4 ms·

So, more skynet leads to more real jobs? I am confused. Wasn't the initial claim that AI kills all jobs? I feel the claim right now is not really correct. One

So, more skynet leads to more real jobs? I am confused. Wasn't the initial claim that AI kills all jobs? I feel the claim right now is not really correct. One needs to do a thorough analysis of the whole job market across different countries, say, over 5 years. Or at the least 3 years but very complete and unbiased either way.

deleted 3mo ago
[deleted]
protocolture 3mo ago
The claim is and always has been that automation increases net jobs. There's never been an automation revolution that worked otherwise. The counter claim that LLMs were special for some reason has never been supported. And a lot of its proponents have other axes to grind, like UBI, Socialism, Communism etc. It would suit their worldview for this time to be different, and so thats the message they push.
- somenameforme 3mo ago
  I'm not entirely sure that's the claim or conclusion. Like they said the companies increasing headcount are also being pumped full of $$$. That's a non-permanent state of affairs because it's heavily fueled by speculation about possible future scenarios which may or may not come to pass. I think the bigger conclusion is that LLMs are, for now, having a minimal effect on the labor market. And I think this makes sense. In spite of individual claims of 10x productivity boost or whatever, their effect on the bottom line of companies seems to remain quite unclear, at best. On the contrary the token-maxing catastrophe seems to have resulted in companies becoming far more price conscious towards LLM usage.
  - Shitty-kitty 3mo ago
    I't has been very good as suppressing wages.
- Retric 3mo ago
  That’s not supported by the evidence. Current rates of employment are well below historic levels. In preindustrial societies nearly everyone was working to support themselves and their families, these days a huge percentage of the population is in education, retirement, prison, disability, etc. The only way jobs have kept up with automation is when you ignore population growth, but more people naturally increases the required workforce. You inherently need more police, food, etc when you have more people.
  - jorisw 3mo ago
    > That’s not supported by the evidence. Current rates of employment are well below historic levels. What evidence? Wasn’t employment in engineering down before all this could’ve gotten enough widespread traction to actually displace jobs?
    - Retric 3mo ago
      Programming/engineering may be of supreme concern to you, but they made a much wider claim. > There's never been an automation revolution that worked otherwise. Requires all automation to have zero effect on net jobs long term. Meanwhile the percentage of people working is down so that’s clearly not true.
  - protocolture 3mo ago
    >Current rates of employment are well below historic levels. Ignoring for a second that net jobs and employment rates aren't really the same thing. >In preindustrial societies nearly everyone was working to support themselves and their families, these days a huge percentage of the population is in education which may be investing in their future but isn’t directly producing anything. Retirement as a percentage of the population similarly exploded etc. The first thing anyone does in employment statistics is remove non participants. Bringing them back in is weird. If you don't need or want a job its kind of a non sequitur to be lumped in with the employment seeking population. AI doomers aren't suggesting that its going to gainfully retire the population. >preindustrial societies Pre industrial societies can be loosely grouped into "People farming to make 3-5 times the food they need" and "city dwellers". Now that a single person can farm for 100s of people, we do have hundreds more city jobs going. We dont have a huge number of out of work farmers sitting around doing nothing. Likewise, Banks employ more people after introducing ATM's than before. Likewise cloud didnt leave IT people lining up at the dole office, but it just moved them from cleaning up on prem messes to cleaning up cloud messes and onprem messes.
- nok22kon 3mo ago
  there never has been a nuclear war, so why do some people worry about it, I dont understand, probably they have some axes to grind
- watwut 3mo ago
  > The counter claim that LLMs were special for some reason has never been supported. And a lot of its proponents have other axes to grind, like UBI, Socialism, Communism etc. No, they are mostly right wing capitalists. LLM is not a left wing project. UBI is something they talked about, but super hard to believe it is anything but a way to shut up critics. > The claim is and always has been that automation increases net jobs. That was definitely not the common claim last 4 years. > There's never been an automation revolution that worked otherwise. That is not what historical record shows. In the short term, larger unemployment are to be expected. Over long term, it evens out.
  - realusername 3mo ago
    > That is not what historical record shows It's not the first industrial revolution, we've been in a good dozen of them now and absolutely none have resulted in large unemployment. The only large unemployment we've experienced until now were linked to economic crisis which had nothing to do with industrial revolutions
  - protocolture 3mo ago
    >No, they are mostly right wing capitalists. LLM is not a left wing project. UBI is something they talked about, but super hard to believe it is anything but a way to shut up critics. The proponents of the claim not the proponents of LLMs.

