[Marxism] The worker and the machine

Louis Proyect lnp3 at panix.com
Sun Aug 19 11:47:01 MDT 2012


Marx, V. 1 of Capital, chapter 15:

Hence, between 1861 and 1868, 338 cotton factories disappeared, in other 
words more productive machinery on a larger scale was concentrated in 
the hands of a smaller number of capitalists. The number of power-looms 
decreased by 20,663; but since their product increased in the same 
period, an improved loom must have yielded more than an old one. Lastly 
the number of spindles increased by 1,612,541, while the number of 
operatives decreased by 50,505. The “temporary” misery inflicted on the 
workpeople by the cotton-crisis, was heightened, and from being 
temporary made permanent, by the rapid and persistent progress of machinery.

But machinery not only acts as a competitor who gets the better of the 
workman, and is constantly on the point of making him superfluous. It is 
also a power inimical to him, and as such capital proclaims it from the 
roof tops and as such makes use of it. It is the most powerful weapon 
for repressing strikes, those periodical revolts of the working-class 
against the autocracy of capital.[127] According to Gaskell, the 
steam-engine was from the very first an antagonist of human power, an 
antagonist that enabled the capitalist to tread under foot the growing 
claims of the workmen, who threatened the newly born factory system with 
a crisis.[128] It would be possible to write quite a history of the 
inventions, made since 1830, for the sole purpose of supplying capital 
with weapons against the revolts of the working-class. At the head of 
these in importance, stands the self-acting mule, because it opened up a 
new epoch in the automatic system.[129]

---

NY Times August 18, 2012
Skilled Work, Without the Worker
By JOHN MARKOFF

DRACHTEN, the Netherlands — At the Philips Electronics factory on the 
coast of China, hundreds of workers use their hands and specialized 
tools to assemble electric shavers. That is the old way.

At a sister factory here in the Dutch countryside, 128 robot arms do the 
same work with yoga-like flexibility. Video cameras guide them through 
feats well beyond the capability of the most dexterous human.

One robot arm endlessly forms three perfect bends in two connector wires 
and slips them into holes almost too small for the eye to see. The arms 
work so fast that they must be enclosed in glass cages to prevent the 
people supervising them from being injured. And they do it all without a 
coffee break — three shifts a day, 365 days a year.

All told, the factory here has several dozen workers per shift, about a 
tenth as many as the plant in the Chinese city of Zhuhai.

This is the future. A new wave of robots, far more adept than those now 
commonly used by automakers and other heavy manufacturers, are replacing 
workers around the world in both manufacturing and distribution. 
Factories like the one here in the Netherlands are a striking 
counterpoint to those used by Apple and other consumer electronics 
giants, which employ hundreds of thousands of low-skilled workers.

“With these machines, we can make any consumer device in the world,” 
said Binne Visser, an electrical engineer who manages the Philips 
assembly line in Drachten.

Many industry executives and technology experts say Philips’s approach 
is gaining ground on Apple’s. Even as Foxconn, Apple’s iPhone 
manufacturer, continues to build new plants and hire thousands of 
additional workers to make smartphones, it plans to install more than a 
million robots within a few years to supplement its work force in China.

Foxconn has not disclosed how many workers will be displaced or when. 
But its chairman, Terry Gou, has publicly endorsed a growing use of 
robots. Speaking of his more than one million employees worldwide, he 
said in January, according to the official Xinhua news agency: “As human 
beings are also animals, to manage one million animals gives me a headache.”

The falling costs and growing sophistication of robots have touched off 
a renewed debate among economists and technologists over how quickly 
jobs will be lost. This year, Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee, 
economists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, made the case 
for a rapid transformation. “The pace and scale of this encroachment 
into human skills is relatively recent and has profound economic 
implications,” they wrote in their book, “Race Against the Machine.”

In their minds, the advent of low-cost automation foretells changes on 
the scale of the revolution in agricultural technology over the last 
century, when farming employment in the United States fell from 40 
percent of the work force to about 2 percent today. The analogy is not 
only to the industrialization of agriculture but also to the 
electrification of manufacturing in the past century, Mr. McAfee argues.

“At what point does the chain saw replace Paul Bunyan?” asked Mike 
Dennison, an executive at Flextronics, a manufacturer of consumer 
electronics products that is based in Silicon Valley and is increasingly 
automating assembly work. “There’s always a price point, and we’re very 
close to that point.”

