5 ms·

>Should you be worried GPT5 is going to interact with social systems and destroy our society single-handedly? No absolutely not. I don't think most people are

>Should you be worried GPT5 is going to interact with social systems and destroy our society single-handedly? No absolutely not. I don't think most people are scared of GPT5. It's AGI that they're scared of. And GPT5 can destabilize a society because of how fast it could replace workers.

ekianjo 3y ago
Yawn. The computers were supposed to put us out of work. Then it was the internet. Now its AI. And despite all that the number of people employed keeps increasing and find new ways to thrive with technology.
- bberrry 3y ago
  The industrial revolution replaced muscle power with machinery. AI is finally at the place where it can replace brain-power for many tasks, and will likely keep improving. I think you are underestimating the significance of this. I don't see too many horses with jobs these days.
  - maaanu 3y ago
    Currently the AI is not even able to improve my work... How should it replace me? I think the statement "AI is finally at the place where it can replace brain-power for many tasks" is ridiculous.
    - maccard 3y ago
      I don't think your statement is true - AI can definitely improve my work and has done for a while now. It lets me be more productive, but it certainly isn't capable of being left unattended or even lightly attended to. As long as you know the limits of what you're doing, tools like ChatGPT are very helpful. In about a minute, i was able to generate a skeleton app using a go framework including tests, the infrastructure as code to deploy as a lambda, a makefile build and run it, and a buildkite pipeline that will build and deploy it all. It's also correct. Now, I can't rely on it to do everything, but it can give me an app scaffold for a tech stack I'm familiar with, quicker than I can Google for it.
      - maaanu 3y ago
        That´s good for you and I could give you some anecdotes with ChatGPT, were it failed horribly, e.g. were it failed to generate unit-tests for a simple api-call (about 10 loc)... I am sure the tools will only improve, but I don't understand all the hype/fear about it. ("We are fucked", "this is soo over", ... I think you will find more of those comments in older news-threads)
        maccard 3y ago
        I agree - it's disastrous when it goes wrong. If you ask it to generate the code for a lambda with 32 CPU's it will happily spout out nonsense rather than tell you it's not a valid think to request. That said, ive found it remarkably good at spitting out slightly modified boilerplate - like IDE templates on steroids. It's been a great tool, like a hammer. But not everything is a nail.
  - laratied 3y ago
    Sam Altman is saying we are going to see a shift from labor to capital and that is going to cause more economic inequality along with possibly breaking the social contract. It is probably nothing though...As if this gopher server is going to replace my TV someday. Give me a break. It only does text!
    - CatWChainsaw 3y ago
      Sam Altman is also a doomsday prepper because he anticipates societal collapse when the shift from capital to labor pushes economic equality past France 1789 levels.
- aatd86 3y ago
  I remember seeing a paper that explained that while the a business needed 7 employees on average to reach something like $1MM in revenue in 90s, it was now 3. So I think it still has the potential to replace some people. And even with AI and AGI eventually perhaps. This is a progression. Besides, employment is a bad measure in general if one does not compare it to others such as cost of living, poverty etc... Like non farm payroll doesn't say anything if everyone is employed living with the minimum paycheck.
