7 ms·

>50 years from new the career of a "coder" will evoke the same historical quaintness as does "switchboard operator" or "wainwright." And what happens to those

>50 years from new the career of a "coder" will evoke the same historical quaintness as does "switchboard operator" or "wainwright." And what happens to those coders? For that matter--what happens to all the other jobs at risk of being replaced by AI? Where are all the high paying jobs these disenfranchised laborers will flock to when their previous careers are made obsolete? We live in a highly specialized society that requires people take out large loans to learn the skills necessary for their careers. You take away their ability to provide their labor, and it now seriously threatens millions of workers from obtaining the same quality of life they once had. I seriously oppose such a future, and if that makes me a Luddite, so be it.

hackyhacky 2y ago
> And what happens to those coders? For that matter--what happens to all the other jobs at risk of being replaced by AI? Some will manage to remain in their field, most won't. > Where are all the high paying jobs these disenfranchised laborers will flock to when their previous careers are made obsolete? They don't exist. Instead they'll take low-paying jobs that can't (yet) be automated. Maybe they'll work in factories [1]. > I seriously oppose such a future, and if that makes me a Luddite, so be it. Like I said, the Luddites were right, in the short term. In the long term, we don't know. Maybe we'll live in a post-scarcity Star Trek world where human labor has been completely devalued, or maybe we'll revert to a feudal society of property owners and indentured servants. [1] https://www.newsweek.com/bessent-fired-federal-workers-manufacturing-jobs-tariffs-2056700 https://www.newsweek.com/bessent-fired-federal-workers-manuf...
- jplusequalt 2y ago
  >They don't exist. Instead they'll take low-paying jobs that can't (yet) be automated. Maybe they'll work in factories >or maybe we'll revert to a feudal society of property owners and indentured servants. We as the workers in society have the power to see that this doesn't happen. We just need to organize. Unionize. Boycott. Organize with people in your community to spread worker solidarity.
  - DrillShopper 2y ago
    There is no industry that I have worked in that fights against creating or joining unions tooth, claw, and nail quite like software engineers.
    - jplusequalt 2y ago
      I think more and more workers are warming up to unions. As wages in software continue to be oppressed, I think we'll see an increase in unionization efforts for software engineers.
      - CamperBob2 2y ago
        "Gee, it seems that people in my profession are in danger of being replaced by AI. I wonder if there's anything I can do to help speed up that process..."
        tdeck 2y ago
        The best plan is to wait until your bargaining position has been thoroughly destroyed rather than taking any action while you still have some power.
        CamperBob2 2y ago
        If that were indeed the case, your employer might not be investing so much in automation. They don't want to give up bargaining power any more than you do.
        jplusequalt 2y ago
        Worker solidarity works. Whether you agree with the methods or not is irrelevant.
      - alwa 2y ago
        Software engineer wages? Oppressed? This is work that averages well over 6 figures—for a single worker, for desk work—in the US? https://www.indeed.com/career/software-engineer/salaries https://www.indeed.com/career/software-engineer/salaries https://www.levels.fyi/t/software-engineer/locations/united-states https://www.levels.fyi/t/software-engineer/locations/united-...
educasean 2y ago
