[HN Gopher] Show HN: Human Lambdas - Create Human in the Loop qu...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Show HN: Human Lambdas - Create Human in the Loop queues and
       outsource them
        
       Author : bernatfp
       Score  : 94 points
       Date   : 2021-04-22 08:59 UTC (14 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (humanlambdas.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (humanlambdas.com)
        
       | sam_goody wrote:
       | You know, this exact same idea could be done in such a way that
       | doesn't dehumanize the, uh, humans.
       | 
       | In fact, I bet your mileage would even increase if you could
       | figure out a way to actually respect even the grunt laborers.
       | 
       | That is, I like the idea of streamlining your workflow, of
       | compartmentalizing, of assembly lining. I like the ideas of
       | integrating that which can be fully automated with what cannot.
       | And of making tools to increase these objectives
       | 
       | But your teams will see the labels on the tools, and the sites
       | that vend them. If they feel they are being "cogged", they will
       | work like cogs. The site should mix the terms that describe their
       | goal, with terms that respect humans as humans. It would sell
       | better to the workers, and I suspect that in smaller companies
       | and companies that have smaller teams, would sell better to the
       | managers as well.
        
         | ramraj07 wrote:
         | This is the same kind of bs that companies like Uber (and
         | professors) pull to glorify low wages with phrases that glorify
         | below minimum wage work. I like OPs approach let's be honest
         | about what this work is, make sure you pay what they deserve
         | and don't try to deceive anyone with fancy accounting.
        
         | fny wrote:
         | > If they feel they are being "cogged", they will work like
         | cogs
         | 
         | Most people who get into Turking know they're going to be cogs,
         | and honestly, the only thing they care about is getting paid
         | properly for it.
         | 
         | No pie-in-the-sky marketing BS is going to make up for sub
         | minimum wage compensation.
        
           | prepend wrote:
           | > No pie-in-the-sky marketing BS is going to make up for sub
           | minimum wage compensation.
           | 
           | Comically marketing BS is frequently created by consultants
           | who cost money. Money that doesn't go towards higher wages,
           | or worker bonuses, or coffee in the beak room, etc
        
           | raddan wrote:
           | Some of our prior work, AutoMan,
           | (https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2927928,
           | https://www.microsoft.com/en-
           | us/research/publication/voxpl-p...) which developed this very
           | idea (almost a decade ago!), explicitly addresses many of the
           | issues around exploitative practices. By default the system
           | pays the minimum wage. We usually paid workers quite a bit
           | more than minimum wage while developing the system. You can
           | read more about it in our CACM letter response (http://www.cs
           | .williams.edu/~dbarowy/acknowledge_crowdworkers... scroll
           | down the the bit titled "Acknowledge Crowdworkers in
           | Crowdwork Research".
           | 
           | Also, while it does not have the convenience of being a web
           | service, you can download and use AutoMan now
           | (https://docs.automanlang.org/). Most importantly, AutoMan
           | provides statistical quality guarantees. It looks like Human
           | Lambdas uses a manual auditing approach, which does not
           | scale. It's surprisingly common for some crowdsourcing tasks
           | to be as hard to audit as it is to do them in the first
           | place. For the kinds of tasks that AutoMan supports, this is
           | basically a non-issue.
           | 
           | I still actively maintain the library, and I am always happy
           | to talk to people about use cases.
        
             | raddan wrote:
             | I should also add that the requester ratings site,
             | Turkopticon (https://turkopticon.ucsd.edu/), rated our jobs
             | highly. I can't seem to find our reviews now (probably
             | because we haven't run any jobs in awhile), but if someone
             | can figure that out, you should see that workers were
             | pretty happy with our system. I often got emails from
             | workers asking for more work! Also, the throughput on a
             | good job when using a properly designed system is insane.
             | If I recall correctly, our case study on estimating calorie
             | content from photos gathered thousands of labels in about
             | 45 minutes.
        
           | brobdingnagians wrote:
           | I think their biggest concern is getting paid. But I don't
           | think it's good for people to accept dehumanisation, even if
           | they seem to be okay with it. Subconscious acceptance of
           | things like that can mess people up. They are free to accept
           | it, but I think we should carefully consider what we are
           | doing to people's self image.
           | 
           | People with a feeling of creative control and ownership or
           | having a stake in success tend to do a better job too. Self
           | esteem definitely helps productivity.
        
