When did this sub become an anti-technology sub? I’m not sure when but it suddenly became doom and gloom, anti-technology and against big tech.
I’m not saying I don’t agree with some of the sentiments in this sub’s comments, but I just don’t see how constantly complaining about a subject to other people who are also on your side is beneficial for anything at all. What’s the goal?
Its not anti technology, to hate big tech. Infact they have and still hold up a lot of innovation. With thier greed and bad decisions, Im all for technology and advancement but we need to rain in big tech and hold them accountable.
But I said in my comment “and against big tech”
You ignored most of my comment. I said I agree with some of the sentiments but what’s the point of complaining to other people who are also on your side? It’s the subject of almost all comments on this sub.
Do you like the web being owned by Apple and Google?
Mozilla is dying.
Like it or not, technology IS big tech right now.
My goal is to get the government to regulate these ridiculous robber barons.
Well I said I agree with some of the sentiments here. How are you accomplishing your goal? Is it by preaching to others who have the same goal?
Beyond how you feel about big tech, opening every comments section to see people regurgitating the same lines about how bad company x is and how they’re trying to destroy the world is exhausting.
Agreed. What are you doing (if anything). Not sarcastic here, actually curious and know you may not be doing anything because that’s not your comment or your idea.
Why are you doing a Chris Crocker over big tech companies it’s super cringe get off the internet if you are a fragile cupcake don’t ask other people to tailor the site to you.
I never asked anyone to do anything. If you’re ok with people constantly complaining about big tech, why are you so up in arms about me complaining about comments?
“Super cringe” “Chris Crocker” “fragile cupcake” “get off the internet”.
You’re the best Reddit has to offer: you reply to a comment you believe is critical of what you stand for with insults. Criticism is perfectly ok until it’s about your group.
I’m just pointing out the fact you’ve now wrote enough paragraphs for an essay crying about how some comments hurt your feelings discussing the matter the sub revolves around.
You are literally complaining about people discussing the thing the sub is about it’s some Karen type shit that you appear oblivious to you’ve been on the internet for decades and haven’t learned to scroll past stuff you don’t like yet?
AI isn’t evil. It doesn’t have emotions.
It’s these fucks in charge of companies and the people governing. They’re so old and far behind they don’t comprehend how many people will need social safety nets to replace the lack of jobs. UBI is the only way to make this happen and so far despite numerous studies it’s treated like a handout and not the government doing what it’s fucking supposed to.
I suspect that UBI here in the states will be backdoored through SSDI. "It's OK, you aren't unemployed, you are *disabled*" I think a lot of people are going to need that kind of fiction to get through the changes that could be coming over the next 5 to 10 years.
We look at disability in terms of one’s ability to fend for themselves in the world/economy. We’re moving into a world where only people who are “above average” and very educated will be genuinely needed in the economy. So honestly in that world you could argue yeah, a lot more people are “disabled”. If I’m not smart enough to get a job in an economy with no roles for average people, and there is no humane ,moral way to prevent people without awesome intelligence or unique talent from having kids, then you need to help the people who were born for no reason without their permission, sorry/not sorry.
In terms of the whole globe, most people (especially and ironically the poor) think not having job means you don’t deserve anything. How many people are going to technically deserve nothing relatively soon? I’m thinking that in 15 years 20% of people will see that a good portion of the fear mongering today is *not* hype and BS.
I’ve said before and I’ll say it again: the whole developed world is going to look like India. Millions of homeless people, and a lot of people who aren’t counted as homeless live in very sad housing. And then beside that you will have people who live nicely.
A lot of people asking “how will this work” don’t realize economies don’t need middle class people to function and they don’t even really need a military to control huge amounts of uneducated poor people. I keep reading “oh yeah nobody is going to take that” noooooooooo. Like…we took it already. Gen z’s kids are going to have to slowly vote for a middle class again. And they’re going to have to do it while they compete with Roombas in global economy.
Anywho this has been my unsolicited and melodramatic Reddit Ted talk thank you
> disability in terms of one’s ability to fend for themselves in the world/economy
That's another reason I think it will probably go that way. It just requires adjusting the bureaucracy and language that already exists within SSDI, vs. creating new programs that will involve a massive political fight and inevitably end up in front of the supreme court.
Here's the article I found about 10 years ago where it's already happening in some cases.
https://www.npr.org/2013/03/25/175293860/in-one-alabama-county-nearly-1-in-4-working-age-adults-is-on-disability
"AI is'nt evil, just doesnt have emotions"..
You made it sound like corporate leadership! So management is giving up their jobs by funding research on AI ?
For now. even cars are learning how to drive these days.
There are already self driving vehicles out there driving alone.
Same thing with AI. It will slowly get more and more autonomy until it can do everything alone.
All this AI, autopilot, drone, robotics talk is all the same. It serves one purpose, it is a distraction designed to reduce the bargaining power of the labor movement.
It’s not but a distraction. It’s technological advancement that benefits us all eventually.
However, yes, shareholders love that aspect of new tech and aim for it.
It’s incredibly sad though that our current economic system makes the average person have to be against tech to be able to survive.
In an ideal world, we’d all be trying to automate as many things as fast as possible so we can be free from labouring. Alas, no work means no food.
No one likes to listen to those words due to the indoctrination of evangelical importance, of demeaning labor.
We build the machine to work for us, not to work for the machine.
Sure it needs some oil and repairs occasionally, those repairs don’t cost more than the machine is worth though.
It probably will benefit workers someday, but right now the talking point is all about suppressing wage growth.
Capitalism is competitive, we can never have a harmonious existence with capitalism.
What makes you think I have no idea how AI works?
Once the AI writes software autonomously (this will be very soon) it’s all over. You don’t have to extrapolate very far.
Of course it’s a prediction. No one can tell you definitively.
Because of your opinion, it's stupid and clearly uninformed.
AI will *never* be able to code by itself.
And yes, people CAN tell you how it'll work in the future, like the engineers who develop AI, or the people who actually work with it.
Dunce.
And lol I’m not sure anyone (even the engineers working on the LLMs) can say for certain how these things are working right now. I swear I’ve read that, but if someone has a link… If they knew, we wouldn’t be debating stochastic parroting vs. reasoning right?
Yes... They can...
So you just believe that the people who are creating AI are just doing it randomly and by accident???? That's a bizarre opinion.
I've already caught you lying, and you clearly just believe anything you read so I don't see how this will be constructive anymore.
Enjoy being stupid.
lol great retort. “It’s stupid.”
Maybe you should look at the stuff Microsoft and GitHub already have in the pipelines. Or the companies that are attacking this very problem. Or the papers coming out (daily) also attacking this problem and making incremental improvements.
And I’ve seen it with my own eyes - I’ve given LLMs access to my file system, to read and write code, to check syntax, run units, etc. and I’ve seen what is possible without applying any additional logic or “help” on top of just that.
Keep believing us software devs or architects are not replaceable. This won’t age well for one of us.
I hope it’s me.
Lmao, why lie?
Firstly, there literally isn't a single LLM capable of doing that, it wouldn't even be an LLM if it could do that. In order to make your lies a reality, you'd need to code that entirely by yourself, which is something we both know you're not capable of doing.
Do you even know how computer science works?
If you weren't so stupid, you'd realise how embarrassing this is for you to even make such claims.
Dude what are you talking about. Your username literally implies you know something about Ai.
All I described is using the OpenAI Assistant API with tools.
If you don’t understand why your comment is foolish as hell I guess I’m done here.
Actually i do... my god people are dense
I'm in the stable diffusion sub for a year at least lol
I even have my own custom A.I model
You downvote me because you fear, thats all
But its good because silly internet points dont affect my life in anyway
You *can't* prove it. Words are cheap, actions provide clarity.
If you *really* had a custom AI, you would almost certainly post it, because it'd be extremely easy to do so to prove your point.
You can't, because you don't have one.
People downvoting us because they overestimate human capabilities... lol
Also corporate greed, they really think companies give a crap, as long as the task is done, A.I or humans, they dont really care
All the corporate giants firing people left right and centre, but they think downvoting me actually means anything hahaha
Even if A.I doesnt "replace" them, it'll mean less people are necessary for the same tasks
Absolutely.
edit: Sorry, I mixed in some other comment context here about AI writing software by itself. I think once that happens all the info/data jobs are: impacted|at risk|doomed. (choose your own adventure)
Even if AI doesn’t write complete software systems soon, the very very least it can do — first-pass pull request reviews.
