3 ms·

I would say it is privilege (now) combined with denialism (for the future). Not only do you have to believe that you're in the group that benefits, but you als

I would say it is privilege (now) combined with denialism (for the future). Not only do you have to believe that you're in the group that benefits, but you also have to believe that "AI" improvement from here forward will stall out prior to the point where it goes from assisting your job to replacing it wholesale. I suspect there are many less people for whom that applies to them than there are people who believe it applies to them. It is very easy for us to exist in that denialism bubble until we see the machine nipping at our heels. And that is not even getting into second order effects, like even if you do provide AI-proof value, what happens when some significant percentage of everyone else (your potential customers) loses their income and society starts to crumble?

leptons 8mo ago
>what happens when some significant percentage of everyone else (your potential customers) loses their income and society starts to crumble? They will start to burn down data centers.
- EA-3167 8mo ago
  There’s a reason that the Musks and Thiels of the world invested in luxury doomsday bunkers, because it won’t just be property people want to burn.
  - WalterBright 8mo ago
    The Soviets used the "iron broom" (i.e. murder) on the wealthy people. It didn't make anyone better off.
    - NoOn3 8mo ago
      The Soviets history is not so simple. ;)
      - WalterBright 8mo ago
        The Soviets aren't the only country that tried that. It's never worked out anywhere it was tried.
        EA-3167 8mo ago
        I’m not arguing in favor of it, I’m just aware of how the world works. You also seem to have forgotten France among other places where the history wasn’t as grim as Russia. Frankly nothing Russia has ever done seems to make their lot better.
        WalterBright 8mo ago
        You're overlooking the Reign of Terror. Consider Pol Pot (Cambodia). How'd that work out? Cuba? How'd that go? Venezuela, anyone? For a counter-example, the US. The greatest rise in the standard of living in history, with free markets where paupers could get rich.
        EA-3167 8mo ago
        I'm not overlooking anything, including the desperate circumstances that led things like the French revolution and ensuing violence. The US went through a war to be free, plenty of people died and it could have easily gone another way. If everyone followed your advice India would still belong to the UK. I also think it's unhelpful to compare utter madness like the killing fields of Cambodia with a typical (even failed) revolution. More typical outcomes can be seen in the wake of the "Arab Spring", which arguably achieved nothing at great cost. That doesn't mean that people won't try again though, drowning people are dangerous and irrational, and I'd argue that's why leaders and people with power should work very hard to prevent those circumstances from emerging. In a country like the US it isn't that hard.
        leptons 8mo ago
        It seems to have worked out alright for the French.
- elzbardico 8mo ago
  If you believe ICE purpose is to enforce immigration law… yeah. Quite possible
josemanuel 8mo ago
In the end there will be the owners of the farmland, and whoever/whatever they employ.
tptacek 8mo ago
Most of the logic of this post will be incoherent in a world where AI has replaced software jobs wholesale. You have to pick a lane. Is it so effective that it (and the labor market more broadly) needs to be aggressively regulated, or it not very useful for anything but trolling? It can't be both.
- Wilder7977 8mo ago
  This assumes every decision-maker is a rational actor. Just today an executive was rambling about "quantum-empowered AI". These are the people who take decisions about firing workers. It is entirely possible that AI will replace many jobs while being useless (at achieving what those workers do). At least in the short-medium period. We would live in a post-scarcity utopia if big economic decisions were taken based on long-term optimal effects.
  - tptacek 8mo ago
    I'm interested in how you can tell an industry-wide job displacement story about AI, where AI isn't actually doing the job, that isn't a just-so story.
    - hyperadvanced 8mo ago
      If you wanted to tell such a story, you’d have to find examples of companies spending bazillions on new AI tooling, but failing to hit their top level OKRs. I suspect there will be at least a few of these by the end of 2026 - even a great technology can seem like an abacus in the hands of a disorganized and slow moving org.
      - tptacek 8mo ago
        The story only matters if it produces an industry-wide displacement in jobs. Failed billion-dollar IT projects are not a new thing, and don't disrupt the entire labor market. To be clear: I'm not claiming that AI rollouts won't be billion-dollar failed IT projects! They very well could be. But if that's the case, they aren't going to disrupt the labor market. Again: you have to pick a lane with the pessimism. Both lanes are valid. I buy neither of them. But recognize a coherent argument when I see one. This, however, isn't one.

leptons 8mo ago

>what happens when some significant percentage of everyone else (your potential customers) loses their income and society starts to crumble? They will start to burn down data centers.