But Bran Ferren, a veteran roboticist and industrial product designer at 
Applied Minds in Glendale, Calif., argues that there are still steep 
obstacles that have made the dream of the universal assembly robot 
elusive. “I had an early naïveté about universal robots that could just 
do anything,” he said. “You have to have people around anyway. And 
people are pretty good at figuring out, how do I wiggle the radiator in 
or slip the hose on? And these things are still hard for robots to do.”

Beyond the technical challenges lies resistance from unionized workers 
and communities worried about jobs. The ascension of robots may mean 
fewer jobs are created in this country, even though rising labor and 
transportation costs in Asia and fears of intellectual property theft 
are now bringing some work back to the West.

Take the cavernous solar-panel factory run by Flextronics in Milpitas, 
south of San Francisco. A large banner proudly proclaims “Bringing Jobs 
& Manufacturing Back to California!” (Right now China makes a large 
share of the solar panels used in this country and is automating its own 
industry.)

Yet in the state-of-the-art plant, where the assembly line runs 24 hours 
a day, seven days a week, there are robots everywhere and few human 
workers. All of the heavy lifting and almost all of the precise work is 
done by robots that string together solar cells and seal them under 
glass. The human workers do things like trimming excess material, 
threading wires and screwing a handful of fasteners into a simple frame 
for each panel.

Such advances in manufacturing are also beginning to transform other 
sectors that employ millions of workers around the world. One is 
distribution, where robots that zoom at the speed of the world’s fastest 
sprinters can store, retrieve and pack goods for shipment far more 
efficiently than people. Robots could soon replace workers at companies 
like C & S Wholesale Grocers, the nation’s largest grocery distributor, 
which has already deployed robot technology.

Rapid improvement in vision and touch technologies is putting a wide 
array of manual jobs within the abilities of robots. For example, 
Boeing’s wide-body commercial jets are now riveted automatically by 
giant machines that move rapidly and precisely over the skin of the 
planes. Even with these machines, the company said it struggles to find 
enough workers to make its new 787 aircraft. Rather, the machines offer 
significant increases in precision and are safer for workers.

And at Earthbound Farms in California, four newly installed robot arms 
with customized suction cups swiftly place clamshell containers of 
organic lettuce into shipping boxes. The robots move far faster than the 
people they replaced. Each robot replaces two to five workers at 
Earthbound, according to John Dulchinos, an engineer who is the chief 
executive at Adept Technology, a robot maker based in Pleasanton, 
Calif., that developed Earthbound’s system.

Robot manufacturers in the United States say that in many applications, 
robots are already more cost-effective than humans.

At an automation trade show last year in Chicago, Ron Potter, the 
director of robotics technology at an Atlanta consulting firm called 
Factory Automation Systems, offered attendees a spreadsheet to calculate 
how quickly robots would pay for themselves.

In one example, a robotic manufacturing system initially cost $250,000 
and replaced two machine operators, each earning $50,000 a year. Over 
the 15-year life of the system, the machines yielded $3.5 million in 
labor and productivity savings.

The Obama administration says this technological shift presents a 
historic opportunity for the nation to stay competitive. “The only way 
we are going to maintain manufacturing in the U.S. is if we have higher 
productivity,” said Tom Kalil, deputy director of the White House Office 
of Science and Technology Policy.

Government officials and industry executives argue that even if 
factories are automated, they still are a valuable source of jobs. If 
the United States does not compete for advanced manufacturing in 
industries like consumer electronics, it could lose product engineering 
and design as well. Moreover, robotics executives argue that even though 
blue-collar jobs will be lost, more efficient manufacturing will create 
skilled jobs in designing, operating and servicing the assembly lines, 
as well as significant numbers of other kinds of jobs in the communities 
where factories are.

And robot makers point out that their industry itself creates jobs. A 
report commissioned by the International Federation of Robotics last 
year found that 150,000 people are already employed by robotics 
manufacturers worldwide in engineering and assembly jobs.

But American and European dominance in the next generation of 
manufacturing is far from certain.

“What I see is that the Chinese are going to apply robots too,” said 
Frans van Houten, Philips’s chief executive. “The window of opportunity 
to bring manufacturing back is before that happens.”