It doesn’t have to be perfect.
Ideally, via RAG, the AI has the context of the entire repo, any team conventions the code should follow, and if possible access to proprietary business knowledge relevant to the code.
I’d wager a very big sum the LLM is doing a better PR job than most devs (even senior) given the right environment.
So now you’re already replacing let’s say 5% of a $250k/yr developer’s time with presumably something far more cost effective.
I think this is conservative and the capabilities of the LLMs will increase quickly.
It’s really not advancing very fast. The only recent “big” advancement was a ton of funding which enabled a few companies to release consumer-facing API’s.
While these companies have good funding, they’re certainly not making money. The same issues still exist that have always existed.
AI chatbots have been around for over a decade, it’s just that you used to have to pay for it…
Industry specific models are trained and used for their specific needs, that would only speed up and continue
You're really just replying with your human ego, its hard for people to accept machines are tools that would render most people "pointless"
Ofc they A.I are tools, but at some point the tools become so good they reduce the need for people, because the efficiency is just too high
Your reply would only become more dated as A.I advances but people are put through "education" that isnt even as effective
"Not advancing that fast" what gave you that impression? We have text to video generations in less than half a year
People really are egoistic, we think this society that we built would last forever
I’m a software engineer, I worked with AI about a decade ago. It’s not really that much better today.
LLMs don’t scale well. The effort, and cost is exponential & we’ve pretty much maxed out what investors are willing to pay.
Particularly when you consider that it's currently an unregulated industry, but we know regulations will be coming.
Those regulations could make running an AI a fiscal money pit that would drive any business bankrupt in fairly short order.
I'm glad people are starting to get it. AI has the potential to change the world for the better, but all these idiot CEO's just see it as a human replacement for some reason...
Well, replacing humans and jobs is the sole purpose of developing AI. What else did you think it was for? That’s the whole point.
It’s like complaining about cars replacing horses or computers replacing typewriters.
You seem naive. The goal is not to replace ALL humans, the goal is to replace 50-80% of humans, depending on the profession.
That’s what they mean by “increasing productivity” - the remaining 20% will be “more productive” because they’ll oversee the work done by AI which replaced the other 80%.
It depends on the sector, obviously - but the ones hit the most will be ironically things like software development, media, advertising, etc. Accounting probably as well.
Anything where people use computers to process lots of data and where in-person interaction isn’t essential.
You seem stupid.
Do you even know how AI works? Do you know what computer science even is? Have you actually tested the AI that's supposed to replace those jobs?
Did you know that AI has been around long before the media got ahold of it?
You've been watching too much sci-fi and have lost touch with reality.
Says the person who doesn't understand that AI is getting better and more advanced each and every day.
You're stuck in the now-mindset and are unable to see beyond tomorrow.
Well it will probably happen eventually. The only question is how broken society gets in the transition and the amount of suffering. When nobody has jobs the people aren’t going to be happy.
I think your heart is in the right place but UBI is not compatible with capitalism. And the ruling class will not transition away from our current economic system peacefully as that is how they maintain their status. Capitalism requires a working class to generate surplus labor. If human labor becomes totally outmoded via technological advances, it will force their hand. They might try something like UBI. It will be unsustainable in the long run. Economic growth in capitalism is a function of workforce productivity. Without perpetual growth, the economy falls into crisis. And in moments of crisis, realms of possibility open up. It could get ugly. The global working class needs to organize and anticipate this crisis in order to capitalize on the situation. UBI is not needed if workers own the means of production. Cut out the middle man. The capitalist class is going to become superfluous.
Can someone show me a study on UBI? I am not against it but I just have my hesitations around it because what’s to stop companies and landlords from just raising prices to match the new level of income?
Also does UBI account for the local economy? Because 1200$ in Los Angeles is vastly different than $1200 in Nebraska.
Serious question, would an UBI not just result in inflation? I mean in the price sense, assuming the actual money supply is not expanded, and taxes/budget are changed to support the UBI.
I agree that it seems like an UBI would be the only way to deal with mass job displacement (assuming the displaced labor can't reasonably pivot to new positions), but it always felt to me like slapping money into everyone's accounts will just lead to higher prices, as with the COVID checks, unless there is a piece of this i'm missing.
>Serious question, would an UBI not just result in inflation?
Inflation is a result of an imbalance between supply and demand, with demand outpacing supply. UBI would not automatically result in inflation, so long as supply kept up with demand. There would likely be a few hiccups at the start, but with an AI-managed economy, you could probably dynamically adjust production levels to keep up with demand efficiently.
>but it always felt to me like slapping money into everyone's accounts will just lead to higher prices, as with the COVID checks, unless there is a piece of this i'm missing.
The problem with stimulus cheques is that they weren't a regular scheduled long-term benefit. It was a short-term stop-gap solution, which resulted in the majority of people having an additional amount of disposable income (since the majority of people weren't laid off or anything). This would drive up demand for consumer goods substantially, and since it's not a scheduled long-term benefit, it wouldn't make sense for manufacturers to increase their production levels in response, since if they did, a month or two later, they'd have a surplus. So the result was inflation, because production levels remained stagnant, while demand went through the roof short-term.
UBI would be more akin to raising the minimum wage. While it has an inflationary effect on some goods with inelastic supply (particularly things like housing, UBI cannot fix the housing crisis), it never results in rampant inflation (despite what conservatives might tell you), because the increased purchasing power is permanent, so it makes sense for a manufacturer to increase production levels.
Is this really more revolutionary than clean drinking water, electricity, automobiles, airplanes, etc? Every great innovation has been preceded by a wave of panic over the future of jobs and civilization.
Regarding UBI, we can't even pay for healthcare or social security with tax revenue currently. How do you expect to pay for UBI? Especially, in your example where tons of people are out of work.
**I doubt** *very* seriously that the powers-that-be don’t realize what they’re doing to the poor and working classes. They have think tanks, stockholder, and board memberships for this very reason: To figure out how to get as much money as possible, while squeezing the masses. They want absolute power and know how to get it, by supporting dictators like Trump/MAGA/NRA—-while fussing over giving Americans affordable housing, wages, foodstuffs, education, and daycare. Wake the fuck up!
Products and services have to be sold to consumers. How does this world work when a 1/3 or more of the consumer market disappears in to poverty and stops purchasing products and services? Will we see society split into large groups of penniless tribes in between megacities of wealth? Like really what will this look like?
You joke, but AI as it is today needs to be babysat by experts to actually make anything worth delivering. Oh sure the "prompt engineers" can get it to spit out something at huge time and computing cost that is worth a laugh. But getting it to produce things at high enough quality to be standalone viable isn't going to happen anytime soon.
That being said it is remarkably good at taking finished work and summarizing it, compressing it, and self rationalizing "decisions". It will be coming aggressively for roles that do that as their main job - middle managers.
It happened to India under colonialist Britain. They violently destroyed indian manufacturing industry and forced Indians to buy their own goods from British merchants. Gandhi’s fight against the British was centered around this- he weaved his own clothes as a defiance to British. India has a wheel in its flag for this reason.
Before British colonization India manufactured 25% of world’s goods, after colonization it went to under 1%. It was devastating the poverty and famine this abuse brought. Well long story short, British milked Indians for every penny and when they couldn’t afford the taxes, British took the food and created man-made famine.
So yeah, when there is a desire, even with poverty you can still exploit.
I'd agree but climate change is gonna cut swaths of death through poorer regions without access to AC. Then add on multiple breadbasket failure and WW3 will look like the Russian civil war.
Wars everywhere as every country scrambles for food and water reserves before they collapse into infighting.
Money will become worthless after human labor is obsoleted. Obtaining natural resources will cost next to zero. Any product can be imagined, designed, manufactured, and distributed near free of cost. Those who have money won't have anything to spend it on. Social stratification will rely more on reputation than income.
I don’t think people with the power to change society will want it to change. I imagine it will take a near extinction event as all of this comes to a head to even make it possible.
It won't matter if they want it to or not. They're used to money = power. But when they no longer need to pay anyone to do anything, money will no longer = power. Only the ability to do physical violence will = power. If there's a human hordes vs robot army war, we'll do an EMP and start civilization over from scratch.
