4 ms·

Having worked for Teleperformance for 3 months in 2002'ish... i can honestly say they won't be missed. Horrible horrible experience. Sure, lots of people will l

Having worked for Teleperformance for 3 months in 2002'ish... i can honestly say they won't be missed. Horrible horrible experience. Sure, lots of people will lose their jobs, but it has to happen, better it happens fast and then we deal with the next phase of our economy whatever that entails than a slow churn, like a frog in a boiling pot where people die from starvation because nobody is aware of the changes... i.e. a little accelerationism might be okay in this instance to figure out what we do when 95% of us don't "need" to work...

wnevets 3y ago
> Sure, lots of people will lose their jobs, but it has to happen, better it happens fast and then we deal with the next phase of our economy whatever that entails than a slow churn, I am glad that is a sacrifice you are willing to make.
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  This is a sociopolitical problem. Tax automation and make safety nets stronger so people don’t suffer for those who control the robots. There are more people with votes than those who would benefit from winner takes all with ML/AI.
  - ToucanLoucan 3y ago
    It isn't a lack of knowing this that's the issue, people have been advocating for these things since the 90's. The problem is the people with power are the same people who control the robots and are therefore disincentivized to cost themselves money in exchange for allowing workers they don't give a fuck about to continue to live.
    - toomuchtodo 3y ago
      Do you think they have the self awareness to solve the problem before the situation potentially devolves into violence? I certainly hope so, but could go either way. The more people who have nothing to lose, the more inherent system volatility. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution
      - ToucanLoucan 3y ago
        If the last 2 decades or so are anything to go by, those in power seem perfectly content to ride out the collapse banking on the fact that they have enough money to pay enough private security to keep themselves from getting [ CENSORED ].
  - gremlinsinc 3y ago
    better yet, enact a land value tax, on top of automation taxes, which could probably cover all the needs of society, also have a VAT to get back some of the money doled out, but do away with income taxes. Then of course universal basic income + healthcare should be a given. Then we need to figure out how we can retain value as a society when AI can do most jobs, personally I hope that society devolves into two main professions after that -- entertainers, and scientists. Sure, Super AGI can outthink any scientist, but the more science thinkers the better IMHO. I think a huge swath of society will also be tied up in virtual worlds, which is probably good so we don't tick off a war against AI, if we stay out of each others way, then there's no need for our annihilation, or being turned into a zoo.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
- thekevan 3y ago
  Do you have the same empathy for lamp lighters? Would you have condemned electric street lights in favor for the sake of lamplighters and oil lamp makers having jobs?
  - jakelazaroff 3y ago
    First of all, yes — of course I'd have empathy for someone whose living was decimated by forces beyond their control! To your second question: the societal benefits of electric light are pretty clear. The societal benefits of predatory loan companies using robots for their call centers are… dubious, to say the least.
- justsomehnguy 3y ago
  Do you think what coachmen should still be able to do their honest work to bring the bread home? What about lynotype workers?
  - silverquiet 3y ago
    As male labor force participation falls, nothing good follows.
    - gremlinsinc 3y ago
      why does "male" matter? I am male, but I don't see why the gender of someone in the workforce matters. I do think parents should be able to have one person as 100% homemaker, but IDGAF if that's the man or the woman, or one of a lesbian or gay couple, each family has different dynamics and that's okay.
      - silverquiet 3y ago
        I don't think in the workforce matters as much as out of the workforce actually. If you look at crime statistics, you'll see that it skews highly gendered.
ActionHank 3y ago
Seems pretty narrow minded to me to be wishing for an economic revolution that will only benefit the wealthy before there are any support systems in place for people displaced.
- gremlinsinc 3y ago
  My point is the way govt moves, if it doesn't happen fast - like a huge emergency they won't act at ALL to make any changes, they'll just build walled fortresses for the rich, and the rest get Mad Max conditions. Rip the bandaid off, and they'll need to do something...this will dwarf all the issues with Covid-19, and they at least got some stimuli packages through..
deprecative 3y ago
That's the thing, though. Nothing will change until realities change for our owners. Until that happens the status quo will carry on. Only until the government and wealth can no longer generate requisite money from labor will anything be done and it will be only the bare minimum.
- gremlinsinc 3y ago
