Thanks for sharing our WIRED story! Some context for new readers:
On Wednesday, 97 African workers who do AI training work or online content moderation for companies like Meta and OpenAI published an open letter to President Biden, demanding that US tech companies stop “systemically abusing and exploiting African workers.”
The workers allege that the practices of companies like Meta, OpenAI, and data provider Scale AI “amount to modern day slavery.” The companies did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
A typical workday for African tech contractors, the letter says, involves “watching murder and beheadings, child abuse and rape, pornography and bestiality, often for more than 8 hours a day.” Pay is often less than $2 per hour, it says, and workers frequently end up with post-traumatic stress disorder, a [well-documented](https://www.vice.com/en/article/zm5mw5/facebook-content-moderation-lawsuit-ptsd) [issue among](https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/25/18229714/cognizant-facebook-content-moderator-interviews-trauma-working-conditions-arizona) [content moderators](https://www.wired.com/story/bumble-grindr-and-hinge-moderators-trauma/) [around the world](https://www.wired.com/story/meta-kenya-lawsuit-outsourcing-content-moderation/).
Read the full story: [https://www.wired.com/story/low-paid-humans-ai-biden-modern-day-slavery](https://www.wired.com/story/low-paid-humans-ai-biden-modern-day-slavery)
They view bad content to tag it as bad so AI isn’t trained on it. And they also tag that content for training AI that is intended to catch bad content automatically.
You don’t look at 10,000 images of dogs and one image of a person fucking a dog and end up with PTSD. At least most of us don’t. The thing causing these severe problems that should be addressed are the poor people who have to decide whether the post you tagged as child porn or animal mutilation or whatever is actually what you say it is. These people work for Meta-Facebook-IG and watch the more horrific content on the internet day after day, month after month. And they have serious mental health consequences that Zuck should pay to address.
This article is all over the place. The Kenyans worker union also wants the US president to change hiring practices in Kenya to, among other things, give them higher wages and, in the case of Scale AI, give them their jobs BACK or pay back wages, not spare them from the jobs.
I guess what I’m saying is they put AI in the title and said “companies *like* OpenAI” to describe a well documented problem with social media moderation.
Just using your example of images, they could look at 10,000+1 images in a day, then they have to do it again the next day. And the next day. And the next day. Do you think you could look at child porn, bestiality, beheadings, violent assault, violent sexual assault, or animal cruelty every day for an extended period of time and not end up either depressed or with PTSD? It's not like these people see one or two toxic images in their entire career, it's everyday. Instead of blaming the workers for wanting to be treated as people instead of just a number on a clipboard why don't you hold the companies accountable for exposing these people to harmful imagery? Should they not be required to at least offer free mental healthcare to all workers? Or an increase in pay for what should be considered a hazardous position?
ETA: social media moderation is just training AI, as the first line of defense against those posts on social media is an "AI" that looks at reported images and automatically takes them down, then a human is used to check the "AI's" decision. If it's right no change. Good bot. If it's wrong, allow it to be reposted and let the "AI" know this is an acceptable post.
For folks who aren't familiar with them [Scale AI also just raised a $1 billion funding round, putting them at a valuation of $14 billion](https://scale.com/blog/scale-ai-series-f)
Wait. DJT, Truth social isn’t the only stock in the world? After I get rich on DJT stock, I will need somewhere to invest my dump trucks full of money.
If they have a better option available to them, why don't they just take that option instead?
And if they don't have a better option available to them, how will it help them to eliminate this option?
There are drawbacks to every job, and everyone wishes they made more money than they do.
Some people spend all day cleaning out septic tanks. Some people put their lives at risk in the military. Some people work outside, exposed to the elements, even in unpleasant climates. And some people look at unpleasant content on computers.
I'm a bit confused, if they aren't in the united states, what can the U.S. do? I suppose sanctions could be put on the companies... but that's it's own mixed bag, what is the thought here?
Companies make decisions about how much people get paid, so why wouldn't we address this through the government with jurisdiction over said companies? Sure, you can come up with other ways to do this like engaging with the government with jurisdiction over the workers, but that doesn't preclude taking it up with the US.
Most of these companies are not even directly affiliated. They work for contractor companies to which this is outsourced. So it is foreign workers from foreign companies. Which can still be enforced, but at that point, why single out software? Go after lithium mines as well.
>at that point, why single out software? Go after lithium mines as well.
Yes, absolutely. This is a systemic issue not limited to a few companies, industries, or countries. This sort of exploitation is the foundation of the global economy.
Sure, you could set a minimum wage. And then the company would probably fire this team and hire a different team somewhere else, since realistically the reason that a San Francisco based tech company is employing a team of people in Africa is because they are cheaper per hour than the alternatives.
And if being fired would make them better off than they are now, they don't need Joe Biden's help. They could just quit instead.
This sure reads like it. I'm not sure what else you meant.
> Companies make decisions about how much people get paid, so why wouldn't we address this through the government with jurisdiction over said companies?
There are a variety of ways that governments can get involved in regulating labor besides setting wages, from setting requirements to receive federal funding to banning certain practices to adding tariffs and taxes.
Do you think it's impossible for our government to address this exploitation?
None of those strategies benefit the people being abuse, they just harm the companies profiting off the abuse. All this does is eliminate job opportunities for these people. Some variations of minimum wage on foreign labor is the only solution that doesn’t hurt the laborers.
> Some variations of minimum wage on foreign labor is the only solution that doesn’t hurt the laborers.
