Definitely. Some people just sometimes fail to realize the problem with something is capitalism, not the thing itself.
Even the much maligned “metaverse” could be good without capitalism trying to bleed it dry. VRChat is a decent proof of what it could be, and that’s still operating under capitalism, just not “major corporation trying to turn it into the next billion dollar industry” style capitalism.
In computer science curricula there may be an ethics in computer science class. They won’t teach you how unethical it is to exploit the labor of others for your personal gain. It’s not designed to make you think.
Genuinely why? Any good argument against them is rooted in the problems of capitalism. Without capitalism they are useful tools for same-day delivery, especially for disabled people.
Without capitalism delivery workers wouldn’t be exploited and people receiving things would appreciate real human interaction. Under capitalism these are transactions where the receiver often looks at the worker like a servant and the company treats them like a slave. The robots further increase atomization and outside of specific circumstances like disability, delivery shouldn’t be necessary or even allowed.
Furthermore, I don’t think restaurants would exist as they do now post-capitalism. Commissaries and community kitchens are way more communist.
We don’t need to continue doing automatable menial labor to decrease atomization. Not needing to do that labor frees people’s time to actually interact with each other in leisurely environments rather than exchange pleasantries on a doorstep for less than a minute (which doesn’t even necessarily happen now with contactless delivery). If there are people who really want to do delivery work and people who really want to have things delivered by a person, they can do their thing. But for most people a robot would be just fine.
Furthermore, I don’t think restaurants would exist as they do now post-capitalism. Commissaries and community kitchens are way more communist.
What distinction are you making between a community kitchen and a restaurant other than the way the labor is organized? Because as far as the people eating the food are concerned, there wouldn’t much difference besides payment.
For me, a community kitchen would be just a big industrial kitchen with all the basic ingredients and kitchen equipment. Anyone can come in and cook whatever they want and share with others. Leftovers go in the walk-in and are available to anyone.
I love to cook but I despised being a line cook and making things to order. Being able to cook a big batch of whatever I want and share with others, anyone free to help with prep, trading recipes, etc without the pressure of constant tickets rolling in would be a dream for me.
There will absolutely still be made to order restaurants. Not everyone is into cooking or knows someone into cooking. And people definitely want to be able to go out somewhere and order something.
without the pressure of constant tickets rolling in would be a dream for me
A big part of that pressure comes from capitalism. To maximize profits they must maximize customers served while minimizing labor expenses. Without profit motive a restaurant could have less seating and/or more cooks.
people receiving things would appreciate real human interaction.
fuckin BOOMER. youre gonna be the type of person that demands you have a human cashier at every checkout even though that sort of labor is almost always soul sucking. inherently reactionary
The robots further increase atomization and outside of specific circumstances like disability, delivery shouldn’t be necessary or even allowed.
fucking luddite. what, are you gonna means test who has a disability or not for this scheme? literally easier to just mass produce little delivery bots. and how is it not atomized having a singular person running around doing deliveries? the cooks still do not see the product of their labors being enjoyed even in a primary stage of socialism. like seriously, if youre arguing against robots in this innocuous context, why not just go fuck off to some random place in alaska and eat berries? you can do that right now, you dont need socialism, which is inextricably linked to technology and automation, to do that.
My ideal post-capitalist society wouldn’t have money so no to cashiers lol. And I don’t think delivering things is that soul-sucking, especially if it’s by bike. I’m not against automation but robots aren’t going to be able to handle every delivery situation for a while, anyway.
Also no to means-testing disability. I’m just imagining being able to get everything I need within a short distance of where I live, so why would I need anything delivered? The only reasons I order anything online are that it’s unavailable anywhere nearby or because I work too late to be able to go in person. In a society that doesn’t exploit it’s citizens there wouldn’t be these food/goods deserts and people wouldn’t be toiling for 12+ hours per day. By all means, keep ordering whatever you want delivered but it’s already true that delivery volume dropped significantly after COVID restrictions were lifted (talking courier stuff here as that’s my industry). If people lived in 15 minute cities and had significantly more leisure time I don’t see why delivery would be necessary in most cases. And if we want to talk about planned economies I don’t know how you justify putting a ton of resources into developing, manufacturing, and maintaining a fleet of robots for delivering food to treat boys. Absolutely, there will be people who need home delivery by default but it seems like the goal for urban planning should be to make these individualistic actions unnecessary and undesirable, in the same way that it should prioritize public transit and dense development or car-centrism and suburban sprawl. TLDR: no means-testing but build society in a way that does away with treat-brain.