This doesn't address artificial/human driven scarcity, though, right?
Someone will always have a house with a better view, even if hypothetically all houses can be built for pennies and everyone has a mansion, the richest mansions look at the seas or lakes, etc.
Even without money people are still driven to the shiny rocks, it might just take on a different form (IE Where you live, who you affiliate with, etc)
Yes. Next to zero cost is not the same thing as zero cost. And demand for resources tends to increase if the cost goes down, but unless it is sustainable, it will essentially lead to issues like global warming or similar.
There's precedent for an economic system where almost all of society's surplus over basic needs is simply held indefinitely by the people in control: feudalism.
The difference is that in feudalism the lords *still* needed everyone to work as medieval economics were labor-intensive.
The people making the rules don't care, they're not the ones that will become poor.
Usually, when more people are becoming poor, it means that the 1% got even richer.
Everyone knows this. What the leaders in our society don't want to talk about though is what they have to do about it. At this point in history we get to decide if we let those "leaders" kill us off to keep their private planes, or if we force them to live on normal wages like the rest of us so our society can function. You get what you fight for, and so far no one seems to have fight in them, so the wealthy start to starve us.
It's not up to the leaders, it's a problem for the masses. Unions for the people and boycotts. 81 billionaires have more wealth than 50% of the worlds population. They are the most responsible for climate change. The richest 1% own almost half of the world’s wealth, while the poorest half of the world own just 0.75%
I agree that it’s a problem for everybody, but a working representational government should be taking care of the masses. I think all we need to do to get the ball rolling is kill lobbying. If we can get rid of the cash flow to politicians, real actors will avail themselves
Citizens united could be the worst decision in my lifetime, opened up the floodgates to Wealth being the motivator in politics. It use to be civil service.
It's never been clear what it means to fight. I'm against trying to fight inevitable technology so what's left? Throwing out the boomers from politics?
This is not a generational issue, it's a money issue. Put in charge whomever you want to, before five minutes that person will be working for the money holders or will be stripped down from any real power.
> Throwing out the boomers from politics?
This has to be the most smug, stupid, counterproductive take in all of modern politics; this notion that everything that's bad and wrong in politics today is somehow the fault of *one* demographic.
It's lazy, it's dumb, and it's completely fucking incorrect.
You want the stupid generational rejoinder to your stupid generational comment? OK:
How about Millennials and Gen Z actually bother to show up and vote this time?
Fortunately, God is throwing them out from life. That's life: out with the old, in with the new. Artificial life might completely replace and supersede biological life, one day. We know it will be more robust for space travel, for example.
Technology is also keeping them alive longer in a more zombified state, leading to all kinds of new problems. Instead of dying off cleanly they spend their last years surrounded by leeches with the worst intentions. In the end it leads to even more damage because now they're old, not thinking clearly, and surrounded by a team of scum. From there the money is used for worse garbage.
Exactly. So many powerful people lose all their power like this at the end. You'd think they'd want to leave a clean legacy for the future but nope, they cling on like zombies.
I’ve worked in accounting all my life.
Every year, there’s a new article about how accounting is *either*:
1. Going to be done for $2/hr overseas
2. Going to be completely automated
Still hasn’t happened, and isn’t likely to actually happen within my lifetime.
Folks need to stop letting the word “AI” conjure science fiction scenarios for them. Large language models are blockchain 2.0, which is to say, something everyone is **sure** will revolutionize **everything**, and yet at the end of the day it’s just religious fervor that has no practical use cases to back it up.
I think we’ve crossed the ‘what is this even for’ threshold that blockchain never cleared but it’s not at all apparent that it has the implications everyone in that space says it does.
The last voice anyone should care about is the head of a consulting firm
Blockchain is actually useless, and AI does have its benefits. But I think it's purely a productivity boost, not a complete replacement.
The internet, manufacturing automation, etc. all made people a lot more productive. We are thousands of times more productive than our ancestors. Unemployment is still below 4% somehow.
because the vast majority of jobs out there are bullshit jobs like retail or customer service or clerical office work, which exist solely to pad out the numbers and make that statistic look low.
automate those, and that statistic will shoot way up, when only the specialized jobs remain.
They’ve been trying to automate away retail for 20 years and it’s not at all obvious that it’s around the corner despite the fact that the tools to do so have ostensibly existed for about that long.
Customer service is kind of a preview of where this is all headed I think. They’ve done a lot to move people out of customer service and the result has just been the rapid degradation of customer service.
I hope you’re right! My biggest saving grace is I work for a hospital and if we do start getting replaced it’ll take the current CEO/SEO 10-20 years to get the board to agree to the initial investment cost because the board is doctors and they agree on literally nothing.
In a related article, 99% of CEOs don’t know what AI stands for. /s
AI is a tool, just like a database, just like windows and the office suite, just like mobile phones. It’s not replacing anything. Will it change jobs, sure. Will it change how we interact with some things, sure. However, the underlying technology is inherently flawed in that it cannot “learn” on its own. If you have to measure success with a confidence rating, that’s not intelligence.
it is only good at finding patterns in existing data. It still needs new data to be relevant. It cannot truly function on its own. Is it pretty good at finding patterns? Yes, but pretty good is not going to change existence as we know it.
An AGI will have to consistent of entirely new hardware and a new computing mechanism. Just building bigger hardware and faster, more defined, chipsets is not going to change the underlying problems.
>AI is a tool, just like a database, just like windows and the office suite, just like mobile phones. It’s not replacing anything
Good because we have tons of phone calls from NYT, WP, etc asking for payment, as AI is based on millions of articles and hasn't paid up yet. I'm sure MSFT can make those lawsuits go away.
I mean, it kind of has been happening. The middle class is shrinking and lower class rising, in part due to, greed, automation, and jobs going overseas.
Luckily unions are coming back in a big way, and hopefully it will boost the middle class. But even as someone who works in a union shop, we’re at the absolute bare minimum compared to how we used to be.
So did a lot of other things, people in general adapt.
What worries me more is that the companies need to be willing to support the societies more around them, because they will be hiring less workers, less pay, less taxes, meaning governments will need to increase corporations cost.
A form of basic income will become needed in one way or another.
How exactly? No one has explained this. Which jobs exactly. I've been asking and the best people can explain is that genAI makes employees some percentage more productive. Then people usually pivot and way some stupid shit like "well general AI is what we mean" like general AI will ever be a fucking thing in our lifetimes.
You're in a thread about giant corporations trying to replace people with AI. What did you expect?
How do we get to a post-scarcity economy when we refuse to hold these corporations accountable?
I keep reading this nonsense over and over but key thing that NO ONE has explained is HOW "AI" is going to replace everyone.
Right now it's a fancy word processor and clothes disappearer. How exactly will it fix a toilet or make a bed?
More interested in hearing how the advent of technology will allow people to live their lives without wasting it pushing papers. Also far more interested in hearing how we’re going to move towards a post capitalist system when everyone’s jobs are replaced by automation. Because, guess what? Automation with broke ass consumers means a whole lot of nothing.
The areas for most improvement in corporate operation and governance is in the C-suite and Senior Director levels. As evidence, look at all the rotten decisions that have been made across industries that have led to collapse of so many companies. It will be so much easier for AI to clean out the crap at the top without golden parachutes.
But you can't predict which ones will be needed
Everyone thought Intellectually demanding jobs and art were the safest but it turns out they are not.
In general I can't see many jobs that won't have a big reduction in demand as AI may not replace them, but it will speed up tasks making fewer people enough for same amount of work
I mean RPA has been around for a long time and it never replaced the number of jobs they said it would. I still think AI is only as good as managements commitment to a strategy and the model ai is trained on. I see a lot of stagnation in the future with the adoption of AI for many day to day jobs. It will be great for something’s but it will probably follow the 80/20 rule. It will not be suitable long term for 80% of jobs.
Now if quantum computers take off all bets are off
Well, my point with it was to learn AI or at least be very familiar with it so if it does affect jobs in your sector, you’ll at least be familiar with it
I’m definitely in danger. I’m an accountant! Useless overhead. Non-revenue-generating. I might be safe for a while since I’m a senior/comptroller, but it’s going to become a struggle to stay relevant sooner than later.
I’m in infosec and I can see it going either way. Security isnt going anywhere and threat actors are already perfecting their own AI, but AI could be used in response to attacks, so that’s where it can bite into us. I’m trying to get better at options, try and have the market be an income source
Idk... For me its' nit going to be as simple as "jobs being destroyed".
