5 ms·

Disclaimer: I am pretty pro AI. To your point about it being good for small and medium sized businesses — let’s assume it gets rid of a significant amount of w

by kredd 3y ago

Disclaimer: I am pretty pro AI. To your point about it being good for small and medium sized businesses — let’s assume it gets rid of a significant amount of workers. Who would be the consumers of these products, other small/medium sized businesses who also mostly have AI producing work? Obviously it’s a simplified question, but I’m curious how we’ll handle the removal of “useless workforce” when AI does an objectively better job.

vladd 3y ago
Similarly to how we removed a lot of workforce from agriculture in the last century. The breadth and scope of services offered increased ten-fold and workers learned to add value in different ways in these new areas.
- kredd 3y ago
  Fair, I guess, I have limited knowledge in this space, and it’s hard to imagine where and how these people would switch to.
  - SirMaster 3y ago
    That's how it's always been though. The previous generations could never imagine the kinds of jobs we have today. Now I am not saying that this is a guarantee to happen again, and that new jobs will be created and such. But I think anyone claiming to know that "this time it will be different" and that "we wont create new jobs that we can't imagine today" could be just as wrong about that idea too.
- zdragnar 3y ago
  The problem is that subsistence and low-yield agriculture families weren't significant consumers in the first place. Taking them out of the economy and pushing their children into industry increased demand for goods and services as they became dependent upon buying food, rent and goods they previously weren't buying. Gutting a ton of jobs across many sectors in the economy won't change demand for food or rent, but will likely hurt every service sector and slow the economy down overall as people without jobs push out purchases they would have made otherwise.
mym1990 3y ago
If we are going to make assumptions, let’s say the advent of new technology such as AI opens up new types of jobs(which will of course need new training). The so called useless workforce would need to be willing to retrain, but the opportunities should be there. As maybe a last resort, regulation could play a factor in how many AI resources a company can use, which will mimic scarcity. You act as if humans haven’t been solving existential problems for their whole existence. It’s not like 50% of the workforce will get laid off and there will be no response to that.

by kredd 3y ago

vladd 3y ago

Similarly to how we removed a lot of workforce from agriculture in the last century. The breadth and scope of services offered increased ten-fold and workers learned to add value in different ways in these new areas.

kredd 3y ago
Fair, I guess, I have limited knowledge in this space, and it’s hard to imagine where and how these people would switch to.
- SirMaster 3y ago
  That's how it's always been though. The previous generations could never imagine the kinds of jobs we have today. Now I am not saying that this is a guarantee to happen again, and that new jobs will be created and such. But I think anyone claiming to know that "this time it will be different" and that "we wont create new jobs that we can't imagine today" could be just as wrong about that idea too.
zdragnar 3y ago
The problem is that subsistence and low-yield agriculture families weren't significant consumers in the first place. Taking them out of the economy and pushing their children into industry increased demand for goods and services as they became dependent upon buying food, rent and goods they previously weren't buying. Gutting a ton of jobs across many sectors in the economy won't change demand for food or rent, but will likely hurt every service sector and slow the economy down overall as people without jobs push out purchases they would have made otherwise.

mym1990 3y ago

If we are going to make assumptions, let’s say the advent of new technology such as AI opens up new types of jobs(which will of course need new training). The so called useless workforce would need to be willing to retrain, but the opportunities should be there. As maybe a last resort, regulation could play a factor in how many AI resources a company can use, which will mimic scarcity. You act as if humans haven’t been solving existential problems for their whole existence. It’s not like 50% of the workforce will get laid off and there will be no response to that.