  our owners lose monopoly if there's nobody left to buy goods, and their debts come due... they NEED consumers, and if there are no jobs, there's going to have to be a different way to ... barter/trade/buy/sell/etc. Star trek society, post scarcity, or Mad Max (everyone to their own, the rich in fortresses of stone).
onlyrealcuzzo 3y ago
> a little accelerationism might be okay in this instance to figure out what we do when 95% of us don't "need" to work... The vast majority of jobs people do aren't being replaced by AI. When AI can treat your medical conditions, repair your infrastructure, build new houses, construct renewable energy sources, move your goods, fight your wars, watch your kids while you're gone, cook your food, mow your lawn, entertain you, etc - then we'll need to worry about what everyone's going to do. That's not happening any time within the next 20 years.
- gremlinsinc 3y ago
  there's ai robots that can build a rock retaining wall, constructing pretty much anything will be done in 5 years tops.. AGI is 2030 at the latest. None of the things you mentioned cannot be done by ai or robots and easily I might add. Every one of them is eons easier than driving a car.
  - xkqd 3y ago
    > constructing pretty much anything will be done in 5 years tops.. I’d be willing to wager my left leg against this claim.
    - gremlinsinc 3y ago
      Have you seen the new robots openai has? They're already pretty jetson-like, and they're fast, not slow like google's demo with Palm2. Embodied AI systems will be able to complete a multitude of tasks before long, it's being emodied that gives them that edge and maybe even pushes towards true AGI, as we learn through all our senses, and different perceptions of the world, it's easier to learn from a full body experience, I'd imagine than a more dumbed down single-modality way. The top researchers at OpenAI and Google who've made claims and expressed their own fears about AI, aren't doing it for publicity, they know better than we could possibly know what's coming -they already have seen the next generation, like gpt5 or maybe even gpt6.. I'm not a Sam Altman fan boy, but I think he's legit when he says society needs to prepare, because changes are coming we can't rollback, and that will affect us world-wide.. I'd bet my left nut that immortality tech is solved 1-2 years following the first generation of AGI, and probably all cancers, and a myriad of other medical issues.
xkqd 3y ago
This accelerationism would leave tens of millions around the globe without a job or way to provide for themselves or families. Furthermore, call center work usually is taken up by the less educated and more financially exposed - it’s not like retooling a software engineer that has 3 years runway saved up and the proven analytical skills to change industries entirely. Dang this is screwed up to even read
- gremlinsinc 3y ago
  Scenario A. 10 million people lose jobs in a year. Scenario B. 20 million people lose jobs over 10 years. Which of these do you think congress is going to act on... which one of these will get bigger headlines.. the gradual burn, or the fast 10mill? That's the world we live in, if they can shove it down the road to the next generation they will!
  - xkqd 3y ago
    I think those 20 million would be better off having 10 years advance notice so they can wrap up their career, retool etc. I think they’d agree too. The beauty of this is that they can decide for themselves with their votes and actions, but I think they’d take up pitchforks and arms if that 10 million were fired in a years time. I wouldn’t even blame them.
    - gremlinsinc 3y ago
      Except after 10 years, they get nothing. No govt' subsidies, nothing it's just normalized. Congress doesn't need to respond to slow job loss, it's just accepted. So what do they do when they have nothing, and nobody gives a shit, and the rich have had time to move to their fortresses of solitude? This way it's a national crisis, it's on every talk show and news outlet, and it becomes the number one issue in politics for everyone next to maybe climate change. Which kinda adds to the pot because of people needing to migrate also because some places will not be habitable any longer.
jakelazaroff 3y ago
> Sure, lots of people will lose their jobs, but it has to happen Nothing "has" to happen. It's not inevitable; it's a choice that we're making as a society.
- gremlinsinc 3y ago
  When self-driving cars didn't materialize by 2020... I was thinking there's no way that prediction that 50% of jobs disappearing by the 2020's was going to become reality, then chatGPT showed up, and all the other generative AI's that already are replacing artists, designers, call center employees, etc... it's inevitable that we continue down this road, because that's what we do. There's no way we just say, whelp, i think we're done with AI, what's next ? ... Sticking your head in the sand hoping for something better, doesn't change the reality.
  - jakelazaroff 3y ago
    I'm not sticking my head in the sand, I'm just not letting you/me/society off the hook for our agency here. It's not inevitable that we continue down this road — it requires the active and voluntary participation of millions of people. There is nothing compelling us to build a society like this. It doesn't have to happen. It is our choice to do so.