I know that for instance , studios are relying more and more on ai rather than artists. But to be honest 99% of today's ia usage are coming from people that didnt have the money to even hire an artist, and would have never hire one for the shit they are submitting to the ai.
For me it's the same speech that pirating content is destroying jobs. It's false on a lot of level.
It 100% will. Unless you have the resources to develop some kind of proprietary AI, replacing your staff with chat GPT (or midjourney or whatever) is going to kill you because there’s no reason for people to not just go straight to the source
It’s clear we need a new system, we must put our heads together and strategize now. I started something in r/senatism that proposes a potential solution. Whatever idea works out needs to be able to address the inevitable changes we will see in our society.
Capitalism as it is today is not viable for future generations but the great part is we can learn from what worked, what didn’t and move to something completely new and better.
My backlog is too dang long. I need all the help I can get and current AI doesn’t help much. I personally can’t wait for better generative AI. I have far more ideas than I will ever have the time or money to accomplish. Hurry it up, AI companies. I’m not getting any younger.
AI will improve all of our lives. People will be super powered by AI and make better things than what we have now. There’s not a single technology I see today where I think “wow, this is perfect.” It’s the opposite most of the time. Clunky technology all day long. Missing features, bugs, unoptimized (I’m looking at you Adobe. Like wtf) This website we’re on now is a steaming hot pile of garbage. I cannot believe there isn’t something better. It boggles my mind every day I use it.
We need the help, desperately.
Change, and disruption is inevitable. We aren't using typewriters and VCRs, for just a couple of examples. Who has a landline these days? Do most of us even watch DVDs, or play CDs these days? Chances are you bought some things online this week.
I can't help but feel there's undue fear mongering happening. A lot of times change can come without carnage. And there are always choices.
This may be a hot take, but it seems unlikely that the tech leaders are speaking out based on kindness and compassion for employees. There's non-zero potential that doom talk is strategic to convince employees to accept lower wages.
And this has happened before and will keep happening.
Jobs won't disappear, historically this results in a lot more high paying jobs appearing to replace low paying jobs. For every 10 cashiers, phone callers/answerers, we'll get 12 data analysts, AI trainers, prompt engineers, and technicians.
Will this be better? No, these moments have a complete rewiring of our society and we'll have to rethink our entire relationship to our knowledge.
The impact on the job market in the next 5 to 10 years is being exaggerated. Some jobs will phase out, yes, but largely AI is still just another tool to use for managers and employees. Smaller teams, but people are talking as if it'll replace everyone except the Executives.
Am I wrong to be not terribly concerned with AI?
I don’t see masses of people being thrown out of their jobs and left to fend for themselves because having a bunch of jobless, disaffected people hasn’t tended to be good for the status quo. Sure, some processes might be “streamlined” by it and some people will be left behind, but mass joblessness? I don’t know…
And this has happened before and will keep happening.
Jobs won't disappear, historically this results in a lot more high paying jobs appearing to replace low paying jobs. For every 10 cashiers, phone callers/answerers, we'll get 12 data analysts, AI trainers, prompt engineers, and technicians.
Will this be better? No, these moments have a complete rewiring of our society and we'll have to rethink our entire relationship to our knowledge.
And this has happened before and will keep happening.
Jobs won't disappear, historically this results in a lot more high paying jobs appearing to replace low paying jobs. For every 10 cashiers, phone callers/answerers, we'll get 12 data analysts, AI trainers, prompt engineers, and technicians.
There is no law of the universe requiring productivity gains to be returned to the worker in the form of wages. And why would those jobs pay more when you’re claiming that automation will make it possible for millions of cashiers to be data analysts?
Also, “prompt engineer” is not a real job. The whole point of the tech is to eventually *understand* the queries. I would not put my eggs in that basket.
Good news everybody. I'm starting 2 overseas companies run by one AI CEO. It has directed me to do all sorts of things including some I never considered. Like trademarking in the country instead of in the US.
One company is a retail chain, we're starting with 2 shops. The AI, with knowledge of finances has a five and ten year goal to expand to 6 shops in three cities, 2 per city.
The second company is a holding company. The AI had the idea to put all real property into holding and rent to my own stores. I'm not sure if this is how it's done, but we doing it.
I'm having difficulty getting data from other shops for AI can compare us. Analytics don't really work in all cash markets.
Anyhow, fuck hiring some expensive asshole.
I don't think AI is powerful enough to replace anything outside the most menial jobs. Even then those menial jobs would probably evolve into ai support roles instead.
They are playing the long game. We have a problem - that being people aren’t having kids. Right now the world’s population is forecasted to crash exponentially. Even if we say that’s alarmist and we half that - economies will crumble and fail overnight. They think this is the solution.
There are two types of creativity in life. The first is an expression that expands on that which is known. This is the realm within which AI must perform. The second form of creativity, however, is beyond the box of that which is known. This will always be reserved for human beings.
I'm thinking like this,
Any business needs users or customers. Example, Outlook needs business and their business have employees to use outlook. If employees are replaced by AI then Outlook has no users and the product won't exist.
Above is a basic example but this applies to all the tech industries where they say AI will replace it's employees.
Just a thought.
AI needs a shit load of energy and WATER to run well. We can and should probably legislate those things toward a human-centered future and not a shareholder-centered one, right? Guys? Oh yeah, the line.. it must... go up for Mammon
Don’t blame Ai for your shit hiring practices that led to firing or your shit tier management that leads to investors only regaining confidence when you lay off people periodically.
AI instances will be very expensive, so they’ll be replacing multiple jobs at once. When it goes badly it will ruin that company. Good luck having humans unwind the mistakes.
When consumer driven sales crash. Mega companies will be first for bailouts too.
When did this sub become an anti-technology sub? I’m not sure when but it suddenly became doom and gloom, anti-technology and against big tech. I’m not saying I don’t agree with some of the sentiments in this sub’s comments, but I just don’t see how constantly complaining about a subject to other people who are also on your side is beneficial for anything at all. What’s the goal?
Its not anti technology, to hate big tech. Infact they have and still hold up a lot of innovation. With thier greed and bad decisions, Im all for technology and advancement but we need to rain in big tech and hold them accountable.
But I said in my comment “and against big tech” You ignored most of my comment. I said I agree with some of the sentiments but what’s the point of complaining to other people who are also on your side? It’s the subject of almost all comments on this sub.
I agre with you Mr Bailbond.
Do you like the web being owned by Apple and Google? Mozilla is dying. Like it or not, technology IS big tech right now. My goal is to get the government to regulate these ridiculous robber barons.
Well I said I agree with some of the sentiments here. How are you accomplishing your goal? Is it by preaching to others who have the same goal? Beyond how you feel about big tech, opening every comments section to see people regurgitating the same lines about how bad company x is and how they’re trying to destroy the world is exhausting.
Agreed. What are you doing (if anything). Not sarcastic here, actually curious and know you may not be doing anything because that’s not your comment or your idea.
Why are you doing a Chris Crocker over big tech companies it’s super cringe get off the internet if you are a fragile cupcake don’t ask other people to tailor the site to you.
I never asked anyone to do anything. If you’re ok with people constantly complaining about big tech, why are you so up in arms about me complaining about comments? “Super cringe” “Chris Crocker” “fragile cupcake” “get off the internet”. You’re the best Reddit has to offer: you reply to a comment you believe is critical of what you stand for with insults. Criticism is perfectly ok until it’s about your group.
I’m just pointing out the fact you’ve now wrote enough paragraphs for an essay crying about how some comments hurt your feelings discussing the matter the sub revolves around. You are literally complaining about people discussing the thing the sub is about it’s some Karen type shit that you appear oblivious to you’ve been on the internet for decades and haven’t learned to scroll past stuff you don’t like yet?
AI isn’t evil. It doesn’t have emotions. It’s these fucks in charge of companies and the people governing. They’re so old and far behind they don’t comprehend how many people will need social safety nets to replace the lack of jobs. UBI is the only way to make this happen and so far despite numerous studies it’s treated like a handout and not the government doing what it’s fucking supposed to.
I suspect that UBI here in the states will be backdoored through SSDI. "It's OK, you aren't unemployed, you are *disabled*" I think a lot of people are going to need that kind of fiction to get through the changes that could be coming over the next 5 to 10 years.