  - joshuahedlund 3y ago
    > I remember seeing a paper that explained that while the a business needed 7 employees on average to reach something like $1MM in revenue in 90s, it was now 3. An alternative interpretation: while in the 90’s, 7 people could only support one $1MM business, today they can support at least two. (US unemployment is lower now than it was then.)
  - rolisz 3y ago
    How much of that is because of inflation though? 1 million in 1995 corresponds to 2 million in 2023 dollars.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
- XorNot 3y ago
  It's the difference between "some human labor involved" and "zero". Getting to zero is very hard, and has very different ramifications then the "some" quantity. As long as "some" labor is needed, then that's going to be the entire economy - it'll simply expand along whatever constraint that "some" represents. The bizarre thing lately is all these arguments people make implying the economy is maximized. That all the things that will ever be needed are currently being produced and no new growth is possible or will ever happen (despite this literally never being the case in the entire history of the human race).
- dclowd9901 3y ago
  As a thought experiment: - computers are able to churn through any problem more quickly and cheaply than people - machines are able to perform any tasks that humans can, more quickly and cheaply I’m curious what you think is left for people to _do_. We may not be there today, but at some point, both of those things can and will become true.
  - levihaku 3y ago
    Fantasies never come true.
NicoJuicy 3y ago
GPT is a tool in the toolbox. It can increase productivity, but won't replace a worker. Fyi, GPT 5 won't be coming soon and GPT 4 vs. 3.5 is not that different in terms of quality.
- whstl 3y ago
  The main worry was never about it "replacing a worker". It's about one worker + GPT replacing two or three, because of the increased productivity gains you mentioned. I've seen it happening in some fields already. First with translation, now with copywriting and GPT-4. Hiring was frozen for those areas for a while in some companies I'm familiar with.
  - sgt101 3y ago
    Also administrative assistants and secretarial support. 30 years ago maybe 1/2 of the white collar workforce and now maybe 5% or less? Not AI - but IT.
cookieperson 3y ago
I'm not scared of AGI beyond how it's likely lead to societal collapse because of human greed. I am worried about the operationalization of the current chat bot technologies and other generative AI modelling techniques for harm. You don't have to have a smart system to hurt hundreds of millions of people.
rco8786 3y ago
> And GPT5 can destabilize a society because of how fast it could replace workers. How do you know this?
bsenftner 3y ago
You miss the point: reality is far, far, immensely far more complex than you, I or anyone else realizes. Attempts to use AI to replace things, people and groups and fields, are fool's errands. They will be colossal failures. Just watch, you may be even a participant: reality is more complex than we realize, and our attempts to replace it with encompassing automation will fail.
xyzal 3y ago
If GPT5 is to put people out of work, I hope it will make unemployable the largest percentage people in the shortest amount of time. Only then there might be a chance we will change our way of measuring an individual's value by his or hers economic output.
- senttoschool 3y ago
  White collar workers, the ones who went to college and studied, will be the first to be unemployed. I'm guessing that these people are more employable than the rest of the population since they dedicated themselves to studying in college versus the ones who mess around in life.

