3 ms·

This time isn't different. History has repeatedly shown us isolated examples of completely replacing the need for human labour. The industrial revolution did

by kypro 5mo ago

This time isn't different. History has repeatedly shown us isolated examples of completely replacing the need for human labour. The industrial revolution did destroy jobs, but back then labour was incomprehensibly unproductive. So much so that around 200 years ago 50% of the entire workforce worked in agriculture. This meant that although a large percentage of the total workforce was affected by the industrial revolution the total percentage of jobs that machines could do was absolutely tiny. Even where machines could typically only automate some percentage of the total work. For example, in agriculture although machines could do a lot of the work, there was still a need for humans to operate the machines. However, there were some exceptions. Texture weavers were completely replaced by machines – it didn't make them more efficient it made them unemployed. More recently human calculators have been completely replaced. And more recently still checkout staff at supermarkets are being replaced by self-service systems. Again, a self-checkout machine doesn't make a job more productive, it entirely replaces the need for a human to do it. Even today there's still relatively very few jobs which can be entirely done by machines, but for the first time ever, we're starting to see how this could change. Then the question then is what new jobs might be created if you no longer need graphic designers or VFX artists or lawyers? If humans aren't good for physical labour or mental labour then what are they good for? The assumption that humans will remain employable assumes that humans will still be able to provide some economic value which machines cannot. That humans unlike horses won't be sent to the glue factory because there will still be some economic use for us so that we can still be net providers and not a net-burden. Even if we assume there will be a small percentage of jobs which machines won't be able to do, if you have the entire workforce competing for those jobs then you'll probably be paid so poorly you might as well not have a job. Would be interested what you disagree with. Is it that you don't believe that AI will be able to replace humans entirely? If so what jobs do you think are safe? Or is it that you believe new jobs will be created? If so can you describe what these jobs might involve that machines cannot do?

stevepotter 5mo ago
This is a good take. I’d like to know how you think this is going to shake out over the next few decades
- kypro 5mo ago
  I am a hardcore AI doomer and have been for years. I've been actively prepping for very bad economic and political scenarios, plus some doom scenarios for about 5 years now. My assumption is that white collar unemployment will become a serious problem by the end of the decade, but potentially as soon as 2-3 years. I believe ASI will come within 10 years and it's hard to predict past the intelligence singularity, but my assumption would be that rapid ASI-assisted robotic advancements will make the majority of humans in developed nations unemployed within a two decades. But again, I can't really predict what will happen post-ASI. I could be very wrong if just a few variables change. The unemployment concern is the bit I'm most certain of but that also worries me the least personally, since it's by far the easiest risk to prep for. If I'm made unemployed and never find work again I'll be fine. I'm also an accelerationist when it comes to AI-driven unemployment because I think an crisis-level unemployment spike before ASI arrives is probably our only hope at getting off the AI doom train we're on before it's too late.

by kypro 5mo ago

stevepotter 5mo ago

This is a good take. I’d like to know how you think this is going to shake out over the next few decades

kypro 5mo ago
I am a hardcore AI doomer and have been for years. I've been actively prepping for very bad economic and political scenarios, plus some doom scenarios for about 5 years now. My assumption is that white collar unemployment will become a serious problem by the end of the decade, but potentially as soon as 2-3 years. I believe ASI will come within 10 years and it's hard to predict past the intelligence singularity, but my assumption would be that rapid ASI-assisted robotic advancements will make the majority of humans in developed nations unemployed within a two decades. But again, I can't really predict what will happen post-ASI. I could be very wrong if just a few variables change. The unemployment concern is the bit I'm most certain of but that also worries me the least personally, since it's by far the easiest risk to prep for. If I'm made unemployed and never find work again I'll be fine. I'm also an accelerationist when it comes to AI-driven unemployment because I think an crisis-level unemployment spike before ASI arrives is probably our only hope at getting off the AI doom train we're on before it's too late.