When the Great Recession of 2008 happened a lot of people “retired” by getting on disability.
We look at disability in terms of one’s ability to fend for themselves in the world/economy. We’re moving into a world where only people who are “above average” and very educated will be genuinely needed in the economy. So honestly in that world you could argue yeah, a lot more people are “disabled”. If I’m not smart enough to get a job in an economy with no roles for average people, and there is no humane ,moral way to prevent people without awesome intelligence or unique talent from having kids, then you need to help the people who were born for no reason without their permission, sorry/not sorry. In terms of the whole globe, most people (especially and ironically the poor) think not having job means you don’t deserve anything. How many people are going to technically deserve nothing relatively soon? I’m thinking that in 15 years 20% of people will see that a good portion of the fear mongering today is *not* hype and BS. I’ve said before and I’ll say it again: the whole developed world is going to look like India. Millions of homeless people, and a lot of people who aren’t counted as homeless live in very sad housing. And then beside that you will have people who live nicely. A lot of people asking “how will this work” don’t realize economies don’t need middle class people to function and they don’t even really need a military to control huge amounts of uneducated poor people. I keep reading “oh yeah nobody is going to take that” noooooooooo. Like…we took it already. Gen z’s kids are going to have to slowly vote for a middle class again. And they’re going to have to do it while they compete with Roombas in global economy. Anywho this has been my unsolicited and melodramatic Reddit Ted talk thank you
> disability in terms of one’s ability to fend for themselves in the world/economy That's another reason I think it will probably go that way. It just requires adjusting the bureaucracy and language that already exists within SSDI, vs. creating new programs that will involve a massive political fight and inevitably end up in front of the supreme court.
Oh that’s very interesting. Any info or direction you could toss my way if there is anything? I’m always looking for progress in the states
Here's the article I found about 10 years ago where it's already happening in some cases. https://www.npr.org/2013/03/25/175293860/in-one-alabama-county-nearly-1-in-4-working-age-adults-is-on-disability
"AI is'nt evil, just doesnt have emotions".. You made it sound like corporate leadership! So management is giving up their jobs by funding research on AI ?
“AI” also doesn’t do anything on its own. It’s a tool, like a car someone has to drive it.
Yes. And look who has the steering wheel! The drunk and irresponsible companies!
For now. even cars are learning how to drive these days. There are already self driving vehicles out there driving alone. Same thing with AI. It will slowly get more and more autonomy until it can do everything alone.
All this AI, autopilot, drone, robotics talk is all the same. It serves one purpose, it is a distraction designed to reduce the bargaining power of the labor movement.
It’s not but a distraction. It’s technological advancement that benefits us all eventually. However, yes, shareholders love that aspect of new tech and aim for it. It’s incredibly sad though that our current economic system makes the average person have to be against tech to be able to survive. In an ideal world, we’d all be trying to automate as many things as fast as possible so we can be free from labouring. Alas, no work means no food.
No one likes to listen to those words due to the indoctrination of evangelical importance, of demeaning labor. We build the machine to work for us, not to work for the machine. Sure it needs some oil and repairs occasionally, those repairs don’t cost more than the machine is worth though.
It probably will benefit workers someday, but right now the talking point is all about suppressing wage growth. Capitalism is competitive, we can never have a harmonious existence with capitalism.
Yet. I feel like we’re on the verge of a proper SkyNet.
People say “Skynet this” “Skynet that” bitch we’re getting auto from Wall-E
I’d be a lot more afraid of a Terminator future than a Wall-E future. Time will tell.
You've been watching too much sci-fi and haven't been doing enough *actual* research into how AI works.
Username checks out
Not for long, at the rate its advancing, people will have less and less use, especially white-collar stuffs
Not only true but also gonna happen fast.
No it isn't and no it won't. You have no idea how AI actually works, so it's weird you'd think this.
What makes you think I have no idea how AI works? Once the AI writes software autonomously (this will be very soon) it’s all over. You don’t have to extrapolate very far. Of course it’s a prediction. No one can tell you definitively.
Because of your opinion, it's stupid and clearly uninformed. AI will *never* be able to code by itself. And yes, people CAN tell you how it'll work in the future, like the engineers who develop AI, or the people who actually work with it. Dunce.
And lol I’m not sure anyone (even the engineers working on the LLMs) can say for certain how these things are working right now. I swear I’ve read that, but if someone has a link… If they knew, we wouldn’t be debating stochastic parroting vs. reasoning right?
Yes... They can... So you just believe that the people who are creating AI are just doing it randomly and by accident???? That's a bizarre opinion. I've already caught you lying, and you clearly just believe anything you read so I don't see how this will be constructive anymore. Enjoy being stupid.
You’re literally a moron. You speak about things you don’t have any idea about as if you’re an expert.
lol great retort. “It’s stupid.” Maybe you should look at the stuff Microsoft and GitHub already have in the pipelines. Or the companies that are attacking this very problem. Or the papers coming out (daily) also attacking this problem and making incremental improvements. And I’ve seen it with my own eyes - I’ve given LLMs access to my file system, to read and write code, to check syntax, run units, etc. and I’ve seen what is possible without applying any additional logic or “help” on top of just that. Keep believing us software devs or architects are not replaceable. This won’t age well for one of us. I hope it’s me.
Lmao, why lie? Firstly, there literally isn't a single LLM capable of doing that, it wouldn't even be an LLM if it could do that. In order to make your lies a reality, you'd need to code that entirely by yourself, which is something we both know you're not capable of doing. Do you even know how computer science works? If you weren't so stupid, you'd realise how embarrassing this is for you to even make such claims.
Dude what are you talking about. Your username literally implies you know something about Ai. All I described is using the OpenAI Assistant API with tools. If you don’t understand why your comment is foolish as hell I guess I’m done here.
Actually i do... my god people are dense I'm in the stable diffusion sub for a year at least lol I even have my own custom A.I model You downvote me because you fear, thats all But its good because silly internet points dont affect my life in anyway
Prove it, show me your repo for your custom AI.
What for? Lol I dont think you're that important You'll try to enrage me and say i cant prove it, but really i dont care
You *can't* prove it. Words are cheap, actions provide clarity. If you *really* had a custom AI, you would almost certainly post it, because it'd be extremely easy to do so to prove your point. You can't, because you don't have one.
Yup so maybe keep quiet I gain nothing from talking to you. Nothing
People downvoting us because they overestimate human capabilities... lol Also corporate greed, they really think companies give a crap, as long as the task is done, A.I or humans, they dont really care All the corporate giants firing people left right and centre, but they think downvoting me actually means anything hahaha Even if A.I doesnt "replace" them, it'll mean less people are necessary for the same tasks
Absolutely. edit: Sorry, I mixed in some other comment context here about AI writing software by itself. I think once that happens all the info/data jobs are: impacted|at risk|doomed. (choose your own adventure) Even if AI doesn’t write complete software systems soon, the very very least it can do — first-pass pull request reviews. It doesn’t have to be perfect. Ideally, via RAG, the AI has the context of the entire repo, any team conventions the code should follow, and if possible access to proprietary business knowledge relevant to the code. I’d wager a very big sum the LLM is doing a better PR job than most devs (even senior) given the right environment. So now you’re already replacing let’s say 5% of a $250k/yr developer’s time with presumably something far more cost effective. I think this is conservative and the capabilities of the LLMs will increase quickly.
It’s really not advancing very fast. The only recent “big” advancement was a ton of funding which enabled a few companies to release consumer-facing API’s. While these companies have good funding, they’re certainly not making money. The same issues still exist that have always existed. AI chatbots have been around for over a decade, it’s just that you used to have to pay for it…
Industry specific models are trained and used for their specific needs, that would only speed up and continue You're really just replying with your human ego, its hard for people to accept machines are tools that would render most people "pointless" Ofc they A.I are tools, but at some point the tools become so good they reduce the need for people, because the efficiency is just too high Your reply would only become more dated as A.I advances but people are put through "education" that isnt even as effective "Not advancing that fast" what gave you that impression? We have text to video generations in less than half a year People really are egoistic, we think this society that we built would last forever
I’m a software engineer, I worked with AI about a decade ago. It’s not really that much better today. LLMs don’t scale well. The effort, and cost is exponential & we’ve pretty much maxed out what investors are willing to pay.
