Raising the wages of humans so they are the same cost as machines doesn't make the machines cheaper. Amazon could keep workers wages low and still buy machines and create the market. One doesn't necessitate the other.
> Robots will be able to do the jobs for $15 hour sooner than they'll be able to for $7 an hour
This doesn't make sense. Increasing workers wages doesn't change the rate a which automation technology becomes available. The bottle neck is the availablity of capable automation systems which is unrelated to workers wages.
Even if there was a technology available that cost $15 an hour and worker wages were $7, increasing the workers wages doesn't decrease cost of the technology.
I specifically mean wearhouse workers. The automotation technology isn't good enough and whether or not they implement it has little to do with these wage changes.
Because men are statistically more likely to cause auto accidents. There is no evidence that women are not statistically more likely to be bad at getting good work done at companies like Amazon. It's pretty simple.
Every story is a twist. "This one thing you thought you knew isn't actually true". Great for telling friends in the pub but misleading through selection bias as they don't tell all the stories where things aren't different to what was expected.
"Why all the wasteful discussion about gender politics? Read the last sentence of the abstract"
Other comenters seem to be making wild statements about gender differences, extrapolating from a small result, and using this to support their other unsubstaiated biases.
It's interesting. Take all new results with a grain of salt. Replication needs to happen before trusting this result, let alone understanding what it means.
I don't think it's a solution to climate change, it's just a personal choice. The solutions are out of my reach and ideling the SUV is much less of a problem than selling the SUV in the first place.
I don't think we're doing a good job handling the issue on a policy level so creating a child who will potentially have to deal with the worst of these problems directly seems unnecessary, avoidable and selfish.
On a personal note, don't have children. I'm not being facetious. It seems like we've had opportunities to do the right thing and consistently haven't so until the outlook looks better and we start taking action it's not a great idea to create offspring that will have to deal with the consequences.
From my experience the people writing the most glowing positive reviews are doing it to get you to work there as they are somehow involved in hiring and do so to counter any of the genuine negative reviews. I have seen this happen first hand as a push by a recruitment team once a few honest negative reviews appeared.
There are enough people within a company with a vested interest in having a good image on glassdoor to create a strong inventive to make it look better than it is.
Right now everyone has a proof of concept demo and people are pouring money in. It's going to take a while and I really can't see a company like comma.ai being a serious player given their approach but maybe I'm wrong. Good luck to them, I hope nobody gets hurt.