wnevets 3y ago

> Sure, lots of people will lose their jobs, but it has to happen, better it happens fast and then we deal with the next phase of our economy whatever that entails than a slow churn, I am glad that is a sacrifice you are willing to make.

toomuchtodo 3y ago
This is a sociopolitical problem. Tax automation and make safety nets stronger so people don’t suffer for those who control the robots. There are more people with votes than those who would benefit from winner takes all with ML/AI.
- ToucanLoucan 3y ago
  It isn't a lack of knowing this that's the issue, people have been advocating for these things since the 90's. The problem is the people with power are the same people who control the robots and are therefore disincentivized to cost themselves money in exchange for allowing workers they don't give a fuck about to continue to live.
  - toomuchtodo 3y ago
    Do you think they have the self awareness to solve the problem before the situation potentially devolves into violence? I certainly hope so, but could go either way. The more people who have nothing to lose, the more inherent system volatility. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution
    - ToucanLoucan 3y ago
      If the last 2 decades or so are anything to go by, those in power seem perfectly content to ride out the collapse banking on the fact that they have enough money to pay enough private security to keep themselves from getting [ CENSORED ].
- gremlinsinc 3y ago
  better yet, enact a land value tax, on top of automation taxes, which could probably cover all the needs of society, also have a VAT to get back some of the money doled out, but do away with income taxes. Then of course universal basic income + healthcare should be a given. Then we need to figure out how we can retain value as a society when AI can do most jobs, personally I hope that society devolves into two main professions after that -- entertainers, and scientists. Sure, Super AGI can outthink any scientist, but the more science thinkers the better IMHO. I think a huge swath of society will also be tied up in virtual worlds, which is probably good so we don't tick off a war against AI, if we stay out of each others way, then there's no need for our annihilation, or being turned into a zoo.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
thekevan 3y ago
Do you have the same empathy for lamp lighters? Would you have condemned electric street lights in favor for the sake of lamplighters and oil lamp makers having jobs?
- jakelazaroff 3y ago
  First of all, yes — of course I'd have empathy for someone whose living was decimated by forces beyond their control! To your second question: the societal benefits of electric light are pretty clear. The societal benefits of predatory loan companies using robots for their call centers are… dubious, to say the least.
justsomehnguy 3y ago
Do you think what coachmen should still be able to do their honest work to bring the bread home? What about lynotype workers?
- silverquiet 3y ago
  As male labor force participation falls, nothing good follows.
  - gremlinsinc 3y ago
    why does "male" matter? I am male, but I don't see why the gender of someone in the workforce matters. I do think parents should be able to have one person as 100% homemaker, but IDGAF if that's the man or the woman, or one of a lesbian or gay couple, each family has different dynamics and that's okay.
    - silverquiet 3y ago
      I don't think in the workforce matters as much as out of the workforce actually. If you look at crime statistics, you'll see that it skews highly gendered.

ActionHank 3y ago

Seems pretty narrow minded to me to be wishing for an economic revolution that will only benefit the wealthy before there are any support systems in place for people displaced.

gremlinsinc 3y ago
My point is the way govt moves, if it doesn't happen fast - like a huge emergency they won't act at ALL to make any changes, they'll just build walled fortresses for the rich, and the rest get Mad Max conditions. Rip the bandaid off, and they'll need to do something...this will dwarf all the issues with Covid-19, and they at least got some stimuli packages through..

deprecative 3y ago

That's the thing, though. Nothing will change until realities change for our owners. Until that happens the status quo will carry on. Only until the government and wealth can no longer generate requisite money from labor will anything be done and it will be only the bare minimum.

gremlinsinc 3y ago
our owners lose monopoly if there's nobody left to buy goods, and their debts come due... they NEED consumers, and if there are no jobs, there's going to have to be a different way to ... barter/trade/buy/sell/etc. Star trek society, post scarcity, or Mad Max (everyone to their own, the rich in fortresses of stone).