deleted 3mo ago

[deleted]

protocolture 3mo ago

The claim is and always has been that automation increases net jobs. There's never been an automation revolution that worked otherwise. The counter claim that LLMs were special for some reason has never been supported. And a lot of its proponents have other axes to grind, like UBI, Socialism, Communism etc. It would suit their worldview for this time to be different, and so thats the message they push.

somenameforme 3mo ago
I'm not entirely sure that's the claim or conclusion. Like they said the companies increasing headcount are also being pumped full of $$$. That's a non-permanent state of affairs because it's heavily fueled by speculation about possible future scenarios which may or may not come to pass. I think the bigger conclusion is that LLMs are, for now, having a minimal effect on the labor market. And I think this makes sense. In spite of individual claims of 10x productivity boost or whatever, their effect on the bottom line of companies seems to remain quite unclear, at best. On the contrary the token-maxing catastrophe seems to have resulted in companies becoming far more price conscious towards LLM usage.
- Shitty-kitty 3mo ago
  I't has been very good as suppressing wages.
Retric 3mo ago
That’s not supported by the evidence. Current rates of employment are well below historic levels. In preindustrial societies nearly everyone was working to support themselves and their families, these days a huge percentage of the population is in education, retirement, prison, disability, etc. The only way jobs have kept up with automation is when you ignore population growth, but more people naturally increases the required workforce. You inherently need more police, food, etc when you have more people.
- jorisw 3mo ago
  > That’s not supported by the evidence. Current rates of employment are well below historic levels. What evidence? Wasn’t employment in engineering down before all this could’ve gotten enough widespread traction to actually displace jobs?
  - Retric 3mo ago
    Programming/engineering may be of supreme concern to you, but they made a much wider claim. > There's never been an automation revolution that worked otherwise. Requires all automation to have zero effect on net jobs long term. Meanwhile the percentage of people working is down so that’s clearly not true.
- protocolture 3mo ago
  >Current rates of employment are well below historic levels. Ignoring for a second that net jobs and employment rates aren't really the same thing. >In preindustrial societies nearly everyone was working to support themselves and their families, these days a huge percentage of the population is in education which may be investing in their future but isn’t directly producing anything. Retirement as a percentage of the population similarly exploded etc. The first thing anyone does in employment statistics is remove non participants. Bringing them back in is weird. If you don't need or want a job its kind of a non sequitur to be lumped in with the employment seeking population. AI doomers aren't suggesting that its going to gainfully retire the population. >preindustrial societies Pre industrial societies can be loosely grouped into "People farming to make 3-5 times the food they need" and "city dwellers". Now that a single person can farm for 100s of people, we do have hundreds more city jobs going. We dont have a huge number of out of work farmers sitting around doing nothing. Likewise, Banks employ more people after introducing ATM's than before. Likewise cloud didnt leave IT people lining up at the dole office, but it just moved them from cleaning up on prem messes to cleaning up cloud messes and onprem messes.
nok22kon 3mo ago
there never has been a nuclear war, so why do some people worry about it, I dont understand, probably they have some axes to grind
watwut 3mo ago
> The counter claim that LLMs were special for some reason has never been supported. And a lot of its proponents have other axes to grind, like UBI, Socialism, Communism etc. No, they are mostly right wing capitalists. LLM is not a left wing project. UBI is something they talked about, but super hard to believe it is anything but a way to shut up critics. > The claim is and always has been that automation increases net jobs. That was definitely not the common claim last 4 years. > There's never been an automation revolution that worked otherwise. That is not what historical record shows. In the short term, larger unemployment are to be expected. Over long term, it evens out.
- realusername 3mo ago
  > That is not what historical record shows It's not the first industrial revolution, we've been in a good dozen of them now and absolutely none have resulted in large unemployment. The only large unemployment we've experienced until now were linked to economic crisis which had nothing to do with industrial revolutions
- protocolture 3mo ago
  >No, they are mostly right wing capitalists. LLM is not a left wing project. UBI is something they talked about, but super hard to believe it is anything but a way to shut up critics. The proponents of the claim not the proponents of LLMs.