           | ath92 wrote:
           | Getting paid properly is important of course, but intrinsic
           | motivation (of which a sense of autonomy is an important
           | driver) is very important to keep workers happy, independent
           | of whether they're doing crowdsourcing work or just a regular
           | job.
           | 
           | I find it hard to believe that this platform will be
           | competing against Amazon Mechanical Turk on price, so they'll
           | have to compete in other dimensions. Increasing worker
           | motivation to improve the quality of the output is a win-win
           | for all the stakeholders, so IMO it's worth pursuing.
        
             | Closi wrote:
             | Good luck convincing workers that they are self-actualising
             | while transcribing financial records from hard-to-read
             | receipts.
             | 
             | If you are running a team doing this sort of work, it's
             | better to be straight up with them and say "you know, this
             | work is boring and repetitive, but we have a good team,
             | look after each other, and you can listen to a podcast at
             | the same time".
        
         | skinnymuch wrote:
         | This sounds..not good. You know how I know how much of a cog
         | some one is? How much they are being paid.
         | 
         | Putting a bow on top of work that pays peanuts is worse in my
         | opinion than being honest. Your tactics appear to try to
         | manipulate underpaid or lowly paid cogs into not believing they
         | are what the company and managers truly see them as - just
         | that.
        
           | brobdingnagians wrote:
           | I think the name is clever and a bit cute, though perhaps
           | easy to misinterpret. But on point of principle:
           | 
           | No matter what someone is paid (or whether they are paid at
           | all), they are a person, with hopes, dreams, feelings, and
           | dignity.
           | 
           | I know you probably already believe that, but it's worth
           | stating anyway.
           | 
           | Our society does tend to treat people like cogs, but that is
           | a problem with our society.
           | 
           | Words influence how we feel about others. We should use words
           | that affirm the dignity of others, then work to make that a
           | reality. Just because most people treat other people like
           | cogs doesn't mean that we should throw in the towel and
           | accept it; much less start doing it ourselves.
           | 
           | I agree that putting a bow on nastiness is messed up, but the
           | root problem is the jerks. If we stop even thinking in terms
           | of people having dignity, the jerks have won one more step.
           | We should spread kindness and dignity wherever we can, and
           | try to get people to name things that imply dignity.
           | 
           | I agree there is a major problem of people with less pay
           | being treated poorly. It seems respect is only given to the
           | high paid, but that is messed up when you stop to think about
           | it. Our real worth isn't determined by our financial status.
           | What if we lose the financial status? Would our friends
           | desert us, our rights be removed, and we end up forgotten?
           | 
           | I for one want to work against the world becoming more like
           | that.
        
             | skinnymuch wrote:
             | I don't want "respect" or whatever other ways things are
             | being framed if I'm being paid a low wage. I always found
             | it insulting when done. When I was treated more like a cog
             | in line with my pay, I don't remember having any specific
             | consistent resentment or annoyance.
             | 
             | This is my own personal life anecdote.
             | 
             | --
             | 
             | It also isn't just pay. Being all cute and "nice" and
             | "respectful" but on top of low pay, not being flexible with
             | something like taking half a day off or coming in late or
             | leaving early because of life stuff, shows how the company
             | and higher ups truly feel about you.
             | 
             | Most of the time lower wages correlates with the loss of
             | the above flexibility. There are major exceptions like when
             | the job is interchangeable and you can swap shifts with
             | others.
             | 
             | At that point. The company knows you're a cog. Treats you
             | as a cog, but sometimes spins things as if you're a person
             | that matters to them.
             | 
             | --
             | 
             | Edit: I do agree jerks suck. I guess I see putting a bow on
             | stuff as jerk material as it is generally done with cogs.
        
               | brobdingnagians wrote:
               | True I agree with that. It can feel like a cynical slap
               | if they cover up your low status and try to make you feel
               | good about it. I try to coach and mentor my employees and
               | see what they value. I totally recognize that isn't
               | common in management.
        
