4 ms·

>>Just as tractors made farmers more productive ... really, that is example used? If AI will do to development was tractors did to farming there is not going

>>Just as tractors made farmers more productive ... really, that is example used? If AI will do to development was tractors did to farming there is not going to be many developers left. >>today’s AI the potential for the loss of certain jobs, yes, but also, if history is a guide, a future in which a great variety of more highly skilled work Ag -> Industrial -> Information transitions were all supported by a mix of massive expansion in population, mass migration of populations, and globalization of economies information -> automation / AI transition does not seem to have these 3 things in the same way. Globalism is slowing or reversing into protectionism. Migration is still high but seemingly for different reasons (geopolitical) as people displaced for war, crime, or climate and critical for this discussion population growth as SLOWED way down, and it expected to reverse about 2040. This means people looking at the historical models for how these tech disruptions played out are very flawed in their "everything will be just fine because Farmers became factory workers, and factory workers became developers" Current economic models may not play out like they did in the past. History may rhyme, but it does not actually repeat. Also lets not forget the terrible way society in general handled these previous transitions that resulted is massive amounts of suffering for the people displaced. "Learn to AI" can not become the mantra of the day like "Learn to Code" did.... My prediction is we will see a MASSIVE increase in wealth gaps, and extreme decrease in standard of living in most of the industrial world (we are already seeing this in a limited way) leading to more and more political instability

dahwolf 4y ago
Yep. Farm. Factory. Office. The end. There's nowhere to go, not for this amount of people. The idea that rather than losing jobs, it will compliment us and even enable millions of new "non-programmers" to start programming, I'm puzzled where this demand actually would come from? What would they even "build? And can you imagine the absolute nightmare of millions of people producing "code" with zero background in programming? In a sane world, this could be a humanitarian moment where we redirect our human capital to things of a less commercial nature, say human care. We don't live in that world though.
- troupe 4y ago
  > it will compliment us and even enable millions of new "non-programmers" to start programming You say that as if understanding and stating requirements in a non conflicting way isn't the primary skill of a programmer anyway.
- anonylizard 4y ago
  Electricians, plumbers, nurses, construction workers, manufacturing, there's an absolute ton of blue collar jobs out there short of people. Where do you think all the renewable energy is coming from, its coming from large teams of crews installing those wind turbines and solar panels in the wilderness. Every electrical transformer in the US is going to have to be upgraded, to accomodate for surges in demand from EVs. The housing price crisis, once regulation is fixed, people will still have to build them. Robot construction workers ain't coming any time soon. All of these are massive sources of employment. If AI really does automate a large chunk of white collar jobs, corporate profits will skyrocket, and so will government tax and private investment (Profits generally end up in investment funds somewhere), and the above sectors will absorb that investment. Now, will the transition look pretty? Will your office workers make an easy transition to physical labour? No. But neither did the coal miners find 'learning to code' easy. Time to buckle up, the tsunami comes. Also, if you can use AI, you are already safer than most of the white collar jobs, so we shouldn't be the ones crying the hardest.
  - jeffdn 4y ago
    In 1985, there were about 170,000 coal miners in the United States — the peak of over 800,000 was in the 1920s. There simply isn’t a comparison in the scale there.
    - anonylizard 4y ago
      Coal miners weren't the only blue collar workers replaced, there were 20 million US manufacturing staff at its peak, now its down to 12. All offshored. That's 8 million alone. The US is already spending $1 trillion on infrastructure, $1 trillion can hire 10 mil people digging ditches for a year, and when subsidizing gainful employment (ie, only subsidizing 20% of the wages), can probably generate 50 mil jobs. If AI is that impressive, expect the government coffers to swell so much it can spend $1 trillion on infrastructure every single year. The US can easily absorb $30 trillion in total of infrastructure investment + housing construction, rebuilding itself to say Chinese standards. This wasn't possible previously because of cost and labour shortages. Now it is. The future isn't all roses, but pretending it'll be some sort of apocalypse, is just another form of coping, excusing yourself to understanding the reality.
13years 4y ago
Agree. All historical comparison to prior disruptions are invalid. The reason they are invalid, is that all prior disruptions were narrow, were followed by periods of stabilization that allowed people to plan and reason about their lives. AI is the opposite in this regard, it is broad and there is no period of stabilization. It is continual acceleration. AI is a skill/technology replication machine. This concept has never existed before. The impacts are not relatable to anything else. The implications go far beyond jobs as well. The potential cultural and societal impacts are equally as disturbing. I've written in detail about some of those possibilities here. https://dakara.substack.com/p/ai-and-the-end-to-all-things https://dakara.substack.com/p/ai-and-the-end-to-all-things
- atodorov99 4y ago
  I completely agree. I do not understand why some people are downvoting you. Everyone on this site (assuming at least 95% are developers) should conceptually understand that AI to office jobs is nothing like tractors to farmers. Before AGI it's an arms race between what skill can humans acquire that AI can't yet simulate. After AGI there is no contest. It's crazy to me how I have memories of AI discussions from years back where this crucial difference was well known and acknowledged. But right now it feels like half the people are turning a blind eye to it on purpose.
  - 13years 4y ago
    Yes, I've described it in the article above as "Climbing the skill ladder is going to look more like running on a treadmill at the gym. No matter how fast you run, you aren’t moving, AI is still right behind you learning everything that you can do."
  - CatWChainsaw 4y ago
    Because they are, because they don't want to acknowledge that reality is bleaker than they pictured.