onlyrealcuzzo 3y ago

> a little accelerationism might be okay in this instance to figure out what we do when 95% of us don't "need" to work... The vast majority of jobs people do aren't being replaced by AI. When AI can treat your medical conditions, repair your infrastructure, build new houses, construct renewable energy sources, move your goods, fight your wars, watch your kids while you're gone, cook your food, mow your lawn, entertain you, etc - then we'll need to worry about what everyone's going to do. That's not happening any time within the next 20 years.

gremlinsinc 3y ago
there's ai robots that can build a rock retaining wall, constructing pretty much anything will be done in 5 years tops.. AGI is 2030 at the latest. None of the things you mentioned cannot be done by ai or robots and easily I might add. Every one of them is eons easier than driving a car.
- xkqd 3y ago
  > constructing pretty much anything will be done in 5 years tops.. I’d be willing to wager my left leg against this claim.
  - gremlinsinc 3y ago
    Have you seen the new robots openai has? They're already pretty jetson-like, and they're fast, not slow like google's demo with Palm2. Embodied AI systems will be able to complete a multitude of tasks before long, it's being emodied that gives them that edge and maybe even pushes towards true AGI, as we learn through all our senses, and different perceptions of the world, it's easier to learn from a full body experience, I'd imagine than a more dumbed down single-modality way. The top researchers at OpenAI and Google who've made claims and expressed their own fears about AI, aren't doing it for publicity, they know better than we could possibly know what's coming -they already have seen the next generation, like gpt5 or maybe even gpt6.. I'm not a Sam Altman fan boy, but I think he's legit when he says society needs to prepare, because changes are coming we can't rollback, and that will affect us world-wide.. I'd bet my left nut that immortality tech is solved 1-2 years following the first generation of AGI, and probably all cancers, and a myriad of other medical issues.

xkqd 3y ago

This accelerationism would leave tens of millions around the globe without a job or way to provide for themselves or families. Furthermore, call center work usually is taken up by the less educated and more financially exposed - it’s not like retooling a software engineer that has 3 years runway saved up and the proven analytical skills to change industries entirely. Dang this is screwed up to even read

gremlinsinc 3y ago
Scenario A. 10 million people lose jobs in a year. Scenario B. 20 million people lose jobs over 10 years. Which of these do you think congress is going to act on... which one of these will get bigger headlines.. the gradual burn, or the fast 10mill? That's the world we live in, if they can shove it down the road to the next generation they will!
- xkqd 3y ago
  I think those 20 million would be better off having 10 years advance notice so they can wrap up their career, retool etc. I think they’d agree too. The beauty of this is that they can decide for themselves with their votes and actions, but I think they’d take up pitchforks and arms if that 10 million were fired in a years time. I wouldn’t even blame them.
  - gremlinsinc 3y ago
    Except after 10 years, they get nothing. No govt' subsidies, nothing it's just normalized. Congress doesn't need to respond to slow job loss, it's just accepted. So what do they do when they have nothing, and nobody gives a shit, and the rich have had time to move to their fortresses of solitude? This way it's a national crisis, it's on every talk show and news outlet, and it becomes the number one issue in politics for everyone next to maybe climate change. Which kinda adds to the pot because of people needing to migrate also because some places will not be habitable any longer.

jakelazaroff 3y ago

> Sure, lots of people will lose their jobs, but it has to happen Nothing "has" to happen. It's not inevitable; it's a choice that we're making as a society.

gremlinsinc 3y ago
When self-driving cars didn't materialize by 2020... I was thinking there's no way that prediction that 50% of jobs disappearing by the 2020's was going to become reality, then chatGPT showed up, and all the other generative AI's that already are replacing artists, designers, call center employees, etc... it's inevitable that we continue down this road, because that's what we do. There's no way we just say, whelp, i think we're done with AI, what's next ? ... Sticking your head in the sand hoping for something better, doesn't change the reality.
- jakelazaroff 3y ago
  I'm not sticking my head in the sand, I'm just not letting you/me/society off the hook for our agency here. It's not inevitable that we continue down this road — it requires the active and voluntary participation of millions of people. There is nothing compelling us to build a society like this. It doesn't have to happen. It is our choice to do so.