4 ms·

A lot of the people on the left of the curve are likely doing different shades of manual work. This is often work that automation is struggling to replicate --

by mft_ 3y ago

A lot of the people on the left of the curve are likely doing different shades of manual work. This is often work that automation is struggling to replicate --think grasping and packing in a warehouse, or tidying up a messy shelf of goods-- and the GPTs won't change this. I'd argue it's maybe the middle and even the right of the curve that's threatened. Is your job writing marketing copy, or communications materials or press releases, or relatively simple moulding and counting of data, or HR administration (or many other examples)? GPT's coming for your job in a short space of time. (Which brings us to mft's second rule: if your job is threatened by the current generation of GPTs, it should probably have been largely automated by simpler means --or just eliminated-- already.)

jiggawatts 3y ago
> and the GPTs won't change this. I suspect but cannot prove that the opposite will be the case. We can make bipedal robots now, but we can’t give them instructions, not like we can instruct human labourers. “Bob, go to where George ate his lunch an hour ago and bring me the tools for fixing a pipe” was an impossible instruction for a robot to execute. Suddenly this is a trivial sentence for an AI that knows what type of tools are typically needed for fixing pipes! Think about how many mega projects are being built in places like Saudi Arabia with immigrant workers that speak little English and no Arabic. An AI is already superior in terms of comprehension than those workers! LLMs already speak every major language and can be a handy translator too. C3P0 and R2D2 are looking totally realistic suddenly! Heck, do you remember that scene in the Empire Strikes Back where Luke used a text chat interface to communicate with R2D2? That’s oddly prescient now!
- mft_ 3y ago
  That's not quite the issue I'm raising. It's not about being able to communicate better with existing robots - it's where (as yet) there are no robots suitable to do the job. There are plenty of tasks which are simple, tedious and repetitive - and yet are resistant (currently) to automation. An example is sorting mixed plastic waste into categories according to the type of plastic. This is comparatively trivial for almost any human, and (afaik) not yet possible to automate. (Another is picking and packing things in Amazon's warehouse - which we know they've expended huge effort in trying to solve.) Look at it the other way around: why are all simple, tedious, repetitive jobs not already automated? It's either because it's possible but not economically feasible, or no-one's tried yet... or because it's really difficult and so far there's no solution. This last category represents a lot of 'low end' jobs. GPTs are unlikely to move the needle here, as appropriate robots to carry out the tasks don't exist yet.
  - pixl97 3y ago
    Let's imagine a world where most jobs that cannot be automated are low end, low skill, low pay jobs... what does this world look like economically? In my eyes this is a world where corporations and the extremely wealthy suck up all the economic benefits and we're left with massive wealth disparity. Assets keep going up in price, but there is no means of monetary velocity to the bottom earners.
    - mft_ 3y ago
      I don't disagree (notwithstanding the extent to which we're already in a "world where corporations and the extremely wealthy suck up all the economic benefits and we're left with massive wealth disparity"). My point is much more narrow (and simple): that there is a subset of low-end jobs which are currently unautomatable due to their nature, and this will likely not change via the GPTs. This may (tending to will, given sufficient time) change via other technological advancements.

by mft_ 3y ago

jiggawatts 3y ago

> and the GPTs won't change this. I suspect but cannot prove that the opposite will be the case. We can make bipedal robots now, but we can’t give them instructions, not like we can instruct human labourers. “Bob, go to where George ate his lunch an hour ago and bring me the tools for fixing a pipe” was an impossible instruction for a robot to execute. Suddenly this is a trivial sentence for an AI that knows what type of tools are typically needed for fixing pipes! Think about how many mega projects are being built in places like Saudi Arabia with immigrant workers that speak little English and no Arabic. An AI is already superior in terms of comprehension than those workers! LLMs already speak every major language and can be a handy translator too. C3P0 and R2D2 are looking totally realistic suddenly! Heck, do you remember that scene in the Empire Strikes Back where Luke used a text chat interface to communicate with R2D2? That’s oddly prescient now!

mft_ 3y ago
That's not quite the issue I'm raising. It's not about being able to communicate better with existing robots - it's where (as yet) there are no robots suitable to do the job. There are plenty of tasks which are simple, tedious and repetitive - and yet are resistant (currently) to automation. An example is sorting mixed plastic waste into categories according to the type of plastic. This is comparatively trivial for almost any human, and (afaik) not yet possible to automate. (Another is picking and packing things in Amazon's warehouse - which we know they've expended huge effort in trying to solve.) Look at it the other way around: why are all simple, tedious, repetitive jobs not already automated? It's either because it's possible but not economically feasible, or no-one's tried yet... or because it's really difficult and so far there's no solution. This last category represents a lot of 'low end' jobs. GPTs are unlikely to move the needle here, as appropriate robots to carry out the tasks don't exist yet.
- pixl97 3y ago
  Let's imagine a world where most jobs that cannot be automated are low end, low skill, low pay jobs... what does this world look like economically? In my eyes this is a world where corporations and the extremely wealthy suck up all the economic benefits and we're left with massive wealth disparity. Assets keep going up in price, but there is no means of monetary velocity to the bottom earners.
  - mft_ 3y ago
    I don't disagree (notwithstanding the extent to which we're already in a "world where corporations and the extremely wealthy suck up all the economic benefits and we're left with massive wealth disparity"). My point is much more narrow (and simple): that there is a subset of low-end jobs which are currently unautomatable due to their nature, and this will likely not change via the GPTs. This may (tending to will, given sufficient time) change via other technological advancements.