dahwolf 4y ago

Yep. Farm. Factory. Office. The end. There's nowhere to go, not for this amount of people. The idea that rather than losing jobs, it will compliment us and even enable millions of new "non-programmers" to start programming, I'm puzzled where this demand actually would come from? What would they even "build? And can you imagine the absolute nightmare of millions of people producing "code" with zero background in programming? In a sane world, this could be a humanitarian moment where we redirect our human capital to things of a less commercial nature, say human care. We don't live in that world though.

troupe 4y ago
> it will compliment us and even enable millions of new "non-programmers" to start programming You say that as if understanding and stating requirements in a non conflicting way isn't the primary skill of a programmer anyway.
anonylizard 4y ago
Electricians, plumbers, nurses, construction workers, manufacturing, there's an absolute ton of blue collar jobs out there short of people. Where do you think all the renewable energy is coming from, its coming from large teams of crews installing those wind turbines and solar panels in the wilderness. Every electrical transformer in the US is going to have to be upgraded, to accomodate for surges in demand from EVs. The housing price crisis, once regulation is fixed, people will still have to build them. Robot construction workers ain't coming any time soon. All of these are massive sources of employment. If AI really does automate a large chunk of white collar jobs, corporate profits will skyrocket, and so will government tax and private investment (Profits generally end up in investment funds somewhere), and the above sectors will absorb that investment. Now, will the transition look pretty? Will your office workers make an easy transition to physical labour? No. But neither did the coal miners find 'learning to code' easy. Time to buckle up, the tsunami comes. Also, if you can use AI, you are already safer than most of the white collar jobs, so we shouldn't be the ones crying the hardest.
- jeffdn 4y ago
  In 1985, there were about 170,000 coal miners in the United States — the peak of over 800,000 was in the 1920s. There simply isn’t a comparison in the scale there.
  - anonylizard 4y ago
    Coal miners weren't the only blue collar workers replaced, there were 20 million US manufacturing staff at its peak, now its down to 12. All offshored. That's 8 million alone. The US is already spending $1 trillion on infrastructure, $1 trillion can hire 10 mil people digging ditches for a year, and when subsidizing gainful employment (ie, only subsidizing 20% of the wages), can probably generate 50 mil jobs. If AI is that impressive, expect the government coffers to swell so much it can spend $1 trillion on infrastructure every single year. The US can easily absorb $30 trillion in total of infrastructure investment + housing construction, rebuilding itself to say Chinese standards. This wasn't possible previously because of cost and labour shortages. Now it is. The future isn't all roses, but pretending it'll be some sort of apocalypse, is just another form of coping, excusing yourself to understanding the reality.

13years 4y ago

Agree. All historical comparison to prior disruptions are invalid. The reason they are invalid, is that all prior disruptions were narrow, were followed by periods of stabilization that allowed people to plan and reason about their lives. AI is the opposite in this regard, it is broad and there is no period of stabilization. It is continual acceleration. AI is a skill/technology replication machine. This concept has never existed before. The impacts are not relatable to anything else. The implications go far beyond jobs as well. The potential cultural and societal impacts are equally as disturbing. I've written in detail about some of those possibilities here. https://dakara.substack.com/p/ai-and-the-end-to-all-things https://dakara.substack.com/p/ai-and-the-end-to-all-things

atodorov99 4y ago
I completely agree. I do not understand why some people are downvoting you. Everyone on this site (assuming at least 95% are developers) should conceptually understand that AI to office jobs is nothing like tractors to farmers. Before AGI it's an arms race between what skill can humans acquire that AI can't yet simulate. After AGI there is no contest. It's crazy to me how I have memories of AI discussions from years back where this crucial difference was well known and acknowledged. But right now it feels like half the people are turning a blind eye to it on purpose.
- 13years 4y ago
  Yes, I've described it in the article above as "Climbing the skill ladder is going to look more like running on a treadmill at the gym. No matter how fast you run, you aren’t moving, AI is still right behind you learning everything that you can do."
- CatWChainsaw 4y ago
  Because they are, because they don't want to acknowledge that reality is bleaker than they pictured.