             | fny wrote:
             | You can call people "sanitation engineers", "sandwich
             | artists", or whatever (these are _real_ titles by the way)
             | and for as long as you treat them as replaceable,
             | interchangeable, and cheap, they will be cogs.
             | 
             | Also are "production worker", "factory worker", "shipping
             | clerk", or "driver" any better or worse than "human
             | lambda"?
        
               | bckr wrote:
               | I was a "Dish Machine Operator" for a few months, and it
               | actually did make me feel cooler than being a
               | "Dishwasher".
               | 
               | "Human Lambda" being the name of the company, perhaps the
               | workers are "Lambda Operators".
        
               | pessimizer wrote:
               | Horses for courses; my favorite job title ever was as a
               | "3602 Clerk." Such an anonymous title for such a crazy
               | job.
        
           | prepend wrote:
           | My office took the DISC [0] personality profile and it
           | revealed that there are some people who love compliments,
           | just love them. Even if they aren't genuine, they like
           | hearing "You're a rock star, I'm so grateful you're here
           | today" even if the person is completely unable to evaluate
           | rockstar vs. non-rockstar. Even if they say it every day to
           | everyone.
           | 
           | And there are people who hate compliments.
           | 
           | So it's funny how within an org there are cogs (and non-cogs)
           | who hate that they aren't recognized and then there's cogs
           | who hate when they are recognized.
           | 
           | Not sure the distribution in the population but it seems like
           | the default mode is to shower complements that mean nothing
           | other than the complimenter has some process for
           | complimenting people.
           | 
           | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DISC_assessment
        
             | skinnymuch wrote:
             | Haha this is a point I didn't bring up but loosely in my
             | opinion lends credence to why obfuscating cogs as cogs is
             | morally wrong.
             | 
             | The opposing view on here appears to be if you can
             | compliment the cogs who enjoy that and keep them happy that
             | way, things are better. This view is self serving and for
             | the benefit of the higher ups. Not the cog.
             | 
             | Thanks for this though. Interesting to think about. I've
             | added your comment and the link to my DEVONthink wiki on
             | status quo :)
        
               | text70 wrote:
               | At that level, abstract logic becomes more important. Is
               | it better to think of a flower in a field as part of a
               | larger ecosystem, or characterize your company as a
               | machine composed of cogs?
        
               | prepend wrote:
               | I've been a cog before and had hippie managers and
               | asshole managers. Honestly, I prefer the occasional whip
               | from the asshole than the constant stream of bullshit
               | from hippies trying to tell me every day how my data
               | entry was "awesome." The weird thing is sometimes I think
               | they convinced themself that our cog work was awesome.
               | 
               | If I'm a commodity, I'd rather be straight about it and
               | have a shared reality since businesses will actually
               | treat me like a commodity when it's important.
        
         | BrianOnHN wrote:
         | Sounds like a lot of work. Instead, let's just keep maximizing
         | income inequality. This way there will always be someone in the
         | position to treat humans like the cogs they are!
        
           | rob74 wrote:
           | ...and a steady supply of humans willing to be treated like
           | cogs, because they desperately need the money.
        
             | BrianOnHN wrote:
             | Spot on. Welcome to the world of problems by design.
        
           | skinnymuch wrote:
           | Which position are you taking? The OPs comment isn't going to
           | make income inequality any better. Does "respecting" people
           | by not saying they are a cog when it is not true help or hurt
           | income? I'm sure your sarcastic comment is pointing to one of
           | these.
           | 
           | I personally don't enjoy giving some one no additional money
           | or perks but pretending they are not cogs like OP is saying.
           | You're treating them like cogs by not paying them much.
        
             | BrianOnHN wrote:
             | The OPs comment does affect income inequality when
             | implemented at scale.
             | 
             | As easy as the implementation is for you and your team,
             | those results have relatively little affect in the scheme
             | of things. In order to make the suggestion a paradigm
             | shift, money would be moved from the top to the bottom in
             | an "at scale" implementation.
             | 
             | Edit: paying your workers less per output has essentially
             | been the last major management paradigm to drive growth
             | over the past 20+ years. The counter examples (Costco) are
             | the exception.
        
       | mahesh_rm wrote:
       | Pricing?
        
       | monkeydust wrote:
       | Bit depressing for humanity. Looking at the task list I would
       | hope they could be automated and not require a human cog in the
       | not to distant future.
        
