5 ms·
Good to know, but for me, the study is more convincing than your anecdote.
by emp17344 1y ago
Good to know, but for me, the study is more convincing than your anecdote.
- daft_pink 1y agoI think it's the fact that they say zero effect, which is obviously not true.
- emp17344 1y agoThey didn’t say there’s literally zero effect, they said that there’s negligible disruption to job market from the introduction of AI.
- maxfurman 1y agoEven a net zero effect would mean some people were replaced with AI and the same amount of people were hired to use AI
- scottlamb 1y agoBe careful with "they". The "zero effect" in the headline was likely written by a Register editor, two steps removed from the authors of the study. I think the quote in the fourth paragraph is more telling: > "Overall, our metrics indicate that the broader labor market has not experienced a discernible disruption since ChatGPT’s release 33 months ago, undercutting fears that AI automation is currently eroding the demand for cognitive labor across the economy," said Martha Gimbel, Molly Kinder, Joshua Kendall, and Maddie Lee in a report summary.