4 ms·

> The entire rest of the section where you lifted this quote from directly addresses the thing you’re claiming no one will ever even try to address. Please poi

> The entire rest of the section where you lifted this quote from directly addresses the thing you’re claiming no one will ever even try to address. Please point me to what I asked for, an example of what this magical new job actually looks like. What does a person with that job do on a day to day basis, in very broad terms. I didn't spot anything like this in the paper. > And they even close the section by acknowledging that “this time it’s different” might actually be true with AI, and that we simply don’t have enough data to say for sure! The paper is basically a round-up of three different viewpoints. One of them (Acemoglu) I'm much more in agreement with than the others, and its his contributions you are referencing above. The quote I pulled came from Briggs. He's the one I want more information from on what these jobs will look like and in what ways these new jobs are safe from AI displacement when the lost jobs they replace are not.

senordevnyc 3mo ago
This is the final two paragraphs of Briggs' section: The second more existential risk is that “this time is different” and AI is fundamentally a more labor-replacing technology than those that inform our historical analysis. While tech sector commentators extrapolating from their own experience tend to lean into this view, we believe that past technology shocks provide a useful guide to the likely labor displacement from AI automation (although effects could be larger if the eventual emergence of AGI eventually makes human input in knowledge-based work tasks redundant). That said, the answer to “is this time different?” will be hard to prove or disprove until the labor market holds up or doesn’t in the coming years. So, the debate around this question will remain lively for the foreseeable future.

senordevnyc 3mo ago

This is the final two paragraphs of Briggs' section: The second more existential risk is that “this time is different” and AI is fundamentally a more labor-replacing technology than those that inform our historical analysis. While tech sector commentators extrapolating from their own experience tend to lean into this view, we believe that past technology shocks provide a useful guide to the likely labor displacement from AI automation (although effects could be larger if the eventual emergence of AGI eventually makes human input in knowledge-based work tasks redundant). That said, the answer to “is this time different?” will be hard to prove or disprove until the labor market holds up or doesn’t in the coming years. So, the debate around this question will remain lively for the foreseeable future.