4 ms·

Machines don't produce a value, humans do. Simply because the "value" (added or not) has a meaning only when you exchange goods or services. Nail gun makes thin

Machines don't produce a value, humans do. Simply because the "value" (added or not) has a meaning only when you exchange goods or services. Nail gun makes things much faster but it's a carpenter who produces the value. Money is simply a universal equivalent of that value, nothing more. So if you give me a breakfast for help with unloading your truck, it's still an exchange, and my work's value is equal to "one breakfast" even no money was involved. AI is just a nail gun, there still needs to be somebody who trains/operates it (like with ChatGPT) and who will ask for something in exchange. It may eliminate some jobs (happened before), but it will create others because human society is not only about food (not sure ChatGPT can help here though), but about interactions which are not going to be automated by ChatGPT (think of sex, power).

danShumway 4y ago
> Simply because the "value" (added or not) has a meaning only when you exchange goods or services. I feel like your definition of value is jumping around quite a bit. In another comment you described "value" as essentially any kind of social capital or personal reward. Now it's explicitly transactional? In any case, this is a very narrow definition of value that I don't think matches up with what most people who worry about automation are talking about. It's certainly not what the original thread was talking about when it worried about people without jobs not being able to find meaning in work. What most people think of as useful or meaningful purpose in their lives does not strictly map to transactional value. > AI is just a nail gun, there still needs to be somebody who trains/operates it (like with ChatGPT) and who will ask for something in exchange. Then there is no problem! This isn't an issue if AI isn't going to take jobs away.

danShumway 4y ago

> Simply because the "value" (added or not) has a meaning only when you exchange goods or services. I feel like your definition of value is jumping around quite a bit. In another comment you described "value" as essentially any kind of social capital or personal reward. Now it's explicitly transactional? In any case, this is a very narrow definition of value that I don't think matches up with what most people who worry about automation are talking about. It's certainly not what the original thread was talking about when it worried about people without jobs not being able to find meaning in work. What most people think of as useful or meaningful purpose in their lives does not strictly map to transactional value. > AI is just a nail gun, there still needs to be somebody who trains/operates it (like with ChatGPT) and who will ask for something in exchange. Then there is no problem! This isn't an issue if AI isn't going to take jobs away.