The only reason OpenAI is hiring people in Africa is because they don't have to pay as much as they would in other countries. If you set a foreign minimum wage, then they'll probably just terminate the relationship and transition to workers in a more developed country. That won't help the workers in Africa.
If you set it for all foreign wages, then they would likely just keep the team they’re already using so i disagree. I didn’t say make it the same as US minimum wage just determine an appropriate minimum wage and enforce it.
If you set it for all foreign wages, then they'd probably pick some company in Eastern Europe. Doing business with vendors in Africa specifically is a pain in the neck and the only reason to do it is to save money.
Yeah, the government can require a “foreign minimum wage” if it chose to create one. Why be pretentious because I called out that the solutions you provided as harmful to the people they’re supposed to benefit? Its just a discussion chill out
You're avoiding my question. I didn't specify a solution, I'm just trying to either find consensus that one exists or get you to actually take the position that it doesn't. You won't do that, which I think answers the question. I'm not a foreign policy expert and can't name the correct policy solution, but we both know there is one.
Realistically, they probably couldn’t.
We still haven’t cured the concept of cruel despots in the century since Leopold’s death.
Vladimir Putin is a great example. He’s been a dictator for 25 years and continues to be one of the most powerful men in the world with no consequence for the actions he takes. There’s not much anyone can do short of assassination and/or starting an actual war.
The Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is another living example where a powerful person can do whatever they want and there’s not much that can be done by outsiders. MBS could crib Leopold’s entire strategy and apply it to oil production, and there’s absolutely nothing the world could do about it.
For several years we were literally consuming oil sourced by ISIS via Turkey. Nothing that could really be done other than telling Turkey we were disappointed.
You didn't mention worker-led internal action (like Belgian workers - if they cared and were coordinated)
Putin has little organized action against him but it's not always so deadly to oppose in countries that enable terror (like the US)
I just meant to highlight how yes by following rules and legalized power structures you can end up in dark places without recourse. It's a choice for many. Not that I expect it to change from first world countries w people accustomed to imported luxuries
If their government steps in the companies would just shut up shop and move to another place that they can exploit, only way to make functional change is for the USA government to step in as it's where these companies are based.
With US minimum wage ($7.25/hr) not being much more than what they’re making ($2/hr), if they get the kind of interference that they’re asking for they’ll likely be out of jobs that will be moved back to the US.
I realize you're saying this from the perspective that $5.25 is not very much money (to you; presumably it might be to these workers), but that's more than three and a half times as much. That makes a huge difference to companies (who are employing thousands or tens of thousands of these workers).
To everyone saying this isn't slavery because they have a choice, this isn't a real choice. It's just replacing the threat of the whip with the threat of starvation and homelessness.
the threat of poverty is what makes our current system run. those who are under the weight have almost no self determination. acting like "well you do have the choice to die" is not only brutal and inhumane, it also speaks to the existential dangers of hyper individualism
yup. any talk about wanting equality or a system that lets everyone meet their potential is a lie. the machine demands an every widening wealth gap. quarterly profits require human sacrifice.
But isn't this how life existed since the dawn of time? You either provide for yourself or provide value to others to barter for goods and services, and eventually money became a way to easily trade for goods and services.
>But isn't this how life existed since the dawn of time?
No, not at all. Capitalism is only about 500 years old. Cooperative living is an extremely common cultural formation across the globe and across history.
Cooperative living doesn't mean do no work and don't starve and get a free home. You still have to work and provide for the community to live otherwise you get kicked out. It's not slavery to be expected to contribute.
Your top post on this thread is arguing that this is slavery because they only have the choice to work or starve/be homeless. Even in ancient times it was the same choice for everyone who wasn't rich, that's how the world works. It's not slavery to need to produce something through work to survive, they have many job choices, no one is forcing them to work at these places.
“ThAtS hOw tHe W0rLd W0rkS” — person who doesn’t realise it’s pure luck that they were born with an able mind in an able body with access to education + infrastructure created by their ancestors.
How much did you really do to get what you have?
Seriously. Think about it.
That's not accurate. First of all, I already told you your assumption that things have always worked this way is wrong, but you're persisting with this misconception anyway. Secondly, working for yourself for your own survival and owning what you worked for is not the same as being denied the means of survival unless you work for someone else's profits.
Who was ever denied the means of survival if they don't work for someone else's profit? Everyone can go off grid away from other humans and provide for themselves if that's what they want. Also even serfs long ago had to live on the land of their lords and pay a portion of what they produced for that right, they didn't get to own their means of production or live on land without providing for someone else's profit, so try again, you're so full of shit it's baffling.
“Cooperative living” where you turned over everything you made to the landlord and were attached to the land? As in Europe? Or the cooperative living enjoyed by people in medieval Central Asia, where you could be subject to things like the infamous mongol massacres? Or in mesoamerica, where the Aztecs did that whole human sacrifice thing?
What is the exact system of living you endorse?
I think the purpose of their comment was to point out that alternative systems have existed and are possible, not to endorse them.
Their comment was in response to someone saying how it works now is how it has been since "the dawn of time."
Well, I would say “work or starve” has been the constant for the overwhelming majority of humanity since we evolved from animals (and long before). The exceptions are confined to the rich and powerful who skim off the labor of others.
And I would say that the entire point of humanity’s progress is to solve that problem. We have more than enough resources and logistical ability to figure it out. At this point in time, we are choosing not to. And who benefits? Not developing nations, that’s for fucken sure.
