5 ms·

The AI jobs crisis is here, now

35 points by devonnull 1y ago

orionblastar 1y ago
I wonder what happens when the AI starts to hallucinate? https://www.sify.com/ai-analytics/the-hilarious-and-horrifying-hallucinations-of-ai/ https://www.sify.com/ai-analytics/the-hilarious-and-horrifyi...
- sigwinch 1y ago
  According to the article, pathology and double entendres are now ungated on Duolingo.
DanAtC 1y ago
Any time I see AI "art" I assume the worst: https://newsocialist.org.uk/transmissions/ai-the-new-aesthetics-of-fascism/ https://newsocialist.org.uk/transmissions/ai-the-new-aesthet...
- k310 1y ago
  Art? A friend of 40 years asked me if my beautiful sunset photo was real. I sent lens data and the image was EXIF tagged. Nothing is real anymore? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43942930#43943277 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43942930#43943277
  - mingus88 1y ago
    The one bright spot I see is that the internet as a source of information is soon over. In the 90s, the internet promised a utopia connecting people across the globe instantly where censorship was damage to be routed around, and information was free. In 2025, the internet is a dystopia of misinformation, making everyone dumber and easier to manipulate. Oligarchs own all the platforms and nobody even cares. The faster that AI ruins it the better. We go back to creating personal connections, building local communities. Happier people making impact in each others lives for real.
    - OutOfHere 1y ago
      That makes no sense. Niche topics require global connections. There just aren't enough locals for niche topics. Also, one can't really build something that lasts without knowing the whole truth about it. The internet still is the best place to discover the truth, although it takes some effort and corroboration.
      - mingus88 1y ago
        The nice thing about being old is that I lived in a world before the internet. We did fine. I feel bad for people who grew up “digitally native” and seem shocked at the concept and can’t even comprehend living without being online 24x7
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
tmsh 1y ago
I think it’s more like AI empowers and 3x’s the creatives that learn to use it. In all fields where highly intelligent auto-complete is useful it replaces 2/3rds of who you need to hire. The key is to learn to use the tools. As it has always been with new tools like computers etc.
- pupppet 1y ago
  It's not just a new tool. It replaces the person using the tool, and we're all being conditioned into believing whatever AI churns out, which will never be anything more than average, is good enough.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
- yuppire 1y ago
  Totally! That’s why those “creatives” who used llms to write their movie won 3x as many Oscars, and the ones who used them to write their tv show won 3x as many Emmys, and the ones who used them to write their music won 3x as many Grammys!
musicale 1y ago
One might imagine that the layoff-based business model for AI could eventually backfire once people discover how bad the output is, but the incentives seem aligned for a society with heaps of low-quality, AI-generated garbage and a major unemployment/underemployment.
kasperni 1y ago
With the current speed of AI progress. We are probably 1 or 2 years away from any generic AI being able to teach languages better than Duolingo.
- PNewling 1y ago
  From the state of Duolingo, I think we've already passed that point by a bit. And I'm not even a huge AI-replacement-alarmist. It's more that Duolingo is not optimal (or even good/great) at teaching language. I will give it its due, it does help with vocabulary memorization.
cadamsdotcom 1y ago
No one owes anyone a job. Systems like that have been tried and they don’t work. This is going to be a bumpy transition but at the other end the jobs that survive will be creative and fulfilling - for example, people automating work, every day, so (barring corner cases) no one has to do that task again. Putting AI in and letting it do a bad job is a great way for AI to be in there eventually doing a good job. Humans may not be needed to do the work but they will be needed to tend to the systems and automations driving the AI - and/or to the agents driving the AI. They’ll be needed to improve what the AI is doing, handle corner cases, and add new use cases. And they’ll fill in the gaps - until those can be automated too. Once everyone’s doing that, it’ll be an automation race. The more humans a company has the more capability it will have to automate more work. Then we’ll be back to full steam hiring, but the skill sets will be very different. At places like Duolingo, job titles like “AI automation specialist” will replace “translator”. It’s going to be okay, we will get through this!
- glimshe 1y ago
  While I mostly agree with you, I also believe there is no guarantee that a human will always be needed to tend the AI. Your argument assumes an arbitrary capability level for the AI, one that is comfortable for the human. It's quite possible also that humans won't be needed at all for many, if not most, tasks.
- Grimblewald 1y ago
  Perhaps, but if we wont let people kill themsleves, we do at least owe them a livable income.
  - cadamsdotcom 1y ago
    Perhaps - but this “we” you speak of has to be better defined before others can agree or disagree with you.
    - Grimblewald 1y ago
      we being a democratic majority, or whatever group structure holds power, that hopefully "we" are a part of. If we're not a part of any power structure, then why are "we" even talking about it?
BergAndCo 1y ago
[dead]

35 points by devonnull 1y ago

I wonder what happens when the AI starts to hallucinate? https://www.sify.com/ai-analytics/the-hilarious-and-horrifying-hallucinations-of-ai/ https://www.sify.com/ai-analytics/the-hilarious-and-horrifyi...

sigwinch 1y ago
According to the article, pathology and double entendres are now ungated on Duolingo.