A Faster Assembly Line

Royal Philips Electronics began making the first electric shavers in 
1939 and set up the factory here in Drachten in 1950. But Mr. Visser, 
the engineer who manages the assembly, takes pride in the sophistication 
of the latest shavers. They sell for as much as $350 and, he says, are 
more complex to make than smartphones.

The assembly line here is made up of dozens of glass cages housing 
robots made by Adept Technology that snake around the factory floor for 
more than 100 yards. Video cameras atop the cages guide the robot arms 
almost unerringly to pick up the parts they assemble. The arms bend 
wires with millimetric accuracy, set toothpick-thin spindles in tiny 
holes, grab miniature plastic gears and set them in housings, and snap 
pieces of plastic into place.

The next generation of robots for manufacturing will be more flexible 
and easier to train.

Witness the factory of Tesla Motors, which recently began manufacturing 
the Tesla S, a luxury sedan, in Fremont, Calif., on the edge of Silicon 
Valley.

More than half of the building is shuttered, called “the dark side.” It 
still houses a dingy, unused Toyota Corolla assembly line on which an 
army of workers once turned out half a million cars annually.

The Tesla assembly line is a stark contrast, brilliantly lighted. Its 
fast-moving robots, bright Tesla red, each has a single arm with 
multiple joints. Most of them are imposing, 8 to 10 feet tall, giving 
them a slightly menacing “Terminator” quality.

But the arms seem eerily human when they reach over to a stand and 
change their “hand” to perform a different task. While the many robots 
in auto factories typically perform only one function, in the new Tesla 
factory a robot might do up to four: welding, riveting, bonding and 
installing a component.

As many as eight robots perform a ballet around each vehicle as it stops 
at each station along the line for just five minutes. Ultimately as many 
as 83 cars a day — roughly 20,000 are planned for the first year — will 
be produced at the factory. When the company adds a sport utility 
vehicle next year, it will be built on the same assembly line, once the 
robots are reprogrammed.

Tesla’s factory is tiny but represents a significant bet on flexible 
robots, one that could be a model for the industry. And others are 
already thinking bigger.

Hyundai and Beijing Motors recently completed a mammoth factory outside 
Beijing that can produce a million vehicles a year using more robots and 
fewer people than the big factories of their competitors and with the 
same flexibility as Tesla’s, said Paul Chau, an American venture 
capitalist at WI Harper who toured the plant in June.

The New Warehouse

Traditional and futuristic systems working side by side in a 
distribution center north of New York City show how robotics is 
transforming the way products are distributed, threatening jobs. From 
this warehouse in Newburgh, C & S, the nation’s largest grocery 
wholesaler, supplies a major supermarket chain.

The old system sprawls across almost half a million square feet. The 
shelves are loaded and unloaded around the clock by hundreds of people 
driving pallet jacks and forklifts. At peak times in the evening, the 
warehouse is a cacophony of beeping and darting electric vehicles as 
workers with headsets are directed to cases of food by a computer that 
speaks to them in four languages.

The new system is much smaller, squeezed into only 30,000 square feet at 
the far end of the warehouse and controlled by just a handful of 
technicians. They watch over a four-story cage with different levels 
holding 168 “rover” robots the size of go-carts. Each can move at 25 
miles an hour, nearly as fast as an Olympic sprinter.

Each rover is connected wirelessly to a central computer and on command 
will race along an aisle until it reaches its destination — a case of 
food to retrieve or the spot to drop one off for storage. The robot 
gathers a box by extending two-foot-long metal fingers from its side and 
sliding them underneath. It lifts the box and pulls it to its belly. 
Then it accelerates to the front of the steel cage, where it turns into 
a wide lane where it must contend with traffic — eight robots are active 
on each level of the structure, which is 20 aisles wide and 21 levels high.

 From the aisle, the robots wait their turn to pull into a special open 
lane where they deposit each load into an elevator that sends a stream 
of food cases down to a conveyor belt that leads to a large robot arm.

About 10 feet tall, the arm has the grace and dexterity of a skilled 
supermarket bagger, twisting and turning each case so the final stack 
forms an eight-foot cube. The software is sophisticated enough to 
determine which robot should pick up which case first, so when the order 
arrives at the supermarket, workers can take the cases out in the 
precise order in which they are to go on the shelves.