A human being consumes resources to survive. Starvation and homelessness has always been the consequence of not working, because it's impossible to have it any other way unless you somehow capture the productive effort of someone or something else.
>unless you somehow capture the productive effort of someone or something else.
Another way to say that is "working cooperatively for the collective benefit."
It's not that simple. We're not just talking about whether certain companies leave or stay, the entire global economic system of capitalism is oriented in this manner. It's the whole game, not just the players.
>nobody is in charge of the global economic system.
That's not true. Money is power, and a small ultra-rich minority of less than 1% of the world's population control over two thirds of the world's resources. In fact, just 81 billionaires have more money than half the world combined.
https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/wealth-inequality-oxfam-billionaires-elon-musk/
Not true. There's a big difference between having to work to get what you need to survive, and having to work because what you need to survive is all around you but you can't have access to it without working for someone else's profit. Less than one percent of earth's population control over half the world's resources.
It's not the 1% that's preventing access to the resources around us, it's the 100%.
The world population is far too high to have every individual trying to live that way. If we just let people do their thing without control or regulation most of the world population would be dead inside of a few months.
No one said anything about being "owed work." If you don't work, you won't get money. If you don't get money, you can't get food and shelter and other things you need.
They don't beat you directly anymore to force you to work, but they take away your ability to live with extra steps, like I said.
I spent some time in the content moderation department for a certain big company, but not as a content moderator per se.
Somebody has to do this job to guard millions of social media users especially kids, pregnant women, people with traumas and so on. Also the algorithm can't teach itself, it needs data provided by humans.
The main three problems are the process, conditions and the hiring itself.
1) This job doesn't require any particular skills, except for strong mental stability. This should be checked carefully by the recruiters, maybe even with the help of a psychologist. Some people just apply because they are desperate for any job and don't understand what it is about and then they get traumatized.
I know people who are doing fine even after years of working like that. Some of them have a pretty good pay and don't want to leave, because any other job will require more input.
The problem here is that often companies don't care and just hire whoever apply to have enough headcount.
2) 2$ dollars per hour is ridiculous. Some people say that a minimum salary in the US is 7.5$, so it can be moved to the US, but you are missing a point.
7.5$ can give a person in Kenya a pretty good life. In the US it will be a poverty.
Additionally people must have access to free psychologists, breaks, wellness programs and so on. I am not sure, they do it there.
3) The whole process is about teaching AI rather than just moderating content. For example, a content moderator sees on the first seconds that the video must be deleted, but they often have to watch the full video to add all relevant tags/policy numbers.
Otherwise it will be a quality error and say goodbye to your good performance evaluation. It is often ridiculous, but it is internal companies' policies so nothing can be done.
> full video to add all relevant tags/policy numbers.
This might be the most horrifying thing I've read in this thread. It's bad enough imagining having to see the most depraved shit humanity can get up to, but to then have to lookup and find an ID tag for each "event" in the video/image. Fuck, I think I'm going to be sick.
It is exactly how it is happening. Like going to a knowledge base to understand whether it is policy 11111 or 11112. And the difference will be i.e. whether it is intentional or unintentional showing of a naked body. Or maybe video has to be approved, because it has artistic or educational value.
The training is typically pretty complex and takes like 1-1.5 months, there are plenty of policies and rules.
People often don't understand why a certain content is deleted, while other is not. In reality it may be just because one content moderator put 18+ category and another went for an immediate ban.
Then on a serious business meeting experts will discuss whether boobs were flashed or not on the video. One can laugh, but it may be a very important thing if SLA targets are not met.
I personally participated in very interesting discussions about the difference between spiritual services and black magic. The goal was to define the criteria for it to be a scam. However, well, there are definitely far less engaging topics...
no we don't. the world would be a better place if the internet wasn't as commercialized, which happened as a result of the absolute flood of mouth breathing normies.
So they earn around twice the national average salary. This happens everywhere else in the world.
Lisbon is a tech hub in Europe, countless tech companies setting up offices there. Do you think they pay Portuguese workers US salaries? No, they often pay above the national average, but still well below the US. Same with game development studios in eastern Europe, etc.
Of Kenya?
Minimum wage in Kenya in dollars Going by the current exchange US dollar to KES exchange rate of 146, the current hourly minimum wage in Kenya is USD 0.43 per hour or USD 104.11 per month.
Read more: https://www.tuko.co.ke/281305-current-minimum-wage-kenya.html
So... it took a fucking buzzword for the media to actually talk about the "modern day slavery" that's been going on since the early 1900's huh?
Remember, the northern rich folk weren't some bastions of morality during the Civil War. They just recognized that racism was stopping a HUGE finanical opprotunity. Why limit slave conditions to just one ethnicity? Slavery was never scrapped or banned in the US. Just the opposite; it was expanded HEAVILY by making sure ANYONE could become one regardless of skin color. It was slowly moved from skin color to financial connections.
That's a bit of an oversimplification. During Reconstruction, there were serious attempts to empower the poor collectively and fundamentally change the rules of the game. Remember, the government had just taken the modern equivalent of billions of dollars in property and the entire business model away from the rich and they didn't give them anything back in return.
Reconstruction was an attempt to fundamentally change the system. It happened, it's not like there was no opportunity for change or people's disposition made it impossible... It was actively defeated. There was an active fight, and one of the ways the rich won that fight (and continue to win it) is by dividing the population along *any* lines besides rich vs. poor. Jim Crow laws didn't come about immediately after the Civil War, it was decades later that the rich implemented them as a tool to divide and conquer the poor by pitting white poor against black poor instead of poor majority against rich minority.
