4 ms·

while I agree with the sentiment, as an Indian, I hope this doesn't happen in India. countries which typically do this mechanical turk-like work typically don't

while I agree with the sentiment, as an Indian, I hope this doesn't happen in India. countries which typically do this mechanical turk-like work typically don't raise themselves out of poverty (esp. Philippines, Indonesia, etc.). If anyone wants a specific example, I lead an aspect of web crawling for a FAANG and then other public companies. Over the last 10 years we heavily used those offshore teams, aforementioned, to do sanity checks/labeling, etc. Now, we have initiatives with GPT APIs which perform just as well for pennies on the dollar we spent offshore - and the offshore team that's been loyal for years? They're getting cut.

someotherperson 2y ago
That's just exploitative business. I know companies that operate in that space and they pay incredibly well, between $20 to $50/hour. > GPT APIs which perform just as well That's because they were also trained by exploiting third world groups, paying about $2/hour. The problem here isn't offering work to developing countries, the problem here is major corporations squeezing them for every cent and not allowing it to be used as a means of getting out of poverty. And that's also why the workers end up performing half-assed work by using automated classifiers and faking their credentials. It's not hard to see where this goes for both.
- winter-day 2y ago
  if you don't think FAANGs (and most companies) participate in "exploitative business" you should find out how your iphone was made (hint: lots of exploited workers).
  - someotherperson 2y ago
    Never said it wasn't. Amazon's antics especially are well known. The point here is that data labelling itself isn't fundamentally exploitative, even when leveraging developing countries.
Dylan16807 2y ago
> the offshore team that's been loyal for years Why, though? I'd say outsourcing that way is a clear indicator that loyalty is not part of the picture.

someotherperson 2y ago

That's just exploitative business. I know companies that operate in that space and they pay incredibly well, between $20 to $50/hour. > GPT APIs which perform just as well That's because they were also trained by exploiting third world groups, paying about $2/hour. The problem here isn't offering work to developing countries, the problem here is major corporations squeezing them for every cent and not allowing it to be used as a means of getting out of poverty. And that's also why the workers end up performing half-assed work by using automated classifiers and faking their credentials. It's not hard to see where this goes for both.

winter-day 2y ago
if you don't think FAANGs (and most companies) participate in "exploitative business" you should find out how your iphone was made (hint: lots of exploited workers).
- someotherperson 2y ago
  Never said it wasn't. Amazon's antics especially are well known. The point here is that data labelling itself isn't fundamentally exploitative, even when leveraging developing countries.

Dylan16807 2y ago

> the offshore team that's been loyal for years Why, though? I'd say outsourcing that way is a clear indicator that loyalty is not part of the picture.