If people lived in 15 minute cities and had significantly more leisure time I don’t see why delivery would be necessary in most cases.
delivery is a big thing even in large chinese cities with good infrastructure. and the number of delivery workers is going up, it was at 3 million in 2020 but 7 million now in 2023 in china. urbanization in china is also increasing, and so are the numbers of high quality cities with good infrastructure. the fact is a lot of people have a need for this.
And if we want to talk about planned economies I don’t know how you justify putting a ton of resources into developing, manufacturing, and maintaining a fleet of robots for delivering food to treat boys
people need food to survive.
absolutely, there will be people who need home delivery by default but it seems like the goal for urban planning should be to make these individualistic actions unnecessary and undesirable, in the same way that it should prioritize public transit and dense development or car-centrism and suburban sprawl.
sure, you should reduce the need for the robots, and of course you want to reduce the time its needed for a robot to travel anyways, its more efficient. the fact is we must automate as many aspects of society as possible so that people can focus on personally and socially meaningful pursuits. china itself even has little underground passages between major residential buildings to make deliveries faster, and those passages are only for delivery vehicles/robots. and also imagine what a society that is able to automate menial labor looks like, i often wonder how many incredibly intelligent people are not afforded opportunities because they have been filed away under ‘manual laborer’. imagine what technologies and ideas we have missed out on because of that.
no means-testing but build society in a way that does away with treat-brain.
I don’t think you’re getting that I understand people need food. I’m talking about treat-seeking behaviour = mindless, marketing-driven consumerism which should be stamped out. I’m currently a courier and I’ve done doordash. 90% of the things I deliver now are completely worthless impulse buys that will get tossed in the garage/attic/trash after a week and never interacted with again (or they get returned a week later, yay more fossil fuels used to transport worthless trash!). 100% of the things I delivered with doordash should be classified as unfit for human consumption in any just society. Literal poison concocted in a lab to get people addicted and prey upon people in food deserts. We could certainly get into the crisis of overproduction and making things for which there is no market and then creating a market via banner ads fed to boomers here. There are SO MANY people whose have been conditioned to think that buying thing = good emotion and not being able to buy thing = why even live?
Delivery is a big thing because everyone is falling all over themselves trying to corner the market. Third party food delivery (ie doordash, not pizza hut delivering their own stuff) is just more capitalist “innovation” in finding new ways to extract rents. I would argue that people have an increased need for delivery because society has removed alternatives or made them inaccessible via e.g.: consolidation and monopolization of the necessities of life and longer working hours (rate of profit declining and all that jazz). The focus is on creating new captive markets and squeezing as much blood from that stone as possible. All of these are examples of problems brought on by profit-seeking and are antithetical to communism.
I will reiterate that I’m not talking about the supply chain as a whole (never disagreed that people need food) and that, of course, people shouldn’t have to travel to each individual farm to get their basics. I really don’t know where you’re getting these assumptions about what I’m saying. All I’m saying is that personal, individual delivery as default should be heavily disincentivized for people that do not need it.
I’m currently a courier and I’ve done doordash. 90% of the things I deliver now are completely worthless impulse buys that will get tossed in the garage/attic/trash after a week and never interacted with again (or they get returned a week later, yay more fossil fuels used to transport worthless trash!).
yeah that makes sense. afaik the delivery services in china are all food. its a little weird that people are ordering things like toys or plastic baubles or even stuff like detergent on doordash when you can just order something like that via amazon / normal mail on a regular basis, the carbon impact of that is likely minimal because USPS/UPS/FedEx will already have courier routes going through your area already. probably even more minimal than going to a store in your own car.