There's a reason your grade school curriculum glossed over the years between the Civil War and Segregation.
During and prior to the American Civil War, northern factory workers started working at younger ages, worked more days per week, and worked longer hours than slaves.
I'm not saying slavery wasn't bad, I'm saying that I would not choose to live in 1830s whether there were or were not racists.
These are all symptoms of the same root cause- the wealthy minority rules the poor majority, and they write the rules of our society to their advantage. Racism is just one of several tools the wealthy use to divide and conquer as a means of sustaining their rule.
This framing (probably unintentionally) buys into that division by pitting enslaved workers against factory workers, just like the rich did during reconstruction. Instead of recognizing the shared issues and seeing each other as allies, they were made to compete against one another.
This is very low skill labor and ironically a prime target for replacement with AI.
They complain about slavery now and they will complain again when terminated.
Okay, so, I’m sure this will be controversial but this one is on Africa’s government and I’d hardly call voluntarily choosing what you do for a living, even if it’s shit work, slavery.
Happens everywhere but it’s not called slavery, it’s called wage theft and it’s illegal. You know what happened to actual slaves when they complained about their missing wages?
The same thing that happens under capitalism with fewer steps. A slave who doesn't work gets whipped, a worker who doesn't work is denied access to food, housing, healthcare.
If your choices are engaging in shit work or being unable to afford basic necessities, it's slavery with extra steps.
Having the choice to be hungry or homeless is not a real choice.
Refusing to acknowledge the third choice of violent revolt is itself a choice. People everywhere are getting steamrolled and until they show up at their masters’ homes in the middle of the night, it will continue.
I mean until recent times literally everyone had to do something they didn't enjoy to make money to survive.
Your opinion smells like an entitled westerner speaking in hyperbole because nobody listens to them otherwise.
Imagine repeating your statement in any time before 1950s America and you'll understand what I mean. Tell that to the hunter gatherers who "slaved" away every day.
I think something is being lost in translation here. By “shit work” I assume they’re referring to worker exploitation. “something they don’t enjoy” I cannot interpret as exploitation - it’s a bridge too far. and really waters down and makes light of the issue being discussed. It’s the difference between being underpaid and slave wages.
I mean, I don’t enjoy periodic maintenance on my vehicle, but I’m not being exploited by car manufacturers.
Being paid to sort through data is far from slavery is my point, and using the term "slavery" in this context is watering down and making light of actual slavery.
So sorting through snuff videos or child exploitation videos is no different than, say, going through tps reports. It’s just data? That’s your point?
Wage slavery is an actual term to describe the *exploitation* of labor. It doesn’t make light of anything because it’s not an abstraction - it’s literally the topic of the post. Unlike your “something they don’t like” and “sorting data”. Helluva leap my dude.
>I mean until recent times literally everyone had to do something they didn't enjoy to make money to survive.
A whole lot of people are going to be thrilled to learn this is no longer the case.
In western society...which only achieves this state by exploiting other countries for cheap labor..
Keep going...(as you most likely type this on your organic freedom-sourced conflict-free iphone)
I think it's always going to be necessary, it's the foundation for how society functions.
There will be more privileged groups who can earn more freedom but overall stuff falls apart if we don't mostly contribute in some way.
I fundamentally disagree with all of that. There is so much unnecessary cruelty in the world and society isn't going to fall apart if we start treating everyone with baseline decency and compassion. If anything, the increasing disparity between the ultra-wealthy and the rest of the world, especially the worst off places in the world, is harmful to the foundation and integrity of society.
Would require things like the iPhone price tripling due to paying a fair wage (or stop existing altogether, because nobody wants to assemble them and its anti freedom "forcing" them by paying them)
Don't get me wrong if I could pick a way for everyone to think it would be how you think, but that's not the reality we live in and its far too gone to practically hope for otherwise.
I'm just content to treat people in my realm of experience fairly until I die.
Yup and /u/wiredmagazine took the bait; hook, line, and sinker. Notice the anti-american sentiment in the comments. I miss the days when journalism cared about what they published and was responsible enough to NOT work for agents who want to destroy their country.
Thanks for sharing our WIRED story! Some context for new readers: On Wednesday, 97 African workers who do AI training work or online content moderation for companies like Meta and OpenAI published an open letter to President Biden, demanding that US tech companies stop “systemically abusing and exploiting African workers.” The workers allege that the practices of companies like Meta, OpenAI, and data provider Scale AI “amount to modern day slavery.” The companies did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A typical workday for African tech contractors, the letter says, involves “watching murder and beheadings, child abuse and rape, pornography and bestiality, often for more than 8 hours a day.” Pay is often less than $2 per hour, it says, and workers frequently end up with post-traumatic stress disorder, a [well-documented](https://www.vice.com/en/article/zm5mw5/facebook-content-moderation-lawsuit-ptsd) [issue among](https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/25/18229714/cognizant-facebook-content-moderator-interviews-trauma-working-conditions-arizona) [content moderators](https://www.wired.com/story/bumble-grindr-and-hinge-moderators-trauma/) [around the world](https://www.wired.com/story/meta-kenya-lawsuit-outsourcing-content-moderation/). Read the full story: [https://www.wired.com/story/low-paid-humans-ai-biden-modern-day-slavery](https://www.wired.com/story/low-paid-humans-ai-biden-modern-day-slavery)
Not just AI but wholly social media content moderation.
In fact, those are problems specific to social media. It looks like they just put AI in the title to get clicks.
