6 ms·

In other words, if the people providing the AI demand the same money as the workers it replaces, it doesn't seem like society actually benefits.

• JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > if the people providing the AI demand the same money as the workers it replaces, it doesn't seem like society actually benefits Those people no longer have jobs. That sounds bad, but consider they can now do something else. (Ad infinitum this is obviously a problem. But the history of technological development provides cause for optimism in the long run.)
  • gmerc 3y ago
    The average american has 6 months of savings for unemployment. I don’t think there’s any cause for optimism on that timeline
    • JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > average american has 6 months of savings for unemployment. I don’t think there’s any cause for optimism on that timeline That's 6 months more than during the agricultural and industrial revolutions. The world isn't great, but it's getting better in the long run.
    • s1artibartfast 3y ago
      I see lots of help wanted signs. 6 days should be be enough.
    • dexwiz 3y ago
      The majority of Americans live paycheck to paycheck. On average, American's may have sixth months of savings, but that is due to the long tail of wealth distribution. Only about 1 out of 4 of them actually have six months or more of savings.
  • jacquesm 3y ago
    > the history of technological development provides cause for optimism in the long run I think it actually provides cause for pessimism: in the past those people had other kinds of jobs to move to. But this AI revolution makes it much harder to move to another job other than a menial one because a lot of the lower level office jobs are affected all at once. This creates a lot of downward pressure on fields that were already paying peanuts and where employers have realized they can now squeeze even further, either by cutting wages directly or by having more desperate entrants in the race to the bottom. Going from agricultural work into technology was an improvement, going from office work to unskilled labor is a regression. Upward mobility is limited because there is less room there anyway and there too there will be more competition for fewer jobs. So for the moment I don't really see the upside on a societal scale, even if for some individuals there are upsides.
    • JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > this AI revolution makes it much harder to move to another job other than a menial one because a lot of the lower level office jobs are affected all at once If we automate away administration, there is a bonanza to be had. Every person would in essence be a start-up team. That's enough surplus to figure out a transition. I'm not optimistic about every political system finding the solution. But some will, and then it slowly spreads.
      • dexwiz 3y ago
        Most people don't want to be start-ups. Media is overbiased towards leaders and makers. But the average person just wants to show up, get paid, and go home. They don't want to have to figure out how to constantly reinvent themselves to be marketable.
        • JumpCrisscross 3y ago
          > Most people don't want to be start-ups Most people don’t want to do work. The point is there will be terrific surpluses generated at every level of society. That gives those people choices. In some societies, they’ll horde it. But in resilient ones, they’ll recognise the long-term collective interest in ensuring everyone who can make does.
• dathinab 3y ago
  It can help if there are simply not enough workers available and it's used to boost productivity of the existing workers. through in most cases it probably will still not work/help society I.e. from what I heard public defendants in the US are notoriously overworked, if an AI could help them auto prepare all the simple straight forward cases they could do a better job. But then this is also a good example for why it probably still will not work out well. As no one will pay for that tool or they will pay for it but then expect so many more cases to be handled that it might get worse instead of better.
• jacquesm 3y ago
  Indeed it doesn't, and likely it won't. But they'll start off subsidizing it to get the employers hooked. It's always the same pattern.