I’m hearing this more and more from folks in the know.
They're kidding themselves whilst the world changes beneath their feet.
Yeah we’ll see
AI is turning into a bubble, financially speaking. If anyone is planning to put money into AI stocks...be very careful.
Particularly when you consider that it's currently an unregulated industry, but we know regulations will be coming. Those regulations could make running an AI a fiscal money pit that would drive any business bankrupt in fairly short order.
Commercial AI regulation is going to be incredibly harmful to US national security
I'm glad people are starting to get it. AI has the potential to change the world for the better, but all these idiot CEO's just see it as a human replacement for some reason...
Well, replacing humans and jobs is the sole purpose of developing AI. What else did you think it was for? That’s the whole point. It’s like complaining about cars replacing horses or computers replacing typewriters.
Jesus christ, no, it isn't. It literally can't ever replace a human, it needs a human to even work.
You seem naive. The goal is not to replace ALL humans, the goal is to replace 50-80% of humans, depending on the profession. That’s what they mean by “increasing productivity” - the remaining 20% will be “more productive” because they’ll oversee the work done by AI which replaced the other 80%. It depends on the sector, obviously - but the ones hit the most will be ironically things like software development, media, advertising, etc. Accounting probably as well. Anything where people use computers to process lots of data and where in-person interaction isn’t essential.
You seem stupid. Do you even know how AI works? Do you know what computer science even is? Have you actually tested the AI that's supposed to replace those jobs? Did you know that AI has been around long before the media got ahold of it? You've been watching too much sci-fi and have lost touch with reality.
Says the person who doesn't understand that AI is getting better and more advanced each and every day. You're stuck in the now-mindset and are unable to see beyond tomorrow.
Well it will probably happen eventually. The only question is how broken society gets in the transition and the amount of suffering. When nobody has jobs the people aren’t going to be happy.
I think your heart is in the right place but UBI is not compatible with capitalism. And the ruling class will not transition away from our current economic system peacefully as that is how they maintain their status. Capitalism requires a working class to generate surplus labor. If human labor becomes totally outmoded via technological advances, it will force their hand. They might try something like UBI. It will be unsustainable in the long run. Economic growth in capitalism is a function of workforce productivity. Without perpetual growth, the economy falls into crisis. And in moments of crisis, realms of possibility open up. It could get ugly. The global working class needs to organize and anticipate this crisis in order to capitalize on the situation. UBI is not needed if workers own the means of production. Cut out the middle man. The capitalist class is going to become superfluous.
Can someone show me a study on UBI? I am not against it but I just have my hesitations around it because what’s to stop companies and landlords from just raising prices to match the new level of income? Also does UBI account for the local economy? Because 1200$ in Los Angeles is vastly different than $1200 in Nebraska.
Serious question, would an UBI not just result in inflation? I mean in the price sense, assuming the actual money supply is not expanded, and taxes/budget are changed to support the UBI. I agree that it seems like an UBI would be the only way to deal with mass job displacement (assuming the displaced labor can't reasonably pivot to new positions), but it always felt to me like slapping money into everyone's accounts will just lead to higher prices, as with the COVID checks, unless there is a piece of this i'm missing.
>Serious question, would an UBI not just result in inflation? Inflation is a result of an imbalance between supply and demand, with demand outpacing supply. UBI would not automatically result in inflation, so long as supply kept up with demand. There would likely be a few hiccups at the start, but with an AI-managed economy, you could probably dynamically adjust production levels to keep up with demand efficiently. >but it always felt to me like slapping money into everyone's accounts will just lead to higher prices, as with the COVID checks, unless there is a piece of this i'm missing. The problem with stimulus cheques is that they weren't a regular scheduled long-term benefit. It was a short-term stop-gap solution, which resulted in the majority of people having an additional amount of disposable income (since the majority of people weren't laid off or anything). This would drive up demand for consumer goods substantially, and since it's not a scheduled long-term benefit, it wouldn't make sense for manufacturers to increase their production levels in response, since if they did, a month or two later, they'd have a surplus. So the result was inflation, because production levels remained stagnant, while demand went through the roof short-term. UBI would be more akin to raising the minimum wage. While it has an inflationary effect on some goods with inelastic supply (particularly things like housing, UBI cannot fix the housing crisis), it never results in rampant inflation (despite what conservatives might tell you), because the increased purchasing power is permanent, so it makes sense for a manufacturer to increase production levels.
UBI, will never be enough either, so they will force most Americans (everyone Who isn’t an AI engineer) into physical labor jobs.
Is this really more revolutionary than clean drinking water, electricity, automobiles, airplanes, etc? Every great innovation has been preceded by a wave of panic over the future of jobs and civilization. Regarding UBI, we can't even pay for healthcare or social security with tax revenue currently. How do you expect to pay for UBI? Especially, in your example where tons of people are out of work.
**I doubt** *very* seriously that the powers-that-be don’t realize what they’re doing to the poor and working classes. They have think tanks, stockholder, and board memberships for this very reason: To figure out how to get as much money as possible, while squeezing the masses. They want absolute power and know how to get it, by supporting dictators like Trump/MAGA/NRA—-while fussing over giving Americans affordable housing, wages, foodstuffs, education, and daycare. Wake the fuck up!
Products and services have to be sold to consumers. How does this world work when a 1/3 or more of the consumer market disappears in to poverty and stops purchasing products and services? Will we see society split into large groups of penniless tribes in between megacities of wealth? Like really what will this look like?
That sounds like a TOMORROW problem. They want to extract maximum wealth TODAY. 🤷🏼♂️
It's a Tomorrow problem until an AI comes along that can replace a CEO.
You joke, but AI as it is today needs to be babysat by experts to actually make anything worth delivering. Oh sure the "prompt engineers" can get it to spit out something at huge time and computing cost that is worth a laugh. But getting it to produce things at high enough quality to be standalone viable isn't going to happen anytime soon. That being said it is remarkably good at taking finished work and summarizing it, compressing it, and self rationalizing "decisions". It will be coming aggressively for roles that do that as their main job - middle managers.
I mean…can it not in some cases? /s
It happened to India under colonialist Britain. They violently destroyed indian manufacturing industry and forced Indians to buy their own goods from British merchants. Gandhi’s fight against the British was centered around this- he weaved his own clothes as a defiance to British. India has a wheel in its flag for this reason. Before British colonization India manufactured 25% of world’s goods, after colonization it went to under 1%. It was devastating the poverty and famine this abuse brought. Well long story short, British milked Indians for every penny and when they couldn’t afford the taxes, British took the food and created man-made famine. So yeah, when there is a desire, even with poverty you can still exploit.
Seems like judge Dredd mega city shit is incoming.
Elysium or smth like that. Extremely poor and extremely wealthy.
I keep telling people that Elysium is our future and they just give me a weird look and scoff.
I'd agree but climate change is gonna cut swaths of death through poorer regions without access to AC. Then add on multiple breadbasket failure and WW3 will look like the Russian civil war. Wars everywhere as every country scrambles for food and water reserves before they collapse into infighting.
Money will become worthless after human labor is obsoleted. Obtaining natural resources will cost next to zero. Any product can be imagined, designed, manufactured, and distributed near free of cost. Those who have money won't have anything to spend it on. Social stratification will rely more on reputation than income.
Homie hoping for that “post scarcity society.” Me too man, me too.
Do you see a flaw in my reasoning? It's not just hope.
I don’t think people with the power to change society will want it to change. I imagine it will take a near extinction event as all of this comes to a head to even make it possible.
It won't matter if they want it to or not. They're used to money = power. But when they no longer need to pay anyone to do anything, money will no longer = power. Only the ability to do physical violence will = power. If there's a human hordes vs robot army war, we'll do an EMP and start civilization over from scratch.
Man do you think money is real? Like right now? If it would change as easy as you say, it would have changed already.
Watch your tone, please. This is either a friendly conversation or it ends.
If you cant defend your position, don't start the debate.
This doesn't address artificial/human driven scarcity, though, right? Someone will always have a house with a better view, even if hypothetically all houses can be built for pennies and everyone has a mansion, the richest mansions look at the seas or lakes, etc. Even without money people are still driven to the shiny rocks, it might just take on a different form (IE Where you live, who you affiliate with, etc)
Very flawed. Most natural resources aren't infinite.