I will reiterate that I’m not talking about the supply chain as a whole (never disagreed that people need food) and that, of course, people shouldn’t have to travel to each individual farm to get their basics. I really don’t know where you’re getting these assumptions about what I’m saying. All I’m saying is that personal, individual delivery as default should be heavily disincentivized for people that do not need it.
i guess i was a little kneejerk of a response, i get very angry at people being luddites on here about tech that has very obvious uses under socialism, marx was very clear about how luddites are reactionary.
What do these things actually do? They can’t move fast and can’t traverse lots of terrain. How much weight do they carry? Maybe in some super walkable area with designated lanes for them it would work?
Little delivery bots are good.
Little delivery bots under capitalism are not.
X would be good but under capitalism is bad is an evergreen statement
Definitely. Some people just sometimes fail to realize the problem with something is capitalism, not the thing itself.
Even the much maligned “metaverse” could be good without capitalism trying to bleed it dry. VRChat is a decent proof of what it could be, and that’s still operating under capitalism, just not “major corporation trying to turn it into the next billion dollar industry” style capitalism.
The “It’s fun to use learning for evil!” economic model
In computer science curricula there may be an ethics in computer science class. They won’t teach you how unethical it is to exploit the labor of others for your personal gain. It’s not designed to make you think.
Fuck these things
Genuinely why? Any good argument against them is rooted in the problems of capitalism. Without capitalism they are useful tools for same-day delivery, especially for disabled people.
Without capitalism delivery workers wouldn’t be exploited and people receiving things would appreciate real human interaction. Under capitalism these are transactions where the receiver often looks at the worker like a servant and the company treats them like a slave. The robots further increase atomization and outside of specific circumstances like disability, delivery shouldn’t be necessary or even allowed.
Furthermore, I don’t think restaurants would exist as they do now post-capitalism. Commissaries and community kitchens are way more communist.
We don’t need to continue doing automatable menial labor to decrease atomization. Not needing to do that labor frees people’s time to actually interact with each other in leisurely environments rather than exchange pleasantries on a doorstep for less than a minute (which doesn’t even necessarily happen now with contactless delivery). If there are people who really want to do delivery work and people who really want to have things delivered by a person, they can do their thing. But for most people a robot would be just fine.
What distinction are you making between a community kitchen and a restaurant other than the way the labor is organized? Because as far as the people eating the food are concerned, there wouldn’t much difference besides payment.
For me, a community kitchen would be just a big industrial kitchen with all the basic ingredients and kitchen equipment. Anyone can come in and cook whatever they want and share with others. Leftovers go in the walk-in and are available to anyone.
I love to cook but I despised being a line cook and making things to order. Being able to cook a big batch of whatever I want and share with others, anyone free to help with prep, trading recipes, etc without the pressure of constant tickets rolling in would be a dream for me.
There will absolutely still be made to order restaurants. Not everyone is into cooking or knows someone into cooking. And people definitely want to be able to go out somewhere and order something.
A big part of that pressure comes from capitalism. To maximize profits they must maximize customers served while minimizing labor expenses. Without profit motive a restaurant could have less seating and/or more cooks.
I think it would be a little more like a cafeteria style food hall (which often includes areas where you can order something)
nobody wants to cook in a community kitchen that sounds like it would suck.
You just sound like you don’t enjoy cooking. It would essentially be a maker space for cooking.
Death to America
fuckin BOOMER. youre gonna be the type of person that demands you have a human cashier at every checkout even though that sort of labor is almost always soul sucking. inherently reactionary
fucking luddite. what, are you gonna means test who has a disability or not for this scheme? literally easier to just mass produce little delivery bots. and how is it not atomized having a singular person running around doing deliveries? the cooks still do not see the product of their labors being enjoyed even in a primary stage of socialism. like seriously, if youre arguing against robots in this innocuous context, why not just go fuck off to some random place in alaska and eat berries? you can do that right now, you dont need socialism, which is inextricably linked to technology and automation, to do that.
My ideal post-capitalist society wouldn’t have money so no to cashiers lol. And I don’t think delivering things is that soul-sucking, especially if it’s by bike. I’m not against automation but robots aren’t going to be able to handle every delivery situation for a while, anyway.
