Skip to main content

Is the current freelance/sharing economy tenable considering human dignity?

A post on On-Demand Workers: ‘We Are Not Robots’, subtitled, Is Technology Liberating or Squeezing the New Class of Freelance Labor?

My personal experience with Uber has been pleasant, albeit troubling. We recently visited friends in California, and the male partner touted how it was great, that he knew of a driver who could piece together work, and could work whenever he wanted to for some extra cash, but I met a driver like this. He had a masters degree in computer science (CS) from a US university, but as an immigrant could not find a sponsor; he had not worked in CS for several years. His primary job was as a dispatcher for the shipping industry, but also had small side jobs picking up mail for non-resident Chinese homeowners who lived elsewhere, and as an Uber driver. 
Although my friend painted this situation as freedom, it sounded a bit more like desperation...
A poster responded, in typical WSJ reader fashion, that he made his own choices, to which my response was:
@Karen Kelly Sandke, yours is the typical right-wing attitude, that we are all free agents, but most people are not free, and most people, from the middle class on down continue to be impoverished by policies that disenfranchise them. This is no different. 
As for feeling sorry, I don't imagine you feel much sympathy or empathy in general, but that is not the point, it is the lack of overall humanity and dignity for people.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst by Robert M. Sapolsky My rating: 5 of 5 stars I finished reading this crying. It is a work of neurobiology, social science, anthropology, and history, but ultimately it is a work of great humanity, suggesting ways that humans, our groups, our systems, and our societies can be made better. View all my reviews

Don't learn to code. Learn to think.

A response to  Don't learn to code. Learn to think. : Below is is my usual response when I see an article stating that everyone should learn to code:  Rather than programming, it is more important to impart the thinking of computer science (CS) than a specific implementation. Programming can be an end point for some students, but it is likely that programming itself will be increasingly automated, so that one needs more the general concepts common in CS. Even then, programming itself is to some degree a grunt task that one progresses beyond:  The following are typical components of a CS degree: algorithms & flowcharting systems thinking logical systems and set theory object-orientation & patterns probability, statistics, mathematics All of the above can be useful in an increasingly automated and data-driven world.

A Journey — if You Dare — Into the Minds of Silicon Valley Programmers

My responses in a NY Times comment section for the book, Coders: The Making of a New Tribe and the Remaking of the World by Clive Thompson : #1 - Link Although I've been a software developer for 15 years, and for longer alternating between a project manager, team lead, or analyst, mostly in finance, and now with a cancer center, I found it funny that you blame the people doing the coding for not seeing the harm it could cause. First, most scientific advancement has dark elements, and it is usually not the science but how it is used and sold by business people that is the problem. This leads to the second problem, in that it is not coding that is in itself problematic, but specifically how technology is harnessed to sell. It is normal and desirable to track users, to log actions, to collect telemetry, so as to monitor systems, respond to errors, and to develop new features, but that normal engineering practice has been used to surveil users for the purpose of selling. Blaming