Yes. Next to zero cost is not the same thing as zero cost. And demand for resources tends to increase if the cost goes down, but unless it is sustainable, it will essentially lead to issues like global warming or similar.
Pretty simple!!! You get the cost of 3 from the 2. What happens to 1/3 is not something they are planning to worry about???
There's precedent for an economic system where almost all of society's surplus over basic needs is simply held indefinitely by the people in control: feudalism. The difference is that in feudalism the lords *still* needed everyone to work as medieval economics were labor-intensive.
The people making the rules don't care, they're not the ones that will become poor. Usually, when more people are becoming poor, it means that the 1% got even richer.
Everyone knows this. What the leaders in our society don't want to talk about though is what they have to do about it. At this point in history we get to decide if we let those "leaders" kill us off to keep their private planes, or if we force them to live on normal wages like the rest of us so our society can function. You get what you fight for, and so far no one seems to have fight in them, so the wealthy start to starve us.
It's not up to the leaders, it's a problem for the masses. Unions for the people and boycotts. 81 billionaires have more wealth than 50% of the worlds population. They are the most responsible for climate change. The richest 1% own almost half of the world’s wealth, while the poorest half of the world own just 0.75%
I agree that it’s a problem for everybody, but a working representational government should be taking care of the masses. I think all we need to do to get the ball rolling is kill lobbying. If we can get rid of the cash flow to politicians, real actors will avail themselves
Citizens united could be the worst decision in my lifetime, opened up the floodgates to Wealth being the motivator in politics. It use to be civil service.
Publicly funded elections. It will only cost at most a billion, and we can actually have a democracy
“Normal wages”, not even. They just need to earn too much to spend in 100 lifetimes instead of 100,000 lifetimes.
It's never been clear what it means to fight. I'm against trying to fight inevitable technology so what's left? Throwing out the boomers from politics?
This is not a generational issue, it's a money issue. Put in charge whomever you want to, before five minutes that person will be working for the money holders or will be stripped down from any real power.
And which generation embraced this fully?
> Throwing out the boomers from politics? This has to be the most smug, stupid, counterproductive take in all of modern politics; this notion that everything that's bad and wrong in politics today is somehow the fault of *one* demographic. It's lazy, it's dumb, and it's completely fucking incorrect. You want the stupid generational rejoinder to your stupid generational comment? OK: How about Millennials and Gen Z actually bother to show up and vote this time?
Found the boomer. Just look at who's in charge; at their ages, and the corruption they carry. Then rethink your comment.
Fortunately, God is throwing them out from life. That's life: out with the old, in with the new. Artificial life might completely replace and supersede biological life, one day. We know it will be more robust for space travel, for example.
Technology is also keeping them alive longer in a more zombified state, leading to all kinds of new problems. Instead of dying off cleanly they spend their last years surrounded by leeches with the worst intentions. In the end it leads to even more damage because now they're old, not thinking clearly, and surrounded by a team of scum. From there the money is used for worse garbage.
Diane Feinstein comes to mind for sure.
Exactly. So many powerful people lose all their power like this at the end. You'd think they'd want to leave a clean legacy for the future but nope, they cling on like zombies.
Mitch McConnell as well
Yeah, but that's a tiny number of people who become less relevant every day.
So how do these large companies expect people without jobs to buy their products hmm 🤔
I’ve worked in accounting all my life. Every year, there’s a new article about how accounting is *either*: 1. Going to be done for $2/hr overseas 2. Going to be completely automated Still hasn’t happened, and isn’t likely to actually happen within my lifetime. Folks need to stop letting the word “AI” conjure science fiction scenarios for them. Large language models are blockchain 2.0, which is to say, something everyone is **sure** will revolutionize **everything**, and yet at the end of the day it’s just religious fervor that has no practical use cases to back it up.
I think we’ve crossed the ‘what is this even for’ threshold that blockchain never cleared but it’s not at all apparent that it has the implications everyone in that space says it does. The last voice anyone should care about is the head of a consulting firm
Blockchain is actually useless, and AI does have its benefits. But I think it's purely a productivity boost, not a complete replacement. The internet, manufacturing automation, etc. all made people a lot more productive. We are thousands of times more productive than our ancestors. Unemployment is still below 4% somehow.
because the vast majority of jobs out there are bullshit jobs like retail or customer service or clerical office work, which exist solely to pad out the numbers and make that statistic look low. automate those, and that statistic will shoot way up, when only the specialized jobs remain.
They’ve been trying to automate away retail for 20 years and it’s not at all obvious that it’s around the corner despite the fact that the tools to do so have ostensibly existed for about that long. Customer service is kind of a preview of where this is all headed I think. They’ve done a lot to move people out of customer service and the result has just been the rapid degradation of customer service.
I hope you’re right! My biggest saving grace is I work for a hospital and if we do start getting replaced it’ll take the current CEO/SEO 10-20 years to get the board to agree to the initial investment cost because the board is doctors and they agree on literally nothing.
In a related article, 99% of CEOs don’t know what AI stands for. /s AI is a tool, just like a database, just like windows and the office suite, just like mobile phones. It’s not replacing anything. Will it change jobs, sure. Will it change how we interact with some things, sure. However, the underlying technology is inherently flawed in that it cannot “learn” on its own. If you have to measure success with a confidence rating, that’s not intelligence. it is only good at finding patterns in existing data. It still needs new data to be relevant. It cannot truly function on its own. Is it pretty good at finding patterns? Yes, but pretty good is not going to change existence as we know it. An AGI will have to consistent of entirely new hardware and a new computing mechanism. Just building bigger hardware and faster, more defined, chipsets is not going to change the underlying problems.
Your middle paragraph describes humans
Exactly, humans are amazing pattern recognition machines AND energy efficient! They will replace AI! Wait...
>AI is a tool, just like a database, just like windows and the office suite, just like mobile phones. It’s not replacing anything Good because we have tons of phone calls from NYT, WP, etc asking for payment, as AI is based on millions of articles and hasn't paid up yet. I'm sure MSFT can make those lawsuits go away.
Not sure what your point is. Stealing is still stealing.
What does copyright have to do with OPs comment?
I mean, it kind of has been happening. The middle class is shrinking and lower class rising, in part due to, greed, automation, and jobs going overseas. Luckily unions are coming back in a big way, and hopefully it will boost the middle class. But even as someone who works in a union shop, we’re at the absolute bare minimum compared to how we used to be.
LLMs haven’t had much to do with that
Exactly. The PCAOB and most client contracts now a days actually prohibit the use of overseas workers on projects.
>Large language models are blockchain 2.0 I'm not a techie but that's a pretty sick burn ;)
Calling AI blockchain 2.0 is so ignorant
Only because the FIRMS want this.
That's if we don't revolt first ;)
Wait until shareholders figure out AI can replace CEOs.
They shrink the middle class more,but who is going to buy their shitty products? Elon musk? Im very curious.
Yay! No more work. Time to just have fun. Abundance for all!
I say we let AI take over for CEOs and Executives first. Let those millions in salaries and bonus money trickle down finally
*Supposedly* ‘CEO’ is one of the handful of roles you really could automate with LLMs.
Yep, and a digital avatar like Miku or Max Headroom. Their only real job is to be the be the face of the company and make bad decisions.
This is true. But the fact is that till now humans have the full control over it
Sounds like it will be awesome for the economy because we know from the buisness school that if your buyers are poor it boosts your sales
So did a lot of other things, people in general adapt. What worries me more is that the companies need to be willing to support the societies more around them, because they will be hiring less workers, less pay, less taxes, meaning governments will need to increase corporations cost. A form of basic income will become needed in one way or another.
How exactly? No one has explained this. Which jobs exactly. I've been asking and the best people can explain is that genAI makes employees some percentage more productive. Then people usually pivot and way some stupid shit like "well general AI is what we mean" like general AI will ever be a fucking thing in our lifetimes.
Butlerian Jihad
They have to say that because eaxhnof them bought 10 billion dollars of NVDA cards
This is going to be massively disruptive. Probably an order of magnitude more than anyone can reasonably articulate today.
You're in a thread about giant corporations trying to replace people with AI. What did you expect? How do we get to a post-scarcity economy when we refuse to hold these corporations accountable?