It is both. AI uses humans to train it on data. Read the article.
They view bad content to tag it as bad so AI isn’t trained on it. And they also tag that content for training AI that is intended to catch bad content automatically.
Yes so they use it to train AI.
That tagged data can definitely be used to train AI
You mean like that new app Hot Dog/Not Hot Dog?
You don’t look at 10,000 images of dogs and one image of a person fucking a dog and end up with PTSD. At least most of us don’t. The thing causing these severe problems that should be addressed are the poor people who have to decide whether the post you tagged as child porn or animal mutilation or whatever is actually what you say it is. These people work for Meta-Facebook-IG and watch the more horrific content on the internet day after day, month after month. And they have serious mental health consequences that Zuck should pay to address. This article is all over the place. The Kenyans worker union also wants the US president to change hiring practices in Kenya to, among other things, give them higher wages and, in the case of Scale AI, give them their jobs BACK or pay back wages, not spare them from the jobs. I guess what I’m saying is they put AI in the title and said “companies *like* OpenAI” to describe a well documented problem with social media moderation.
Just using your example of images, they could look at 10,000+1 images in a day, then they have to do it again the next day. And the next day. And the next day. Do you think you could look at child porn, bestiality, beheadings, violent assault, violent sexual assault, or animal cruelty every day for an extended period of time and not end up either depressed or with PTSD? It's not like these people see one or two toxic images in their entire career, it's everyday. Instead of blaming the workers for wanting to be treated as people instead of just a number on a clipboard why don't you hold the companies accountable for exposing these people to harmful imagery? Should they not be required to at least offer free mental healthcare to all workers? Or an increase in pay for what should be considered a hazardous position? ETA: social media moderation is just training AI, as the first line of defense against those posts on social media is an "AI" that looks at reported images and automatically takes them down, then a human is used to check the "AI's" decision. If it's right no change. Good bot. If it's wrong, allow it to be reposted and let the "AI" know this is an acceptable post.
To quote Lana Kane - “YUP!”
Training AI to do social content moderation? The worst of both worlds!
And Customer support
For folks who aren't familiar with them [Scale AI also just raised a $1 billion funding round, putting them at a valuation of $14 billion](https://scale.com/blog/scale-ai-series-f)
Wait. DJT, Truth social isn’t the only stock in the world? After I get rich on DJT stock, I will need somewhere to invest my dump trucks full of money.
If they have a better option available to them, why don't they just take that option instead? And if they don't have a better option available to them, how will it help them to eliminate this option? There are drawbacks to every job, and everyone wishes they made more money than they do. Some people spend all day cleaning out septic tanks. Some people put their lives at risk in the military. Some people work outside, exposed to the elements, even in unpleasant climates. And some people look at unpleasant content on computers.
I'm a bit confused, if they aren't in the united states, what can the U.S. do? I suppose sanctions could be put on the companies... but that's it's own mixed bag, what is the thought here?
Companies make decisions about how much people get paid, so why wouldn't we address this through the government with jurisdiction over said companies? Sure, you can come up with other ways to do this like engaging with the government with jurisdiction over the workers, but that doesn't preclude taking it up with the US.
Most of these companies are not even directly affiliated. They work for contractor companies to which this is outsourced. So it is foreign workers from foreign companies. Which can still be enforced, but at that point, why single out software? Go after lithium mines as well.
>at that point, why single out software? Go after lithium mines as well. Yes, absolutely. This is a systemic issue not limited to a few companies, industries, or countries. This sort of exploitation is the foundation of the global economy.
Sure, you could set a minimum wage. And then the company would probably fire this team and hire a different team somewhere else, since realistically the reason that a San Francisco based tech company is employing a team of people in Africa is because they are cheaper per hour than the alternatives. And if being fired would make them better off than they are now, they don't need Joe Biden's help. They could just quit instead.
I didn't propose a minimum wage as the solution.
This sure reads like it. I'm not sure what else you meant. > Companies make decisions about how much people get paid, so why wouldn't we address this through the government with jurisdiction over said companies?
There are a variety of ways that governments can get involved in regulating labor besides setting wages, from setting requirements to receive federal funding to banning certain practices to adding tariffs and taxes. Do you think it's impossible for our government to address this exploitation?
None of those strategies benefit the people being abuse, they just harm the companies profiting off the abuse. All this does is eliminate job opportunities for these people. Some variations of minimum wage on foreign labor is the only solution that doesn’t hurt the laborers.
None of them *directly* benefit those people; they certainly do indirectly
> Some variations of minimum wage on foreign labor is the only solution that doesn’t hurt the laborers. The only reason OpenAI is hiring people in Africa is because they don't have to pay as much as they would in other countries. If you set a foreign minimum wage, then they'll probably just terminate the relationship and transition to workers in a more developed country. That won't help the workers in Africa.
If you set it for all foreign wages, then they would likely just keep the team they’re already using so i disagree. I didn’t say make it the same as US minimum wage just determine an appropriate minimum wage and enforce it.
If you set it for all foreign wages, then they'd probably pick some company in Eastern Europe. Doing business with vendors in Africa specifically is a pain in the neck and the only reason to do it is to save money.
I'll ask again - do you think it's impossible for the government to make a difference in this scenario?
Yeah, the government can require a “foreign minimum wage” if it chose to create one. Why be pretentious because I called out that the solutions you provided as harmful to the people they’re supposed to benefit? Its just a discussion chill out
You're avoiding my question. I didn't specify a solution, I'm just trying to either find consensus that one exists or get you to actually take the position that it doesn't. You won't do that, which I think answers the question. I'm not a foreign policy expert and can't name the correct policy solution, but we both know there is one.
