> working conditions and wages have pretty consistently improved over the past 200 years

They've improved, but not consistently on human timescales.

Being a worker in the pre-labor-movement industrial revolution was by all accounts horrendous. Things have, so far, trended better over time but they can be bad for whole generations and also past results do not guarantee future results.

> The cases where it didn't were generally offset by the rest of society benefiting from increased automation and productivity.

I don't think we can sweep the worst parts of it under the rug because the bad impacts are only happening to "the poors". And anyway when it comes to the current tech revolution, it is likely that almost all of us are going to be "the poors".

▲

WalterBright 18 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

> Being a worker in the pre-labor-movement industrial revolution was by all accounts horrendous.

Average height and life expectancy improved steadily in the US throughout the 19th century.

The pre-Revolutionary Americans tended to live short and backbreaking lives.

Take a tour through Fort Williams. There is a collection of clothing from the Revolutionary War. The baby clothes look like doll clothes, and the adult clothes look like they were for boys. Then look at the clothing in the Gettysburg museums. The people were taller then, but still about the size of boys.

	▲	miyoji 6 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> Take a tour through Fort Williams. There is a collection of clothing from the Revolutionary War. The baby clothes look like doll clothes, and the adult clothes look like they were for boys. Then look at the clothing in the Gettysburg museums. The people were taller then, but still about the size of boys. I don't think that's a correct interpretation, see the explanation here [0]. Not quite the same situation, but likely a similar case. Are you sure the "adult" clothes weren't made for young boys or teens, or women? [0] https://dyckmanfarmhouse.org/people-were-shorter-back-then-r... I don't think your statement about short lives in colonial America is correct either, they had a low life expectancy like everyone else, but mostly due to a lot of childbirth deaths and young infant deaths. Surviving childhood gave you a good shot at making it to your 70s, which has been true for a long time pretty much everywhere.

▲

palmotea 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> I don't think we can sweep the worst parts of it under the rug because the bad impacts are only happening to "the poors".

We can and we will.

If you read HN for any period of time, you'll probably read at least 5 apologia for the harms caused by prior technological change for every one critique or expression of sympathy. After all, we're well-indoctrinated software engineers, and most of the rest are temporarily embarrassed billionaires. We know what we're supposed to think.

> And anyway when it comes to the current tech revolution, it is likely that almost all of us are going to be "the poors".

Not me! I'm 100x AI engineer who will certainly remain comfy an secure. LLMs are awesome! It's all those luddite doomer jerks who cling to their old ways of understanding how things work and manual coding that are going to be poor, and they deserve it.

▲

rafaelRiv an hour ago | parent [-]

> Not me! I'm 100x AI engineer who will certainly remain comfy an secure. LLMs are awesome! It's all those luddite doomer jerks who cling to their old ways of understanding how things work and manual coding that are going to be poor, and they deserve it.

We will see in 5 years ! I think you highly overestimate llms

	▲	nubg 18 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Funnily enough, the parent made the point that people probably overestimate their position in the future pecking order, and did so sarcastically, which you seemed to have completely missed (probably due to being ESL), something even a current LLM would easily "understand", thus proving his point.