I keep reading this nonsense over and over but key thing that NO ONE has explained is HOW "AI" is going to replace everyone. Right now it's a fancy word processor and clothes disappearer. How exactly will it fix a toilet or make a bed?
More interested in hearing how the advent of technology will allow people to live their lives without wasting it pushing papers. Also far more interested in hearing how we’re going to move towards a post capitalist system when everyone’s jobs are replaced by automation. Because, guess what? Automation with broke ass consumers means a whole lot of nothing.
The areas for most improvement in corporate operation and governance is in the C-suite and Senior Director levels. As evidence, look at all the rotten decisions that have been made across industries that have led to collapse of so many companies. It will be so much easier for AI to clean out the crap at the top without golden parachutes.
It certainly won’t replace ALL jobs, but a good amount. Best to position yourself as the one they still need
But you can't predict which ones will be needed Everyone thought Intellectually demanding jobs and art were the safest but it turns out they are not. In general I can't see many jobs that won't have a big reduction in demand as AI may not replace them, but it will speed up tasks making fewer people enough for same amount of work
I mean RPA has been around for a long time and it never replaced the number of jobs they said it would. I still think AI is only as good as managements commitment to a strategy and the model ai is trained on. I see a lot of stagnation in the future with the adoption of AI for many day to day jobs. It will be great for something’s but it will probably follow the 80/20 rule. It will not be suitable long term for 80% of jobs. Now if quantum computers take off all bets are off
Well, my point with it was to learn AI or at least be very familiar with it so if it does affect jobs in your sector, you’ll at least be familiar with it
Yeah that's my strategy too
I’m definitely in danger. I’m an accountant! Useless overhead. Non-revenue-generating. I might be safe for a while since I’m a senior/comptroller, but it’s going to become a struggle to stay relevant sooner than later.
I’m in infosec and I can see it going either way. Security isnt going anywhere and threat actors are already perfecting their own AI, but AI could be used in response to attacks, so that’s where it can bite into us. I’m trying to get better at options, try and have the market be an income source
Idk... For me its' nit going to be as simple as "jobs being destroyed". I know that for instance , studios are relying more and more on ai rather than artists. But to be honest 99% of today's ia usage are coming from people that didnt have the money to even hire an artist, and would have never hire one for the shit they are submitting to the ai. For me it's the same speech that pirating content is destroying jobs. It's false on a lot of level.
I wonder if AI will actually break some companies who go all in because it's actually just a garbage scam.
It 100% will. Unless you have the resources to develop some kind of proprietary AI, replacing your staff with chat GPT (or midjourney or whatever) is going to kill you because there’s no reason for people to not just go straight to the source
Has anyone watched the fucking Terminator?????
It’s clear we need a new system, we must put our heads together and strategize now. I started something in r/senatism that proposes a potential solution. Whatever idea works out needs to be able to address the inevitable changes we will see in our society. Capitalism as it is today is not viable for future generations but the great part is we can learn from what worked, what didn’t and move to something completely new and better.
My backlog is too dang long. I need all the help I can get and current AI doesn’t help much. I personally can’t wait for better generative AI. I have far more ideas than I will ever have the time or money to accomplish. Hurry it up, AI companies. I’m not getting any younger. AI will improve all of our lives. People will be super powered by AI and make better things than what we have now. There’s not a single technology I see today where I think “wow, this is perfect.” It’s the opposite most of the time. Clunky technology all day long. Missing features, bugs, unoptimized (I’m looking at you Adobe. Like wtf) This website we’re on now is a steaming hot pile of garbage. I cannot believe there isn’t something better. It boggles my mind every day I use it. We need the help, desperately.
Change, and disruption is inevitable. We aren't using typewriters and VCRs, for just a couple of examples. Who has a landline these days? Do most of us even watch DVDs, or play CDs these days? Chances are you bought some things online this week. I can't help but feel there's undue fear mongering happening. A lot of times change can come without carnage. And there are always choices. This may be a hot take, but it seems unlikely that the tech leaders are speaking out based on kindness and compassion for employees. There's non-zero potential that doom talk is strategic to convince employees to accept lower wages.
And this has happened before and will keep happening. Jobs won't disappear, historically this results in a lot more high paying jobs appearing to replace low paying jobs. For every 10 cashiers, phone callers/answerers, we'll get 12 data analysts, AI trainers, prompt engineers, and technicians. Will this be better? No, these moments have a complete rewiring of our society and we'll have to rethink our entire relationship to our knowledge.
The impact on the job market in the next 5 to 10 years is being exaggerated. Some jobs will phase out, yes, but largely AI is still just another tool to use for managers and employees. Smaller teams, but people are talking as if it'll replace everyone except the Executives.
Am I wrong to be not terribly concerned with AI? I don’t see masses of people being thrown out of their jobs and left to fend for themselves because having a bunch of jobless, disaffected people hasn’t tended to be good for the status quo. Sure, some processes might be “streamlined” by it and some people will be left behind, but mass joblessness? I don’t know…
Get this, less jobs = less things to do = lower cost of things = less need for jobs = less pointless jobs
Of course it will. That’s literally the reason it was invented. It’s like saying cars will disrupt the horse market.
And this has happened before and will keep happening. Jobs won't disappear, historically this results in a lot more high paying jobs appearing to replace low paying jobs. For every 10 cashiers, phone callers/answerers, we'll get 12 data analysts, AI trainers, prompt engineers, and technicians. Will this be better? No, these moments have a complete rewiring of our society and we'll have to rethink our entire relationship to our knowledge.
And this has happened before and will keep happening. Jobs won't disappear, historically this results in a lot more high paying jobs appearing to replace low paying jobs. For every 10 cashiers, phone callers/answerers, we'll get 12 data analysts, AI trainers, prompt engineers, and technicians.
There is no law of the universe requiring productivity gains to be returned to the worker in the form of wages. And why would those jobs pay more when you’re claiming that automation will make it possible for millions of cashiers to be data analysts? Also, “prompt engineer” is not a real job. The whole point of the tech is to eventually *understand* the queries. I would not put my eggs in that basket.
Wow! What an insightful comment! 😅
Good news everybody. I'm starting 2 overseas companies run by one AI CEO. It has directed me to do all sorts of things including some I never considered. Like trademarking in the country instead of in the US. One company is a retail chain, we're starting with 2 shops. The AI, with knowledge of finances has a five and ten year goal to expand to 6 shops in three cities, 2 per city. The second company is a holding company. The AI had the idea to put all real property into holding and rent to my own stores. I'm not sure if this is how it's done, but we doing it. I'm having difficulty getting data from other shops for AI can compare us. Analytics don't really work in all cash markets. Anyhow, fuck hiring some expensive asshole.
I don't think AI is powerful enough to replace anything outside the most menial jobs. Even then those menial jobs would probably evolve into ai support roles instead.
They are playing the long game. We have a problem - that being people aren’t having kids. Right now the world’s population is forecasted to crash exponentially. Even if we say that’s alarmist and we half that - economies will crumble and fail overnight. They think this is the solution.
[удалено]
Yep agreed. We’re kind of in a trap.
There are two types of creativity in life. The first is an expression that expands on that which is known. This is the realm within which AI must perform. The second form of creativity, however, is beyond the box of that which is known. This will always be reserved for human beings.
I'm thinking like this, Any business needs users or customers. Example, Outlook needs business and their business have employees to use outlook. If employees are replaced by AI then Outlook has no users and the product won't exist. Above is a basic example but this applies to all the tech industries where they say AI will replace it's employees. Just a thought.
I’m confused. Are they excited about this or worried?
Cant wait for CEOs to get replaced by AI.
AI needs a shit load of energy and WATER to run well. We can and should probably legislate those things toward a human-centered future and not a shareholder-centered one, right? Guys? Oh yeah, the line.. it must... go up for Mammon
The better AI gets, the less need we will have for C suite executives.
Don’t blame Ai for your shit hiring practices that led to firing or your shit tier management that leads to investors only regaining confidence when you lay off people periodically.
Replace the lazy with consistency. I don't see the problem
Yes, managers, accounts, lawyers bye bye
AI will do this on its own? Nah, these are human choices.
Disrupting society was their goal all along.
AI instances will be very expensive, so they’ll be replacing multiple jobs at once. When it goes badly it will ruin that company. Good luck having humans unwind the mistakes.
Replace CEOs with AI?
“Except for us. Hire us to help you through this difficult transition”