Remix.run Logo
nirui 2 days ago

Not sure if I'm allowed to quote from the protected article, but the full talk point was:

> “What’s actually going to happen is rich people are going to use AI to replace workers,” he says. “It’s going to create massive unemployment and a huge rise in profits. It will make a few people much richer and most people poorer. That’s not AI’s fault, that is the capitalist system.”

It's kind curious how that would happen.

In the old days, if you want to maintain a monopoly, you can try drain out the talent pool so no one else can hire the best people to do the work that you're doing, and you can also try patent wall to delay your competitors from launching their product.

But if a worker can be replaced by an AI, it could also mean that the competitiveness of the work is significantly reduced, to the point that theoretically everybody can do it. The only way (i guess) to remain the monopoly is then tightening control on the AI while optimize the process to kill off all potential competitors etc. It's all Red Ocean policies (https://www.wallstreetprep.com/knowledge/red-ocean-strategy/).

"Massive unemployment" maybe, but I don't think "huge rise in profits" is guaranteed.

fragmede 2 days ago | parent [-]

At a high level, if profits are revenue minus costs, and cost goes down, and revenue stays the same, then profit goes up. If you fire all your employees and pay a tenth of that to an AI company instead, if we handwave that it's possible (it's not, currently), then there's your huge rise in profit.

nirui 2 days ago | parent [-]

It might work for a short while. But my point is, what if other companies also wants to join the fun? What could stop those companies from replicating the successor and eventually drive them out of the market?

Back then, you have people, which is hard to duplicate and thus can act as a barrier of entry. But AI is just a program, which can be copied with ease, and runs on maybe expensive but standardized hardware.