4 ms·
If you look closer into history -- or ask your favorite AI to summarize ;-) -- about what new jobs were created when existing jobs were replaced by automation,
by keeda 8mo ago
If you look closer into history -- or ask your favorite AI to summarize ;-) -- about what new jobs were created when existing jobs were replaced by automation, the answer is broadly the same every time: the newer jobs required higher-level a) cognitive, b) technical or c) social skills.
That is it. There is no other dimension to upskill along. (Would actually be relieved if someone can find counter-examples!)
LLMs are good at all three. And improving extremely rapidly.
This time is different.
- qsera 8mo agoLLM's are just a better search tool. Nothing more.
- azan_ 8mo agoYou keep repeating it, but it’s obviously wrong in practice. I guess you can make an argument that sending WhatsApp message or generating video is just a search job but that’s not a great argument for why humans wouldn’t get replaced - it doesn’t matter if LLMs can be reduced to search tools, but if their output is good enough approximation of human worker output. If it is then it has a chance to replace human, even if you call it glorified search tool.
- qsera 8mo agoYes, a better search tool will automate a lot of currently employed manual search jobs.
- generallyjosh 8mo agoYou say this as though it's a pithy point. Might as well say humans are just a better search tool - it's true in the exact same sense you're using. All humans do is absorb information, then search through our memories and apply that information in relevant contexts to affect the world
- qsera 8mo ago> pithy point. Not really, because I do think all knowledge can be obtained by searching true randomness.