It took me a long time to master the pen tool in Photoshop. I don't mean that I spent a weekend and learned how it worked. I meant that out of all the graphic designers at the agency I was working for, I was the designer who had the most flawless pen-tool skills and thus was the envy of many. It is now an obsolete skill. You can segment anything instantly and the results are pristine. Thanks to technology one no longer needs to learn how to make the most form-fitting curves with the pen tool to be labeled a great graphic designer. It's remarkable that reading and writing, once the guarded domain of elites and religious scribes, are now everyday skills for millions. Where once a handful of monks preserved knowledge with their specialized scribing skills, today anyone can record history, share ideas, and access the thoughts of centuries with a few keystrokes. The wheel moves on and people adapt. Who knows what the "right side" of history will be, but I doubt we get there by suppressing advancements and guaranteeing job placements simply because you took out large loans to earn a degree and a license.
- antasvara 2y ago
  But what if the rate at which things change increases to the point that humans can't adapt in time? This has happened to other animals (coral has existed for millions of years and is now threatened by ocean acidification, any number of native species have been crowded out by the introduction of non-native ones, etc.). Even humans have gotten shocks like this. Things like the Black Death created social and economic upheavals that lasted generations. Now, these are all biological examples. They don't map cleanly to technogical advances, because human brains adapt much faster than immune systems that are constrained by their DNA. But the point is that complex systems can adapt and can seem to handle "anything," up until they can't. I don't know enough about AI or LLM's to say if we're reaching an inflection point. But most major crises happen when enough people say that something can't happen, and then it happens. I also don't think that discouraging innovation is the solution. But I don't also want to pretend like "humans always adapt" is a rule and not a 300,000 year old blip on the timeline of life's existence.
- nicbou 2y ago
  Automating drudgery is a good thing. It frees us up to do more important things. Automating thinking and self-expression is a lot more dangerous. We're not automating the calculation or the research, but the part where you add your soul to that information.
dankwizard 2y ago
Your opinion is wild. Hmm, millions of humans are spending a bulk of their lives plugging away at numbers on a screen. We can replace this with an AI and free them up to do literally anything else. No, let's not do that. Keep being slow ineffective calculators and lay on your death bed feeling FULFILLED!
- hackyhacky 2y ago
  You're skipping over a critical step, which is that our society allocated resources based on the labor value that an individual provides. If we free up everyone to do anything, they're not providing labor any more, so they get no resources. In other words, society needs to change in big ways, and I don't know how or if it will do that.
  - Ray20 2y ago
    >If we free up everyone to do anything Not anything, but something useful. And in exchange for that useful they'll get resources (which will become more abundant).
    - hackyhacky 2y ago
      Huh? If AI can do any job cheaper and better than a person can, why would anyone hire a person? What "useful" skill could a person exchange for resources in an era when computers write code, drive cars, fight wars, and cook food?
      - Ray20 2y ago
        But you answer your own question: the only situation in which it makes no sense to hire another person to satisfy a need is when that need has already been satisfied in another way. And if all needs are already satisfied... Why worry about work? The purpose of work is to satisfy needs. If needs are satisfied, there is no need for work.
        2y ago

