much all online now), advertising and marketing, communicating with customers - email is essential. If you aren’t able to use a computer you would be left behind by the people that are.
Policemen literally have computers in their patrol vehicles and a lot of police work is computer work.
Plumbers need to order stuff online, manage invoices, have an online presence to get and communicate with customers, have digital instruments that might feed into their field laptop.
Bakers use digitalized machines and have their recipes down to an almost exact science. They use computers all the time to calibrate stuff.
Yes, they did. Or rather: everyone was forced to catch up and those that didn't just got left behind.
Those of us who saw the PC revolution still remember the time when typewriters were an everyday artifact. We also saw how everyone was forced to choose between updating or being left behind - no matter how fast your secretary was, a human with carbon paper is no match for a human that slightly tweaks a template and sends 10 copies to the printer. And a human with a calculator will always be slower than a human with Excel.