DanAtC 1y ago

Any time I see AI "art" I assume the worst: https://newsocialist.org.uk/transmissions/ai-the-new-aesthetics-of-fascism/ https://newsocialist.org.uk/transmissions/ai-the-new-aesthet...

k310 1y ago
Art? A friend of 40 years asked me if my beautiful sunset photo was real. I sent lens data and the image was EXIF tagged. Nothing is real anymore? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43942930#43943277 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43942930#43943277
- mingus88 1y ago
  The one bright spot I see is that the internet as a source of information is soon over. In the 90s, the internet promised a utopia connecting people across the globe instantly where censorship was damage to be routed around, and information was free. In 2025, the internet is a dystopia of misinformation, making everyone dumber and easier to manipulate. Oligarchs own all the platforms and nobody even cares. The faster that AI ruins it the better. We go back to creating personal connections, building local communities. Happier people making impact in each others lives for real.
  - OutOfHere 1y ago
    That makes no sense. Niche topics require global connections. There just aren't enough locals for niche topics. Also, one can't really build something that lasts without knowing the whole truth about it. The internet still is the best place to discover the truth, although it takes some effort and corroboration.
    - mingus88 1y ago
      The nice thing about being old is that I lived in a world before the internet. We did fine. I feel bad for people who grew up “digitally native” and seem shocked at the concept and can’t even comprehend living without being online 24x7

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

tmsh 1y ago

I think it’s more like AI empowers and 3x’s the creatives that learn to use it. In all fields where highly intelligent auto-complete is useful it replaces 2/3rds of who you need to hire. The key is to learn to use the tools. As it has always been with new tools like computers etc.

pupppet 1y ago
It's not just a new tool. It replaces the person using the tool, and we're all being conditioned into believing whatever AI churns out, which will never be anything more than average, is good enough.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
yuppire 1y ago
Totally! That’s why those “creatives” who used llms to write their movie won 3x as many Oscars, and the ones who used them to write their tv show won 3x as many Emmys, and the ones who used them to write their music won 3x as many Grammys!

musicale 1y ago

One might imagine that the layoff-based business model for AI could eventually backfire once people discover how bad the output is, but the incentives seem aligned for a society with heaps of low-quality, AI-generated garbage and a major unemployment/underemployment.

kasperni 1y ago

With the current speed of AI progress. We are probably 1 or 2 years away from any generic AI being able to teach languages better than Duolingo.

PNewling 1y ago
From the state of Duolingo, I think we've already passed that point by a bit. And I'm not even a huge AI-replacement-alarmist. It's more that Duolingo is not optimal (or even good/great) at teaching language. I will give it its due, it does help with vocabulary memorization.

cadamsdotcom 1y ago

No one owes anyone a job. Systems like that have been tried and they don’t work. This is going to be a bumpy transition but at the other end the jobs that survive will be creative and fulfilling - for example, people automating work, every day, so (barring corner cases) no one has to do that task again. Putting AI in and letting it do a bad job is a great way for AI to be in there eventually doing a good job. Humans may not be needed to do the work but they will be needed to tend to the systems and automations driving the AI - and/or to the agents driving the AI. They’ll be needed to improve what the AI is doing, handle corner cases, and add new use cases. And they’ll fill in the gaps - until those can be automated too. Once everyone’s doing that, it’ll be an automation race. The more humans a company has the more capability it will have to automate more work. Then we’ll be back to full steam hiring, but the skill sets will be very different. At places like Duolingo, job titles like “AI automation specialist” will replace “translator”. It’s going to be okay, we will get through this!

glimshe 1y ago
While I mostly agree with you, I also believe there is no guarantee that a human will always be needed to tend the AI. Your argument assumes an arbitrary capability level for the AI, one that is comfortable for the human. It's quite possible also that humans won't be needed at all for many, if not most, tasks.
Grimblewald 1y ago
Perhaps, but if we wont let people kill themsleves, we do at least owe them a livable income.
- cadamsdotcom 1y ago
  Perhaps - but this “we” you speak of has to be better defined before others can agree or disagree with you.
  - Grimblewald 1y ago
    we being a democratic majority, or whatever group structure holds power, that hopefully "we" are a part of. If we're not a part of any power structure, then why are "we" even talking about it?

BergAndCo 1y ago

[dead]