When the arm is finished, the cube of goods is conveyed to a machine 
that wraps it in clear plastic to hold it in place. Then a forklift 
operator summoned by the computer moves the cube to a truck for shipment.

Built by Symbotic, a start-up company based in the Boston area, this 
robotic warehouse is inspired by computer designers who created software 
algorithms to efficiently organize data to be stored on a computer’s 
hard drive.

Jim Baum, Symbotic’s chief executive, compares the new system to a huge 
parallel computer. The design is efficient because there is no single 
choke point; the cases of food moving through the robotic warehouse are 
like the digital bits being processed by the computer.

Humans’ Changing Role

In the decade since he began working as a warehouseman in Tolleson, 
Ariz., a suburb of Phoenix, Josh Graves has seen how automation systems 
can make work easier but also create new stress and insecurity. The 
giant facility where he works distributes dry goods for Kroger supermarkets.

Mr. Graves, 29, went to work in the warehouse, where his father worked 
for three decades, right out of high school. The demanding job required 
lifting heavy boxes and the hours were long. “They would bring in 15 
guys, and only one would last,” he said.

Today Mr. Graves drives a small forklift-like machine that stores and 
retrieves cases of all sizes. Because such workers are doing less 
physical labor, there are fewer injuries, said Rome Aloise, a Teamsters 
vice president in Northern California. Because a computer sets the pace, 
the stress is now more psychological.

Mr. Graves wears headsets and is instructed by a computerized voice on 
where to go in the warehouse to gather or store products. A centralized 
computer the workers call The Brain dictates their speed. Managers know 
exactly what the workers do, to the precise minute.

Several years ago, Mr. Graves’s warehouse installed a German system that 
automatically stores and retrieves cases of food. That led to the 
elimination of 106 jobs, roughly 20 percent of the work force. The new 
system was initially maintained by union workers with high seniority. 
Then that job went to the German company, which hired nonunion workers.

Now Kroger plans to build a highly automated warehouse in Tolleson. 
Sixty union workers went before the City Council last year to oppose the 
plan, on which the city has not yet ruled.

“We don’t have a problem with the machines coming,” Mr. Graves told city 
officials. “But tell Kroger we don’t want to lose these jobs in our city.”

Some jobs are still beyond the reach of automation: construction jobs 
that require workers to move in unpredictable settings and perform 
different tasks that are not repetitive; assembly work that requires 
tactile feedback like placing fiberglass panels inside airplanes, boats 
or cars; and assembly jobs where only a limited quantity of products are 
made or where there are many versions of each product, requiring 
expensive reprogramming of robots.

But that list is growing shorter.

Upgrading Distribution

Inside a spartan garage in an industrial neighborhood in Palo Alto, 
Calif., a robot armed with electronic “eyes” and a small scoop and 
suction cups repeatedly picks up boxes and drops them onto a conveyor belt.

It is doing what low-wage workers do every day around the world.

Older robots cannot do such work because computer vision systems were 
costly and limited to carefully controlled environments where the 
lighting was just right. But thanks to an inexpensive stereo camera and 
software that lets the system see shapes with the same ease as humans, 
this robot can quickly discern the irregular dimensions of randomly 
placed objects.

The robot uses a technology pioneered in Microsoft’s Kinect motion 
sensing system for its Xbox video game system.

Such robots will put automation within range of companies like Federal 
Express and United Parcel Service that now employ tens of thousands of 
workers doing such tasks.

The start-up behind the robot, Industrial Perception Inc., is the first 
spinoff of Willow Garage, an ambitious robotics research firm based in 
Menlo Park, Calif. The first customer is likely to be a company that now 
employs thousands of workers to load and unload its trucks. The workers 
can move one box every six seconds on average. But each box can weigh 
more than 130 pounds, so the workers tire easily and sometimes hurt 
their backs.

Industrial Perception will win its contract if its machine can reliably 
move one box every four seconds. The engineers are confident that the 
robot will soon do much better than that, picking up and setting down 
one box per second.

“We’re on the cusp of completely changing manufacturing and 
distribution,” said Gary Bradski, a machine-vision scientist who is a 
founder of Industrial Perception. “I think it’s not as singular an 
event, but it will ultimately have as big an impact as the Internet.”




More information about the Marxism mailing list