Also no to means-testing disability. I’m just imagining being able to get everything I need within a short distance of where I live, so why would I need anything delivered? The only reasons I order anything online are that it’s unavailable anywhere nearby or because I work too late to be able to go in person. In a society that doesn’t exploit it’s citizens there wouldn’t be these food/goods deserts and people wouldn’t be toiling for 12+ hours per day. By all means, keep ordering whatever you want delivered but it’s already true that delivery volume dropped significantly after COVID restrictions were lifted (talking courier stuff here as that’s my industry). If people lived in 15 minute cities and had significantly more leisure time I don’t see why delivery would be necessary in most cases. And if we want to talk about planned economies I don’t know how you justify putting a ton of resources into developing, manufacturing, and maintaining a fleet of robots for delivering food to treat boys. Absolutely, there will be people who need home delivery by default but it seems like the goal for urban planning should be to make these individualistic actions unnecessary and undesirable, in the same way that it should prioritize public transit and dense development or car-centrism and suburban sprawl. TLDR: no means-testing but build society in a way that does away with treat-brain.
delivery is a big thing even in large chinese cities with good infrastructure. and the number of delivery workers is going up, it was at 3 million in 2020 but 7 million now in 2023 in china. urbanization in china is also increasing, and so are the numbers of high quality cities with good infrastructure. the fact is a lot of people have a need for this.
people need food to survive.
sure, you should reduce the need for the robots, and of course you want to reduce the time its needed for a robot to travel anyways, its more efficient. the fact is we must automate as many aspects of society as possible so that people can focus on personally and socially meaningful pursuits. china itself even has little underground passages between major residential buildings to make deliveries faster, and those passages are only for delivery vehicles/robots. and also imagine what a society that is able to automate menial labor looks like, i often wonder how many incredibly intelligent people are not afforded opportunities because they have been filed away under ‘manual laborer’. imagine what technologies and ideas we have missed out on because of that.
people need food to survive.
I don’t think you’re getting that I understand people need food. I’m talking about treat-seeking behaviour = mindless, marketing-driven consumerism which should be stamped out. I’m currently a courier and I’ve done doordash. 90% of the things I deliver now are completely worthless impulse buys that will get tossed in the garage/attic/trash after a week and never interacted with again (or they get returned a week later, yay more fossil fuels used to transport worthless trash!). 100% of the things I delivered with doordash should be classified as unfit for human consumption in any just society. Literal poison concocted in a lab to get people addicted and prey upon people in food deserts. We could certainly get into the crisis of overproduction and making things for which there is no market and then creating a market via banner ads fed to boomers here. There are SO MANY people whose have been conditioned to think that buying thing = good emotion and not being able to buy thing = why even live?
Delivery is a big thing because everyone is falling all over themselves trying to corner the market. Third party food delivery (ie doordash, not pizza hut delivering their own stuff) is just more capitalist “innovation” in finding new ways to extract rents. I would argue that people have an increased need for delivery because society has removed alternatives or made them inaccessible via e.g.: consolidation and monopolization of the necessities of life and longer working hours (rate of profit declining and all that jazz). The focus is on creating new captive markets and squeezing as much blood from that stone as possible. All of these are examples of problems brought on by profit-seeking and are antithetical to communism.
I will reiterate that I’m not talking about the supply chain as a whole (never disagreed that people need food) and that, of course, people shouldn’t have to travel to each individual farm to get their basics. I really don’t know where you’re getting these assumptions about what I’m saying. All I’m saying is that personal, individual delivery as default should be heavily disincentivized for people that do not need it.
yeah that makes sense. afaik the delivery services in china are all food. its a little weird that people are ordering things like toys or plastic baubles or even stuff like detergent on doordash when you can just order something like that via amazon / normal mail on a regular basis, the carbon impact of that is likely minimal because USPS/UPS/FedEx will already have courier routes going through your area already. probably even more minimal than going to a store in your own car.
i guess i was a little kneejerk of a response, i get very angry at people being luddites on here about tech that has very obvious uses under socialism, marx was very clear about how luddites are reactionary.
What do these things actually do? They can’t move fast and can’t traverse lots of terrain. How much weight do they carry? Maybe in some super walkable area with designated lanes for them it would work?