Comment by swalsh | Hacker News Reader

Comment by swalsh | Hacker News Reader

This is really a net plus. The vast majority of people working fast food, really don't like it (as a job). They hate the pay, and most hate the work. Technology like this is a blessing in disguise, it frees people from working in places they hate. If you're the kind of person who actually liked a job in fast food, you're a special person... and a fine dining restaurant would probably be even more enjoyable for you. Of course the downside is our society requires you to have a job to participate in the economy, and the bar to getting a job just raised a bit higher. Technology combined with globalization isn't changing the world... it CHANGED the world. In 2016 we're at a crossroads to decide how we deal with it. To me the current "extremist" candidates Bernie vs Trump represent two alternative views... Bernie seems interested in building a society that takes care of its citizens, even if they're not capable of taking care of themselves in the new economy. He advocates not for "Free" college, but rather raising the bar to help people get the NEW minimum education required to participate. Trump says (though its unclear) that the solution to people no longer being able to participate in the new economy is to ratchet back the social (not technological) progress we've made.

How does one measure social progress? Without an agreed upon definition of what is forward, how can we label something back?

I'll take a stab and say protected classes. You can't refuse service or employment to someone based on race, disability status, and so on, and the rare edge cases of people abusing this statute adds fuel to the "political correctness is ruining this country" fire.

Without such protections, people would be cheaper to employ because the deck is further stacked against them.

That is how we go back in time.

So is adding more protected classes progress in all cases, are are there certain criteria as to what counts as a protected class? And is this really progress (imagine how protected classes works in certain jobs related to the sex industry), you are basically overriding a persons ability to consent, and even if the action is only something physical, is it really progress for the government to force consent under threat?

And maybe we could even break it down. Maybe protected classes for employment is great and maybe protect classes for service aren't. Or maybe protected classes for employment is actually regressive because it is endorsement of all the factors you can discriminate on. For example, orientation isn't a protect class (at least not federally), and thus in many places is legal to discriminate based on. Perhaps progress would be that employment discrimination is only allowed for factors actually relevant to the job, and adding protected classes is a regression from this.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com