Not long ago I got into an…interesting…conversation about machines that took away jobs. That’s actually not the conversation I’d been planning to have: I had watched a cool video on how the US Postal Service handles envelopes whose destination address cannot be OCR’d, and in the process of explaining it to a friend, I pointed out (as the video taught me) that a single “human powered” center with about 800 employees is sufficient to deal with all such mail in a timely way. Just 20 years ago there were over 50 such centers, giving a sense of how far OCR and ML have advanced beyond when it became possible to OCR zip codes.

But my friend’s surprising and rather deflating reaction was that that “advance” had put a bunch of people out of work, and was that really something to be happy about?

I was surprised by this reaction to say the least, not just because that hadn’t at all been the point of bringing it up, but because in general I’m a proponent of less paper mail overall in order to reduce the consumption of paper and fossil fuels that that entails, and this advance seemed compatible with that goal. That is, yeah, people did lose their jobs because of this, but I have no problem defending the conclusion that the overall effects of the change represented a net benefit to society.

And it’s not as if those displaced workers represented a major lost investment in training and experience: while the technology they use does require some training, this isn’t a craft apprenticeship where displacing a worker means tossing out years of experience (oppose, for example, a weaver, woodworker, etc.).

And then today during a lunch break, because I enjoy watching videos about how things work, I watched a great video about how automatic pin-setting machines in bowling alleys work…Guess what—they displaced workers who were hired to hang around behind the bowling lanes and manually reset pins after each frame!

Anyway, I got sufficiently irked about the whole thing that I thought to compile a list of machines that nominally took away jobs but that I’d challenge anyone to argue we aren’t better off as a society for it. Perhaps if a Luddite argued against these, that makes me a Dullite.

To limit the scope of my rant, I’m only including inventions that completely eliminated a job category, rather than ones that just diminished the number of people. So by my own definition, the automatic address recognition technology doesn’t make the list, since there are still people doing that job, just fewer of them. Similarly travel agents: many (most?) people now book travel directly online, but there are still travel agents, just fewer of them and serving more specialized markets.

Here are, in no particular order, some of the ones I thought of.