EA-3167 8mo ago
There’s a reason that the Musks and Thiels of the world invested in luxury doomsday bunkers, because it won’t just be property people want to burn.
- WalterBright 8mo ago
  The Soviets used the "iron broom" (i.e. murder) on the wealthy people. It didn't make anyone better off.
  - NoOn3 8mo ago
    The Soviets history is not so simple. ;)
    - WalterBright 8mo ago
      The Soviets aren't the only country that tried that. It's never worked out anywhere it was tried.
      - EA-3167 8mo ago
        I’m not arguing in favor of it, I’m just aware of how the world works. You also seem to have forgotten France among other places where the history wasn’t as grim as Russia. Frankly nothing Russia has ever done seems to make their lot better.
        WalterBright 8mo ago
        You're overlooking the Reign of Terror. Consider Pol Pot (Cambodia). How'd that work out? Cuba? How'd that go? Venezuela, anyone? For a counter-example, the US. The greatest rise in the standard of living in history, with free markets where paupers could get rich.
        EA-3167 8mo ago
        I'm not overlooking anything, including the desperate circumstances that led things like the French revolution and ensuing violence. The US went through a war to be free, plenty of people died and it could have easily gone another way. If everyone followed your advice India would still belong to the UK. I also think it's unhelpful to compare utter madness like the killing fields of Cambodia with a typical (even failed) revolution. More typical outcomes can be seen in the wake of the "Arab Spring", which arguably achieved nothing at great cost. That doesn't mean that people won't try again though, drowning people are dangerous and irrational, and I'd argue that's why leaders and people with power should work very hard to prevent those circumstances from emerging. In a country like the US it isn't that hard.
      - leptons 8mo ago
        It seems to have worked out alright for the French.
elzbardico 8mo ago
If you believe ICE purpose is to enforce immigration law… yeah. Quite possible

josemanuel 8mo ago

In the end there will be the owners of the farmland, and whoever/whatever they employ.

tptacek 8mo ago

Most of the logic of this post will be incoherent in a world where AI has replaced software jobs wholesale. You have to pick a lane. Is it so effective that it (and the labor market more broadly) needs to be aggressively regulated, or it not very useful for anything but trolling? It can't be both.

Wilder7977 8mo ago
This assumes every decision-maker is a rational actor. Just today an executive was rambling about "quantum-empowered AI". These are the people who take decisions about firing workers. It is entirely possible that AI will replace many jobs while being useless (at achieving what those workers do). At least in the short-medium period. We would live in a post-scarcity utopia if big economic decisions were taken based on long-term optimal effects.
- tptacek 8mo ago
  I'm interested in how you can tell an industry-wide job displacement story about AI, where AI isn't actually doing the job, that isn't a just-so story.
  - hyperadvanced 8mo ago
    If you wanted to tell such a story, you’d have to find examples of companies spending bazillions on new AI tooling, but failing to hit their top level OKRs. I suspect there will be at least a few of these by the end of 2026 - even a great technology can seem like an abacus in the hands of a disorganized and slow moving org.
    - tptacek 8mo ago
      The story only matters if it produces an industry-wide displacement in jobs. Failed billion-dollar IT projects are not a new thing, and don't disrupt the entire labor market. To be clear: I'm not claiming that AI rollouts won't be billion-dollar failed IT projects! They very well could be. But if that's the case, they aren't going to disrupt the labor market. Again: you have to pick a lane with the pessimism. Both lanes are valid. I buy neither of them. But recognize a coherent argument when I see one. This, however, isn't one.