       | tluyben2 wrote:
       | Amazon Mechnical Turk for your own team?
        
       | weeboid wrote:
       | I honestly can't tell if this is satire or no; leaning towards
       | former
        
         | skinnymuch wrote:
         | I don't think it is satire.
         | 
         | I find the comments that want to spin cogs into a good thing by
         | changing the name and manipulating the imaging so lowly people
         | don't know how you they are really viewed, worse than any thing
         | this app is doing, satire or not.
        
           | TeMPOraL wrote:
           | I also assumed it is satire.
           | 
           | I think a lot of devs eventually realize that the whole "gig
           | economy", as it is, is essentially an API for humans.
           | 
           | I also agree that, on the off chance this isn't satire, its
           | current, honest form is much better than the proposed
           | "marketability improvements" would make it.
        
       | xbar wrote:
       | Awful.
        
       | dmd wrote:
       | This is essentially how the young lady's illustrated primer works
       | in The Diamond Age.
        
         | HiroProtagonist wrote:
         | I am currently reading this book! :)
        
       | lwansbrough wrote:
       | I actually think this is a great idea. If I'm understanding it
       | correctly, it's essentially Amazon MechanicalTurk for people in
       | your company?
       | 
       | Paired with some capabilities for building custom interfaces (if
       | that doesn't already exist), this would allow many less savvy
       | companies slowly integrate their human processes into their
       | software processes. Of course there's something to be said about
       | making human redundancy so interactive and personal for the
       | victim, but from a cost savings/business standpoint it's probably
       | hard to ignore the potential value.
       | 
       | Good luck! I may pitch this to my team next time we need
       | something semi-automated (btw you're kind of competing with Slack
       | bots, that's what we use now.)
        
       | prepend wrote:
       | I find these cognitive surplus [0] really promising. If not for
       | identifying the people for whom a task is easy. It's always neat
       | to me how some things are easy or hard for people and the time is
       | spent trying to match this effectively.
       | 
       | I have a friend who is a regex expert and can answer in seconds
       | what takes me hours. But I'd never want a thousand people to ask
       | vim each arcane question in case ve also knows the answer for
       | that topic.
       | 
       | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_Surplus
        
       | Closi wrote:
       | This is great - I could use something like this (without having
       | to face into Mechanical Turk), and definitely would use this if
       | the pricing was right.
       | 
       | What's the pricing structure?
        
       | ngvrnd wrote:
       | who said "Insort Geront"?
        
       | wildermuthn wrote:
       | A quick look over their docs, and I think this is a terrific
       | product that needs a better landing page. They make it easy to
       | build a custom task with a UI builder, and more importantly, they
       | also automatically exposes programmatic means of adding tasks and
       | receiving task completion data. This makes "do things that don't
       | scale" somewhat more scalable. Looking forward to trying it out!
        
       | motohagiography wrote:
       | Impressive, we could instrument a lot of municipal licensing and
       | public service form filling with these templates. It's like kiosk
       | applications as a service.
       | 
       | I'm interpreting that it's like taking the features of a PowerBI
       | app, but something with less overhead, and more accessible to
       | smaller orgs.
        
       | sanitycheck wrote:
       | What next, human Kubernetes? (No no no it's a Joke, Deliveroo and
       | Uber staff, don't you dare paste that into Slack)
        
         | cbm-vic-20 wrote:
         | Some shops that manually manage docker containers on VMs call
         | it "meat scheduling".
        
         | mring33621 wrote:
         | Will Job X run on Node Y?
         | 
         | [] yes
         | 
         | [] no
        
         | namelosw wrote:
         | Human Kubernetes == System Admin. It's already there.
         | 
         | But yeah, it could be a fancy new word for VC haha.
        
         | TeMPOraL wrote:
         | Google keeps saying that Kubernetes is a real world,
         | kubernetes, Greek for "helmsman" or "pilot" or
         | "governor"[0][1], but its predecessor was called _Borg_ , so in
         | my mind, the true meaning of "Kubernetes" was always "a network
         | of (Borg) cubes".
         | 
         | This way, I've already seen on TV what "Human Kubernetes" looks
         | like. Resistance is futile.
         | 
         | --
         | 
         | [0] - Via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kubernetes#History.
         | 
         | [1] - Curiously, it's also the etymological root of
         | cybernetics; cybernetics -> cyborg -> the Borg.
        