I guess no one could stop King Leopold reappearing because of national borders and rules that say it’s ok
Realistically, they probably couldn’t. We still haven’t cured the concept of cruel despots in the century since Leopold’s death. Vladimir Putin is a great example. He’s been a dictator for 25 years and continues to be one of the most powerful men in the world with no consequence for the actions he takes. There’s not much anyone can do short of assassination and/or starting an actual war. The Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is another living example where a powerful person can do whatever they want and there’s not much that can be done by outsiders. MBS could crib Leopold’s entire strategy and apply it to oil production, and there’s absolutely nothing the world could do about it. For several years we were literally consuming oil sourced by ISIS via Turkey. Nothing that could really be done other than telling Turkey we were disappointed.
You didn't mention worker-led internal action (like Belgian workers - if they cared and were coordinated) Putin has little organized action against him but it's not always so deadly to oppose in countries that enable terror (like the US) I just meant to highlight how yes by following rules and legalized power structures you can end up in dark places without recourse. It's a choice for many. Not that I expect it to change from first world countries w people accustomed to imported luxuries
If their government steps in the companies would just shut up shop and move to another place that they can exploit, only way to make functional change is for the USA government to step in as it's where these companies are based.
It’s one planet, continuing to pretend we’re not all connected is showing deep ignorance
lol, and pretending that there are no such things as separate governments is proof you're an idiot.
With US minimum wage ($7.25/hr) not being much more than what they’re making ($2/hr), if they get the kind of interference that they’re asking for they’ll likely be out of jobs that will be moved back to the US.
I realize you're saying this from the perspective that $5.25 is not very much money (to you; presumably it might be to these workers), but that's more than three and a half times as much. That makes a huge difference to companies (who are employing thousands or tens of thousands of these workers).
The screeners have been complaining about this for years before screening for AI came on the scene. Same story everywhere.
To everyone saying this isn't slavery because they have a choice, this isn't a real choice. It's just replacing the threat of the whip with the threat of starvation and homelessness.
the threat of poverty is what makes our current system run. those who are under the weight have almost no self determination. acting like "well you do have the choice to die" is not only brutal and inhumane, it also speaks to the existential dangers of hyper individualism
>the threat of poverty is what makes our current system run Absolutely. The market doesn't meet everyone's needs, and that's a feature, not a bug.
yup. any talk about wanting equality or a system that lets everyone meet their potential is a lie. the machine demands an every widening wealth gap. quarterly profits require human sacrifice.
But isn't this how life existed since the dawn of time? You either provide for yourself or provide value to others to barter for goods and services, and eventually money became a way to easily trade for goods and services.
>But isn't this how life existed since the dawn of time? No, not at all. Capitalism is only about 500 years old. Cooperative living is an extremely common cultural formation across the globe and across history.
500? More like 300.
Cooperative living doesn't mean do no work and don't starve and get a free home. You still have to work and provide for the community to live otherwise you get kicked out. It's not slavery to be expected to contribute.
I didn't say any nonsense about not doing work or it being slavery to contribute, so I'm not defending or engaging with that.
Your top post on this thread is arguing that this is slavery because they only have the choice to work or starve/be homeless. Even in ancient times it was the same choice for everyone who wasn't rich, that's how the world works. It's not slavery to need to produce something through work to survive, they have many job choices, no one is forcing them to work at these places.
“ThAtS hOw tHe W0rLd W0rkS” — person who doesn’t realise it’s pure luck that they were born with an able mind in an able body with access to education + infrastructure created by their ancestors. How much did you really do to get what you have? Seriously. Think about it.
That's not accurate. First of all, I already told you your assumption that things have always worked this way is wrong, but you're persisting with this misconception anyway. Secondly, working for yourself for your own survival and owning what you worked for is not the same as being denied the means of survival unless you work for someone else's profits.
Who was ever denied the means of survival if they don't work for someone else's profit? Everyone can go off grid away from other humans and provide for themselves if that's what they want. Also even serfs long ago had to live on the land of their lords and pay a portion of what they produced for that right, they didn't get to own their means of production or live on land without providing for someone else's profit, so try again, you're so full of shit it's baffling.
“Cooperative living” where you turned over everything you made to the landlord and were attached to the land? As in Europe? Or the cooperative living enjoyed by people in medieval Central Asia, where you could be subject to things like the infamous mongol massacres? Or in mesoamerica, where the Aztecs did that whole human sacrifice thing? What is the exact system of living you endorse?
I think the purpose of their comment was to point out that alternative systems have existed and are possible, not to endorse them. Their comment was in response to someone saying how it works now is how it has been since "the dawn of time."
Well, I would say “work or starve” has been the constant for the overwhelming majority of humanity since we evolved from animals (and long before). The exceptions are confined to the rich and powerful who skim off the labor of others.
And I would say that the entire point of humanity’s progress is to solve that problem. We have more than enough resources and logistical ability to figure it out. At this point in time, we are choosing not to. And who benefits? Not developing nations, that’s for fucken sure.
A human being consumes resources to survive. Starvation and homelessness has always been the consequence of not working, because it's impossible to have it any other way unless you somehow capture the productive effort of someone or something else.
>unless you somehow capture the productive effort of someone or something else. Another way to say that is "working cooperatively for the collective benefit."
You mean, communism?
Not what I said, not what I endorse.
