3 ms·

I don't think I'm a fear mongerer but the amount of reasonably qualified jobs that can be displaced by the models we have now seems huge. In the hands of a qual

I don't think I'm a fear mongerer but the amount of reasonably qualified jobs that can be displaced by the models we have now seems huge. In the hands of a qualified human AI-manager they are incredibly productive when the output doesn't have to be cutting edge. I know people who have already automated most of their own job and some colleagues through linking together disparate AI models. Think graphic designer at medium-sized law firm. Or copywriter at a scientific publisher. Those jobs are going, going, gone.

swatcoder 3y ago
If you think about this generation of text/media AI as being a kind of generalized decrompressor for some input prompt, the output has more detail than the input but never more information. So as any model becomes widespread, people will become increasingly sensitive to the sameness of easy, simple prompts. So the graphic designer at the law firm may lose their job tomorrow, but the law firm is going to have to hire a AI Image Technician in a few years so that their stuff looks like somebody actually invested in it (which matters to the law firm’s brand image or they’d not have a graphic designer in the first place). So yeah, the job market will shuffle around, but it’s unclear what that means in net number of jobs or what share of AI Image Technicians will literally have just been Graphic Designers five years earlier.
dimgl 3y ago
> I don't think I'm a fear mongerer but the amount of reasonably qualified jobs that can be displaced by the models we have now seems huge. Maybe I'm living under a rock, but I have serious doubts about this claim. > Think graphic designer at medium-sized law firm. Or copywriter at a scientific publisher. How is that even possible? Take the example of the graphic designer. You'd still need them to iterate on ideas, come up with different versions for different backgrounds, generate different file types depending on the medium and format, etc. Extremely skeptical of your claims.
- zemvpferreira 3y ago
  That's the thing, a lot of professionals do rote jobs that are necessary but not valued by their employers - such as designers at law firms. Many law firms, I believe, will settle for an AI-generated version of their old logo/masthead/website and fire their designer.
astrange 3y ago
Making someone's job more productive makes them more valuable in that job, not less.
- bondarchuk 3y ago
  There used to be 2 garbagemen on every garbage truck in my city, now they have a remote-controlled crane which is operated by a single garbageman who also drives the truck and presumably they fired the other. Garbageman 2x productive > 2x fewer garbagemen. This is a concrete example that contradicts your claim.
  - astrange 3y ago
    Or they didn't fire them and they're doing another task in the same job. Or they're on another route and they run more garbage trucks than they used to, since population has grown.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - hewlett 3y ago
    I doubt they were fired. sanitation workers have pretty strong unions

swatcoder 3y ago

If you think about this generation of text/media AI as being a kind of generalized decrompressor for some input prompt, the output has more detail than the input but never more information. So as any model becomes widespread, people will become increasingly sensitive to the sameness of easy, simple prompts. So the graphic designer at the law firm may lose their job tomorrow, but the law firm is going to have to hire a AI Image Technician in a few years so that their stuff looks like somebody actually invested in it (which matters to the law firm’s brand image or they’d not have a graphic designer in the first place). So yeah, the job market will shuffle around, but it’s unclear what that means in net number of jobs or what share of AI Image Technicians will literally have just been Graphic Designers five years earlier.

dimgl 3y ago

> I don't think I'm a fear mongerer but the amount of reasonably qualified jobs that can be displaced by the models we have now seems huge. Maybe I'm living under a rock, but I have serious doubts about this claim. > Think graphic designer at medium-sized law firm. Or copywriter at a scientific publisher. How is that even possible? Take the example of the graphic designer. You'd still need them to iterate on ideas, come up with different versions for different backgrounds, generate different file types depending on the medium and format, etc. Extremely skeptical of your claims.

zemvpferreira 3y ago
That's the thing, a lot of professionals do rote jobs that are necessary but not valued by their employers - such as designers at law firms. Many law firms, I believe, will settle for an AI-generated version of their old logo/masthead/website and fire their designer.

astrange 3y ago

Making someone's job more productive makes them more valuable in that job, not less.

bondarchuk 3y ago
There used to be 2 garbagemen on every garbage truck in my city, now they have a remote-controlled crane which is operated by a single garbageman who also drives the truck and presumably they fired the other. Garbageman 2x productive > 2x fewer garbagemen. This is a concrete example that contradicts your claim.
- astrange 3y ago
  Or they didn't fire them and they're doing another task in the same job. Or they're on another route and they run more garbage trucks than they used to, since population has grown.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- hewlett 3y ago
  I doubt they were fired. sanitation workers have pretty strong unions