       | lsb wrote:
       | Interesting launch!
       | 
       | 0) Why is this better than MTurk's predefined workflows?
       | 
       | 1) How much does it cost?? MTurk charges min(0.005, 10%) for each
       | Human Intelligence Task.
       | 
       | 2) How is quality checked???
       | 
       | 3) People doing tasks generally report greater satisfaction and
       | generally produce greater accuracy with a smaller topic shift
       | (instead of doing NLP classification about everything at all
       | times, first do topic A, then topic B). I bet you could train a
       | simple classifier to group topics together
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | evrydayhustling wrote:
       | You're getting a lot of comments on the naming/presentation that
       | I think are worth considering, but I want to say that the tool
       | itself looks great. There are so many workflows that we twist
       | into pretzels, and over-engineer one interface point or another,
       | because we don't have a way to trivially put a human interface in
       | the right spot. I will 100% try this.
       | 
       | With that said, I see a big blocker to many use cases. One of the
       | main reasons you add humans to workflows is to deal with
       | unstructured data, which can often be sensitive. Have you
       | considered offering a managed service or self-hosted option so
       | that orgs can control their own data flow?
        
       | edoceo wrote:
       | isnt this what Amazon Mechanical Turk does?
        
       | dekhn wrote:
       | IBM used to call this "BPEL"
        
       | tgv wrote:
       | I thought they were called Epsilons.
        
         | iR5ugfXGAE wrote:
         | "They are happy to be where they are, and would not be happy to
         | be where we are."
        
         | newsbinator wrote:
         | "Every one works for every one else. We can't do without any
         | one. Even Epsilons are useful. We couldn't do without
         | Epsilons."
        
       | jdub wrote:
       | "Human Lambdas"... "Mechanical Turk"... you're fully aware these
       | are horrible names for horrible ideas, right?
        
         | prepend wrote:
         | Mechanical Turk is on of the best product names I've ever seen.
         | It's accurate. It has a clever story behind it that almost no
         | one knew beforehand.
         | 
         | I like it because it sparks curiosity and it pays off when
         | people learn. As opposed to other "quirky" names that aren't
         | clever and are intrinsicly meaningless.
        
         | Closi wrote:
         | This is how the sausage get's made.
         | 
         | If you work inside the meat industry, the room where animals
         | get slaughtered is called the kill chamber. It's not called the
         | "cattle life transition chamber" because it is self-aware and
         | it's better to call a spade a spade.
        
           | thraxil wrote:
           | That might not be a great example. The meat industry is
           | pretty notorious for euphemisms. They're usually called "meat
           | processing plants" rather than "slaughterhouses". When
           | farmers need to conduct a mass extermination (more officially
           | referred to as "depopulation"), one common technique is to
           | shut off the air supply to the barn which causes the heat to
           | rise so the animals suffocate and roast to death. The
           | technical term for that technique is "ventilation shutdown".
           | And that's all without getting into whether terms like
           | "meat", "sausage", "beef", "pork", etc. are just polite ways
           | of saying "parts of animal corpses" and "livestock" as
           | "animals that we feel are acceptable to kill."
        
             | Closi wrote:
             | I think that is a difference between _internal_ and
             | _external_ communication.
             | 
             | Within the industry in the UK at least, meat processing
             | plants can be both 'kill-facilities' and 'no-kill
             | facilities' which is specifying if they have a
             | slaughterhouse in them or not, but the term meat processing
             | plant includes both. The site operators will not shy away
             | from what is happening - you can't when you are in the room
             | when it happens, and it's actually worse for workers if you
             | de-associate from it.
             | 
             | That doesn't mean when you write a press release you use
             | these terms. External communication gets fluffed-up for the
             | rest of the world, and you don't write 'kill facility' on
             | your address in Google Maps because you don't want to get
             | splattered in red paint.
        
           | clarkevans wrote:
           | We don't have to make sausage.
        