hackyhacky 2y ago

> And what happens to those coders? For that matter--what happens to all the other jobs at risk of being replaced by AI? Some will manage to remain in their field, most won't. > Where are all the high paying jobs these disenfranchised laborers will flock to when their previous careers are made obsolete? They don't exist. Instead they'll take low-paying jobs that can't (yet) be automated. Maybe they'll work in factories [1]. > I seriously oppose such a future, and if that makes me a Luddite, so be it. Like I said, the Luddites were right, in the short term. In the long term, we don't know. Maybe we'll live in a post-scarcity Star Trek world where human labor has been completely devalued, or maybe we'll revert to a feudal society of property owners and indentured servants. [1] https://www.newsweek.com/bessent-fired-federal-workers-manufacturing-jobs-tariffs-2056700 https://www.newsweek.com/bessent-fired-federal-workers-manuf...

jplusequalt 2y ago
>They don't exist. Instead they'll take low-paying jobs that can't (yet) be automated. Maybe they'll work in factories >or maybe we'll revert to a feudal society of property owners and indentured servants. We as the workers in society have the power to see that this doesn't happen. We just need to organize. Unionize. Boycott. Organize with people in your community to spread worker solidarity.
- DrillShopper 2y ago
  There is no industry that I have worked in that fights against creating or joining unions tooth, claw, and nail quite like software engineers.
  - jplusequalt 2y ago
    I think more and more workers are warming up to unions. As wages in software continue to be oppressed, I think we'll see an increase in unionization efforts for software engineers.
    - CamperBob2 2y ago
      "Gee, it seems that people in my profession are in danger of being replaced by AI. I wonder if there's anything I can do to help speed up that process..."
      - tdeck 2y ago
        The best plan is to wait until your bargaining position has been thoroughly destroyed rather than taking any action while you still have some power.
        CamperBob2 2y ago
        If that were indeed the case, your employer might not be investing so much in automation. They don't want to give up bargaining power any more than you do.
      - jplusequalt 2y ago
        Worker solidarity works. Whether you agree with the methods or not is irrelevant.
    - alwa 2y ago
      Software engineer wages? Oppressed? This is work that averages well over 6 figures—for a single worker, for desk work—in the US? https://www.indeed.com/career/software-engineer/salaries https://www.indeed.com/career/software-engineer/salaries https://www.levels.fyi/t/software-engineer/locations/united-states https://www.levels.fyi/t/software-engineer/locations/united-...

educasean 2y ago

It took me a long time to master the pen tool in Photoshop. I don't mean that I spent a weekend and learned how it worked. I meant that out of all the graphic designers at the agency I was working for, I was the designer who had the most flawless pen-tool skills and thus was the envy of many. It is now an obsolete skill. You can segment anything instantly and the results are pristine. Thanks to technology one no longer needs to learn how to make the most form-fitting curves with the pen tool to be labeled a great graphic designer. It's remarkable that reading and writing, once the guarded domain of elites and religious scribes, are now everyday skills for millions. Where once a handful of monks preserved knowledge with their specialized scribing skills, today anyone can record history, share ideas, and access the thoughts of centuries with a few keystrokes. The wheel moves on and people adapt. Who knows what the "right side" of history will be, but I doubt we get there by suppressing advancements and guaranteeing job placements simply because you took out large loans to earn a degree and a license.

antasvara 2y ago
But what if the rate at which things change increases to the point that humans can't adapt in time? This has happened to other animals (coral has existed for millions of years and is now threatened by ocean acidification, any number of native species have been crowded out by the introduction of non-native ones, etc.). Even humans have gotten shocks like this. Things like the Black Death created social and economic upheavals that lasted generations. Now, these are all biological examples. They don't map cleanly to technogical advances, because human brains adapt much faster than immune systems that are constrained by their DNA. But the point is that complex systems can adapt and can seem to handle "anything," up until they can't. I don't know enough about AI or LLM's to say if we're reaching an inflection point. But most major crises happen when enough people say that something can't happen, and then it happens. I also don't think that discouraging innovation is the solution. But I don't also want to pretend like "humans always adapt" is a rule and not a 300,000 year old blip on the timeline of life's existence.
nicbou 2y ago
Automating drudgery is a good thing. It frees us up to do more important things. Automating thinking and self-expression is a lot more dangerous. We're not automating the calculation or the research, but the part where you add your soul to that information.

dankwizard 2y ago

Your opinion is wild. Hmm, millions of humans are spending a bulk of their lives plugging away at numbers on a screen. We can replace this with an AI and free them up to do literally anything else. No, let's not do that. Keep being slow ineffective calculators and lay on your death bed feeling FULFILLED!

hackyhacky 2y ago
You're skipping over a critical step, which is that our society allocated resources based on the labor value that an individual provides. If we free up everyone to do anything, they're not providing labor any more, so they get no resources. In other words, society needs to change in big ways, and I don't know how or if it will do that.
- Ray20 2y ago
  >If we free up everyone to do anything Not anything, but something useful. And in exchange for that useful they'll get resources (which will become more abundant).
  - hackyhacky 2y ago
    Huh? If AI can do any job cheaper and better than a person can, why would anyone hire a person? What "useful" skill could a person exchange for resources in an era when computers write code, drive cars, fight wars, and cook food?
    - Ray20 2y ago
      But you answer your own question: the only situation in which it makes no sense to hire another person to satisfy a need is when that need has already been satisfied in another way. And if all needs are already satisfied... Why worry about work? The purpose of work is to satisfy needs. If needs are satisfied, there is no need for work.
      - 2y ago