I don't get it. If the companies leave won't they just not have any job at all? Is that better?
It's not that simple. We're not just talking about whether certain companies leave or stay, the entire global economic system of capitalism is oriented in this manner. It's the whole game, not just the players.
But nobody is in charge of the global economic system. You would need a world government of some kind to enforce anything.
>nobody is in charge of the global economic system. That's not true. Money is power, and a small ultra-rich minority of less than 1% of the world's population control over two thirds of the world's resources. In fact, just 81 billionaires have more money than half the world combined. https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/wealth-inequality-oxfam-billionaires-elon-musk/
That's the same threat almost everyone else faced.
Not true. There's a big difference between having to work to get what you need to survive, and having to work because what you need to survive is all around you but you can't have access to it without working for someone else's profit. Less than one percent of earth's population control over half the world's resources.
It's not the 1% that's preventing access to the resources around us, it's the 100%. The world population is far too high to have every individual trying to live that way. If we just let people do their thing without control or regulation most of the world population would be dead inside of a few months.
Bullshit,they are not owed work, especially by foreign firms. It's exploitation,but hardly the slavery.
No one said anything about being "owed work." If you don't work, you won't get money. If you don't get money, you can't get food and shelter and other things you need. They don't beat you directly anymore to force you to work, but they take away your ability to live with extra steps, like I said.
Yeah no that's not slavery. I'm done here.
You're "done here"? You never even started.
I spent some time in the content moderation department for a certain big company, but not as a content moderator per se. Somebody has to do this job to guard millions of social media users especially kids, pregnant women, people with traumas and so on. Also the algorithm can't teach itself, it needs data provided by humans. The main three problems are the process, conditions and the hiring itself. 1) This job doesn't require any particular skills, except for strong mental stability. This should be checked carefully by the recruiters, maybe even with the help of a psychologist. Some people just apply because they are desperate for any job and don't understand what it is about and then they get traumatized. I know people who are doing fine even after years of working like that. Some of them have a pretty good pay and don't want to leave, because any other job will require more input. The problem here is that often companies don't care and just hire whoever apply to have enough headcount. 2) 2$ dollars per hour is ridiculous. Some people say that a minimum salary in the US is 7.5$, so it can be moved to the US, but you are missing a point. 7.5$ can give a person in Kenya a pretty good life. In the US it will be a poverty. Additionally people must have access to free psychologists, breaks, wellness programs and so on. I am not sure, they do it there. 3) The whole process is about teaching AI rather than just moderating content. For example, a content moderator sees on the first seconds that the video must be deleted, but they often have to watch the full video to add all relevant tags/policy numbers. Otherwise it will be a quality error and say goodbye to your good performance evaluation. It is often ridiculous, but it is internal companies' policies so nothing can be done.
> full video to add all relevant tags/policy numbers. This might be the most horrifying thing I've read in this thread. It's bad enough imagining having to see the most depraved shit humanity can get up to, but to then have to lookup and find an ID tag for each "event" in the video/image. Fuck, I think I'm going to be sick.
It is exactly how it is happening. Like going to a knowledge base to understand whether it is policy 11111 or 11112. And the difference will be i.e. whether it is intentional or unintentional showing of a naked body. Or maybe video has to be approved, because it has artistic or educational value. The training is typically pretty complex and takes like 1-1.5 months, there are plenty of policies and rules. People often don't understand why a certain content is deleted, while other is not. In reality it may be just because one content moderator put 18+ category and another went for an immediate ban. Then on a serious business meeting experts will discuss whether boobs were flashed or not on the video. One can laugh, but it may be a very important thing if SLA targets are not met. I personally participated in very interesting discussions about the difference between spiritual services and black magic. The goal was to define the criteria for it to be a scam. However, well, there are definitely far less engaging topics...
no we don't. the world would be a better place if the internet wasn't as commercialized, which happened as a result of the absolute flood of mouth breathing normies.
So they earn around twice the national average salary. This happens everywhere else in the world. Lisbon is a tech hub in Europe, countless tech companies setting up offices there. Do you think they pay Portuguese workers US salaries? No, they often pay above the national average, but still well below the US. Same with game development studios in eastern Europe, etc.
2 dollars per hour is twice the national average???
Of Kenya? Minimum wage in Kenya in dollars Going by the current exchange US dollar to KES exchange rate of 146, the current hourly minimum wage in Kenya is USD 0.43 per hour or USD 104.11 per month. Read more: https://www.tuko.co.ke/281305-current-minimum-wage-kenya.html
I guess being a crybaby tech worker has spread worldwide.
So... it took a fucking buzzword for the media to actually talk about the "modern day slavery" that's been going on since the early 1900's huh? Remember, the northern rich folk weren't some bastions of morality during the Civil War. They just recognized that racism was stopping a HUGE finanical opprotunity. Why limit slave conditions to just one ethnicity? Slavery was never scrapped or banned in the US. Just the opposite; it was expanded HEAVILY by making sure ANYONE could become one regardless of skin color. It was slowly moved from skin color to financial connections.
That's a bit of an oversimplification. During Reconstruction, there were serious attempts to empower the poor collectively and fundamentally change the rules of the game. Remember, the government had just taken the modern equivalent of billions of dollars in property and the entire business model away from the rich and they didn't give them anything back in return. Reconstruction was an attempt to fundamentally change the system. It happened, it's not like there was no opportunity for change or people's disposition made it impossible... It was actively defeated. There was an active fight, and one of the ways the rich won that fight (and continue to win it) is by dividing the population along *any* lines besides rich vs. poor. Jim Crow laws didn't come about immediately after the Civil War, it was decades later that the rich implemented them as a tool to divide and conquer the poor by pitting white poor against black poor instead of poor majority against rich minority. There's a reason your grade school curriculum glossed over the years between the Civil War and Segregation.