             | Closi wrote:
             | As long as people are buying sausage, people will make and
             | sell it.
             | 
             | And to extend the metaphor beyond where it should probably
             | go, products taste better when sausage is added and people
             | don't always need to know the ingredients.
             | 
             | Your data will have gone through something very similar to
             | this a million times - it might have been validating your
             | photo on a dating site or transcribing your receipt for
             | expenses, but these sort of use-cases would not be done as
             | cleanly if it wasn't for human in the loop.
        
           | musingsole wrote:
           | > it's better to call a spade a spade.
           | 
           | There are slaughterhouses that have different jargon, but
           | even "slaughterhouse" shows your point. I'd put out there
           | that slaughterhouses don't have the best track record of
           | humane treatment and when efforts are made to improve, they
           | often backslide into old habits (even at the cost of
           | productivity). All of this is about mindset. So, picking a
           | different name and not encouraging your butchers to see
           | themselves as executioners would probably help. (Temple
           | Grandin's books provide this insight)
        
           | nathancahill wrote:
           | > it's better to call a spade a spade
           | 
           | Speaking of political correctness..
        
             | intergalplan wrote:
             | It's fine.
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call_a_spade_a_spade
             | 
             | Any concern over it is very recent and ahistorical. Like
             | the false etymologies of "rule of thumb", but far less
             | well-established (and hopefully it remains poorly-
             | established--there's plenty of justified language-policing,
             | we don't need to make up reasons to do more of it)
        
             | Closi wrote:
             | > Speaking of political correctness.
             | 
             | Ironically your statement is an example of "political
             | correctness gone mad" for me at least.
             | 
             | It's a metaphor about shovels, there isn't anything
             | politically incorrect about it. Someone has just dreamed up
             | an alternative meaning to be offended about.
        
         | the_local_host wrote:
         | Applying "human" as an adjective to something else seems almost
         | guaranteed to sound unkind to humans.
         | 
         | No one wants to be a "human [something_not_human]".
        
         | xwdv wrote:
         | Maybe a better term would be "micro freelancing".
        
       | aequitas wrote:
       | We had something like this for a project which would allow you to
       | create multiple CDN accounts using a single interface. Where some
       | CDN's could not be automated by API or we didn't have the time
       | (yet) to implement. So the default API implementation was the
       | FrankAPI (named after the guy handling the manual requests). It
       | would create a pending database record and Frank would get an
       | email with details and the instructions along with a link to a
       | Django page to fill the record with details when the CDN was
       | created. It was so simple and efficient. We loved the solution,
       | he loved the solution. It was great. Though we where all more
       | tech minded people, so talking with computers was natural to us.
       | I don't know how these kind of interfaces would pan out for other
       | kinds of people, if they would miss the human aspect in the
       | interaction?
        
         | vincnetas wrote:
         | At my previous position (bank) we called this concept "baba
         | layer". Baba in most slavic languages means "old woman". And
         | when used this term "baba layer" was as an indicator that your
         | system sucks (a bit) that you cant really automate some things
         | away. Or as and easy "solution" to difficult problems. "Well,
         | we just let baba layer solve this"
        
           | mushishi wrote:
           | Thanks, now then name of the (great) puzzle game "Baba is
           | You" makes sense to me.
        
       | stevesimmons wrote:
       | This looks like a great piece of tooling for when you don't need
       | a full workflow system.
       | 
       | What other similar solution are in this space?
        
       | kjrose wrote:
       | So, from what I can tell it's essentially a Mechanical Turk for
       | someone's personal team. However, I'm trying to figure out if it
       | offers Mechanical Turk style offerings as well, where you can
       | just pay for some random person to do the job?
        
       | benjaminjosephw wrote:
       | > Outsource tedious, repetitive and boring work to our workforce
       | in just a couple of clicks.
       | 
       | This is exactly how you create an environment that is just asking
       | for regulation and rightly so if you show such disregard for
       | other people.
       | 
       | Explicitly treating human laborers in more-or-less the same way
       | you treat a machine is unethical design as well as being an ugly
       | and harmful philosophy. You are literally building a system that
       | enables dehumanizing labor. Is this the kind of future you're
       | happy being a part of building?
        
       | weatherlight wrote:
       | Heres an idea. It's not novel or revolutionary.
       | 
       | Maybe the the abject alienation from the product of one's labor
       | is a bad idea...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-04-22 23:02 UTC)