| ▲ | ang_cire 9 hours ago |
| > The result: the nurse’s job changes > As the nurse incorporates AI into her job, the nurse is able to oversee and accomplish more. She can spend more time talking with patients and helping them understand diagnoses. Productivity increases. Except what actually happens is that the patient contact time stays the same, but then the added productivity is used to justify fewer on-staff nurses. |
|
| ▲ | glaslong 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Self-checkout will free up cashiers to focus on high-quality customer service! |
| |
| ▲ | emil-lp 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yes, I too have noticed an increased high quality customer service. |
|
|
| ▲ | sscaryterry 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| There we go. Except, all business owners, private or public, will tell you that this isn't the case. :) |
|
| ▲ | crossroadsguy 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Something like this: same.. > nurse is able to oversee and accomplish more .. and work with more patients in the same shift. > She can spend more time talking with patients .. we mean the talking will be through the "ClaudeMedTalker Nurse" billed per patient, per second (depending upon tokens used and if any translation need, depending upon patient nationality and accents) |
|
| ▲ | bpodgursky 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > but then the added productivity is used to justify fewer on-staff nurses Lower staffing levels per unit of care performed makes medical care cheaper for patients. If the goal of a healthcare system is to make healthcare more accessible (rather than be a jobs program), that's a success. |
| |
| ▲ | lbreakjai 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | If, and that's a huge if, the savings are actually passed on to the customers rather than the capital owners. | | |
| ▲ | submain 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Which is why we need competition. Which is almost non-existent in US healthcare as comparing prices is near impossible. | | |
| ▲ | lbreakjai 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | The incumbents can just swallow the competition and consolidate further. The end state of crony capitalism is always a monopoly. |
| |
| ▲ | dgellow 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Or any of the middlemen |
| |
| ▲ | jackdaniel 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Lowering prices or raising wages due to increased productivity is not a given, and often does not follow. There is more to pocket by shareholders though. | | |
| ▲ | bpodgursky 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | So it's OK to roll out AI to nurses in the NHS and Canada? Their hospitals don't have shareholders, so that's a minimum baseline that meets all of your goals. | | |
| |
| ▲ | teeray 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > makes medical care cheaper for patients I think you misspelled “increases profit margins for hospitals” if you’re talking about US healthcare. | |
| ▲ | pasquinelli 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > Lower staffing levels per unit of care performed makes medical care cheaper for patients. yeah yeah, sure sure | |
| ▲ | leto_ii 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Lower staffing levels per unit of care performed makes medical care cheaper for patients. Based on how neoliberal capitalism tends to work it will simply lead to more profits for hospitals etc. |
|
|
| ▲ | simianwords 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| how come productivity increase actually led to increase in quality in almost all cases? internet/digitasion for doctors for example. |
| |
| ▲ | chris_money202 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I think this is only true if the # of doctors available per patient stays the same. If productivity increases, you can have fewer doctors available while providing the same quality of care. So, quality doesn't necessarily increase in all cases. | |
| ▲ | ang_cire 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > how come productivity increase actually led to increase in quality in almost all cases? It doesn't, this is just plain false. Most productivity gains happen by cutting value-add complexity or material quality. See IKEA chairs versus Shaker ones, or lycra clothes versus silk. > internet/digitasion for doctors for example. I see the misconception. The internet was not created to serve productivity, it was a communication medium. That it can be used to increase productivity is orthogonal to its existence or purpose, and whether it has been used to actually increase quality of something is entirely dependent of the specifics of what you're discussing. For instance, in gaming right now there's a huge discussion going on about whether digital distribution has actually trapped us with crappier goods which we can't resell or transfer. | | |
| ▲ | simianwords 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | > It doesn't, this is just plain false. Most productivity gains happen by cutting value-add complexity or material quality. See IKEA chairs versus Shaker ones, or lycra clothes versus silk. this is a popular misconception. IKEA made bad furniture more accessible. good quality furniture still exists and is more affordable (share of disposable income) now than in the past. its the same deal for watches, dryers, computers etc. if you don't trust me, use ChatGPT/Claude to verify this. | | |
| ▲ | ang_cire 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | You think handcrafted furniture is more readily accessible to the average person now than say 30 years ago? When people are struggling to buy gas, nevermind homes? And I asked Claude (Fable 5), and they said you're wrong. I'd paste it here, but it literally dumped a 10 paragraph rant about "Baumol's Cost Disease". | | |
| ▲ | simianwords an hour ago | parent [-] | | What did you ask it? It’s pretty clear that share of disposable income is more or less flat for handcrafted furniture which is cherry picked. |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | cman1444 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Except, so far, this isn't actually what happens. I listened to Moody's "Inside Economics" podcast with Ramp's Chief Economist, and they observe that companies who adopt AI intensively actually hire 10% more people. Also, this article from The Economist suggests that evidence is mixed-to-positive for long term employment, while short term data center buildout is extremely positive for jobs. Paywalled unfortunately. https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2026/09/04/t... |
| |
| ▲ | ang_cire 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | This is like asking your drug dealer if being high will help you forget your problems. | | |
| ▲ | cman1444 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | No. As I said, the long-term gains are mixed-to-positive. And, all else being equal, you would rather have more short term job gains than none at all. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | cucumber3732842 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| >Except what actually happens is that the patient contact time stays the same, but then the added productivity is used to justify fewer on-staff nurses. They'll fire the janitor and the secretary and make the nurses do that stuff too because "muh regulatory required staffing levels". |
|
| ▲ | detectivestory 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| that didn't happen with self-checkout tills in supermakets... |
| |
| ▲ | leto_ii 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Wdym? self-checkout definitely lead to fewer supermarket workers being employed. | | |
| ▲ | heaney-555 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Actually, it has been essentially balanced out by a greater need for behind-the-shelves workers to pack and load orders for online/app delivery and eCommerce orders. This is how the economy often works. The loss of one kind of job to technology lets the business grow by using the same number of staff, or often even more, to serve new opportunities/markets/products/services. | |
| ▲ | rootusrootus 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The data seems to contradict that, if Freakonomics is to be believed (and some people don't like them, I get that). Apparently overall headcount actually increased as a result of self-checkout. E.g. cashiers did drop a little but loss prevention more than made up for it. | | |
| ▲ | nemomarx 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | seems like a worse customer experience though. longer lines at checkouts and the self checkout process is unnecessarily slow to deter theft. | | |
| ▲ | trallnag 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | Some supermarkets let customers scan their items as they go through the store with a handheld device | | |
| ▲ | rootusrootus 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | My local Kroger variant does that. Or they did, maybe it stopped, now that I think about it. I never saw anyone use it. Intuitively it sounds like it could be handy, but it seems like in practice everyone just kept on doing things the way they're used to doing it. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | chris_money202 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I don't have the numbers on this, but if you look at per-capita self checkout probably had some effect. Our population is increasing which means we need jobs to be increasing at same rates. The effect on supermarkets is they get more customers as population increases but they are able to lower the relative number of staff per customer. |
|