ekianjo 3y ago

Yawn. The computers were supposed to put us out of work. Then it was the internet. Now its AI. And despite all that the number of people employed keeps increasing and find new ways to thrive with technology.

bberrry 3y ago
The industrial revolution replaced muscle power with machinery. AI is finally at the place where it can replace brain-power for many tasks, and will likely keep improving. I think you are underestimating the significance of this. I don't see too many horses with jobs these days.
- maaanu 3y ago
  Currently the AI is not even able to improve my work... How should it replace me? I think the statement "AI is finally at the place where it can replace brain-power for many tasks" is ridiculous.
  - maccard 3y ago
    I don't think your statement is true - AI can definitely improve my work and has done for a while now. It lets me be more productive, but it certainly isn't capable of being left unattended or even lightly attended to. As long as you know the limits of what you're doing, tools like ChatGPT are very helpful. In about a minute, i was able to generate a skeleton app using a go framework including tests, the infrastructure as code to deploy as a lambda, a makefile build and run it, and a buildkite pipeline that will build and deploy it all. It's also correct. Now, I can't rely on it to do everything, but it can give me an app scaffold for a tech stack I'm familiar with, quicker than I can Google for it.
    - maaanu 3y ago
      That´s good for you and I could give you some anecdotes with ChatGPT, were it failed horribly, e.g. were it failed to generate unit-tests for a simple api-call (about 10 loc)... I am sure the tools will only improve, but I don't understand all the hype/fear about it. ("We are fucked", "this is soo over", ... I think you will find more of those comments in older news-threads)
      - maccard 3y ago
        I agree - it's disastrous when it goes wrong. If you ask it to generate the code for a lambda with 32 CPU's it will happily spout out nonsense rather than tell you it's not a valid think to request. That said, ive found it remarkably good at spitting out slightly modified boilerplate - like IDE templates on steroids. It's been a great tool, like a hammer. But not everything is a nail.
- laratied 3y ago
  Sam Altman is saying we are going to see a shift from labor to capital and that is going to cause more economic inequality along with possibly breaking the social contract. It is probably nothing though...As if this gopher server is going to replace my TV someday. Give me a break. It only does text!
  - CatWChainsaw 3y ago
    Sam Altman is also a doomsday prepper because he anticipates societal collapse when the shift from capital to labor pushes economic equality past France 1789 levels.
aatd86 3y ago
I remember seeing a paper that explained that while the a business needed 7 employees on average to reach something like $1MM in revenue in 90s, it was now 3. So I think it still has the potential to replace some people. And even with AI and AGI eventually perhaps. This is a progression. Besides, employment is a bad measure in general if one does not compare it to others such as cost of living, poverty etc... Like non farm payroll doesn't say anything if everyone is employed living with the minimum paycheck.
- joshuahedlund 3y ago
  > I remember seeing a paper that explained that while the a business needed 7 employees on average to reach something like $1MM in revenue in 90s, it was now 3. An alternative interpretation: while in the 90’s, 7 people could only support one $1MM business, today they can support at least two. (US unemployment is lower now than it was then.)
- rolisz 3y ago
  How much of that is because of inflation though? 1 million in 1995 corresponds to 2 million in 2023 dollars.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
XorNot 3y ago
It's the difference between "some human labor involved" and "zero". Getting to zero is very hard, and has very different ramifications then the "some" quantity. As long as "some" labor is needed, then that's going to be the entire economy - it'll simply expand along whatever constraint that "some" represents. The bizarre thing lately is all these arguments people make implying the economy is maximized. That all the things that will ever be needed are currently being produced and no new growth is possible or will ever happen (despite this literally never being the case in the entire history of the human race).
dclowd9901 3y ago
As a thought experiment: - computers are able to churn through any problem more quickly and cheaply than people - machines are able to perform any tasks that humans can, more quickly and cheaply I’m curious what you think is left for people to _do_. We may not be there today, but at some point, both of those things can and will become true.
- levihaku 3y ago
  Fantasies never come true.

NicoJuicy 3y ago

GPT is a tool in the toolbox. It can increase productivity, but won't replace a worker. Fyi, GPT 5 won't be coming soon and GPT 4 vs. 3.5 is not that different in terms of quality.

whstl 3y ago
The main worry was never about it "replacing a worker". It's about one worker + GPT replacing two or three, because of the increased productivity gains you mentioned. I've seen it happening in some fields already. First with translation, now with copywriting and GPT-4. Hiring was frozen for those areas for a while in some companies I'm familiar with.
- sgt101 3y ago
  Also administrative assistants and secretarial support. 30 years ago maybe 1/2 of the white collar workforce and now maybe 5% or less? Not AI - but IT.

cookieperson 3y ago

I'm not scared of AGI beyond how it's likely lead to societal collapse because of human greed. I am worried about the operationalization of the current chat bot technologies and other generative AI modelling techniques for harm. You don't have to have a smart system to hurt hundreds of millions of people.

rco8786 3y ago

> And GPT5 can destabilize a society because of how fast it could replace workers. How do you know this?

bsenftner 3y ago

You miss the point: reality is far, far, immensely far more complex than you, I or anyone else realizes. Attempts to use AI to replace things, people and groups and fields, are fool's errands. They will be colossal failures. Just watch, you may be even a participant: reality is more complex than we realize, and our attempts to replace it with encompassing automation will fail.

xyzal 3y ago

If GPT5 is to put people out of work, I hope it will make unemployable the largest percentage people in the shortest amount of time. Only then there might be a chance we will change our way of measuring an individual's value by his or hers economic output.

senttoschool 3y ago
White collar workers, the ones who went to college and studied, will be the first to be unemployed. I'm guessing that these people are more employable than the rest of the population since they dedicated themselves to studying in college versus the ones who mess around in life.