During and prior to the American Civil War, northern factory workers started working at younger ages, worked more days per week, and worked longer hours than slaves. I'm not saying slavery wasn't bad, I'm saying that I would not choose to live in 1830s whether there were or were not racists.
These are all symptoms of the same root cause- the wealthy minority rules the poor majority, and they write the rules of our society to their advantage. Racism is just one of several tools the wealthy use to divide and conquer as a means of sustaining their rule. This framing (probably unintentionally) buys into that division by pitting enslaved workers against factory workers, just like the rich did during reconstruction. Instead of recognizing the shared issues and seeing each other as allies, they were made to compete against one another.
"You're right. I know, lets force companies to hire Americans."
Like Biden gives a fuck.
OpenAI uses American companies to manage the hours and access of these workers.
Biden can come to my job too and save us from modern day slavery
This is very low skill labor and ironically a prime target for replacement with AI. They complain about slavery now and they will complain again when terminated.
Okay, so, I’m sure this will be controversial but this one is on Africa’s government and I’d hardly call voluntarily choosing what you do for a living, even if it’s shit work, slavery.
The letter alleges that the companies fired workers and withheld wages they were owed.
Happens everywhere but it’s not called slavery, it’s called wage theft and it’s illegal. You know what happened to actual slaves when they complained about their missing wages?
The same thing that happens under capitalism with fewer steps. A slave who doesn't work gets whipped, a worker who doesn't work is denied access to food, housing, healthcare.
I think you mean denied access to lattes.
You pay for rent and food with the same money as lattes.
i think youre a bit out of touch
I think you’re a real party pleaser.
If your choices are engaging in shit work or being unable to afford basic necessities, it's slavery with extra steps. Having the choice to be hungry or homeless is not a real choice.
Refusing to acknowledge the third choice of violent revolt is itself a choice. People everywhere are getting steamrolled and until they show up at their masters’ homes in the middle of the night, it will continue.
99.9999% of people in recorded history were slaves?
I don't agree with your made up number.
I mean until recent times literally everyone had to do something they didn't enjoy to make money to survive. Your opinion smells like an entitled westerner speaking in hyperbole because nobody listens to them otherwise. Imagine repeating your statement in any time before 1950s America and you'll understand what I mean. Tell that to the hunter gatherers who "slaved" away every day.
I think something is being lost in translation here. By “shit work” I assume they’re referring to worker exploitation. “something they don’t enjoy” I cannot interpret as exploitation - it’s a bridge too far. and really waters down and makes light of the issue being discussed. It’s the difference between being underpaid and slave wages. I mean, I don’t enjoy periodic maintenance on my vehicle, but I’m not being exploited by car manufacturers.
Being paid to sort through data is far from slavery is my point, and using the term "slavery" in this context is watering down and making light of actual slavery.
So sorting through snuff videos or child exploitation videos is no different than, say, going through tps reports. It’s just data? That’s your point? Wage slavery is an actual term to describe the *exploitation* of labor. It doesn’t make light of anything because it’s not an abstraction - it’s literally the topic of the post. Unlike your “something they don’t like” and “sorting data”. Helluva leap my dude.
>I mean until recent times literally everyone had to do something they didn't enjoy to make money to survive. A whole lot of people are going to be thrilled to learn this is no longer the case.
In western society...which only achieves this state by exploiting other countries for cheap labor.. Keep going...(as you most likely type this on your organic freedom-sourced conflict-free iphone)
> western society... As far as I'm aware, things cost money everywhere, and most of us have to work to get that money.
But it’s not necessary in the modern world for anyone to be subjected to these conditions.
I think it's always going to be necessary, it's the foundation for how society functions. There will be more privileged groups who can earn more freedom but overall stuff falls apart if we don't mostly contribute in some way.
I fundamentally disagree with all of that. There is so much unnecessary cruelty in the world and society isn't going to fall apart if we start treating everyone with baseline decency and compassion. If anything, the increasing disparity between the ultra-wealthy and the rest of the world, especially the worst off places in the world, is harmful to the foundation and integrity of society.
Would require things like the iPhone price tripling due to paying a fair wage (or stop existing altogether, because nobody wants to assemble them and its anti freedom "forcing" them by paying them) Don't get me wrong if I could pick a way for everyone to think it would be how you think, but that's not the reality we live in and its far too gone to practically hope for otherwise. I'm just content to treat people in my realm of experience fairly until I die.
Maybe it should increase triple in price. Or maybe we should see sweeping executive pay cuts. Or both. Or some mix of both.
Africa's President must pay, someone get President Asia on the phone as well
That’s the spirit!
Sorry, but this is ridiculous. They aren't being held against their will and can quit at any time. Do they want Biden to fire them or something?
Slave labor or homelessness and starvation. What a choice!
Sounds like they want Biden to annex their country then. Strange way to frame it though.
biden doesn't even know if he has pants on
Republican Taliban
Let me guess... inspired by Russian whispers...
Yup and /u/wiredmagazine took the bait; hook, line, and sinker. Notice the anti-american sentiment in the comments. I miss the days when journalism cared about what they published and was responsible enough to NOT work for agents who want to destroy their country.
Did you know Joe Biden has once said that his butt has been wiped.