But we all went back to the office 5 days a week? Surely we are too valuable to replace!

I love how myopic the knee-jerk reactions to these pleas of modesty and decency tend to be.

"If AI replaces all jobs, none of us will have to work!" Alright, let's extrapolate a bit.

Society is currently organized around working to survive. AI suddenly replaces all work. How do people survive?

"Well everything will just be free now" Will it? Will the Capitalists who built these systems and replaced that labor now suddenly just give away product? Housing? Food? Care?

"Well, we'll just have to reconfigure society!" I mean, yeah, sure, obviously that'll have to happen. Will the Capitalists who empower the current systems of governance now cede said power when work is no longer available but still necessary to survive?

"Oh, well, people need to cooperate then, speak up for themselves, take action now." I don't disagree, and I think these sorts of Op-Eds, the "AI Doomers" making pleas for decency and civility in comments sections, the artisans demanding compensation for the theft of their work, and the myriad of folks who recognize the pace we're on will get people killed - nevermind the folks highlighting AI's disproportionate use in mass surveillance, genocide, and inflicting harm on "undesirables - are doing exactly that: speaking up, taking action, and attempting proactive reform.

"But they're hindering AI!" That's the fucking point you colossal numpty. The point is to slow it down so we have time to adapt.

Like...jesus, I expected more/better from folks who digest mathematical proofs and Arxiv papers for funsies, yet so many people here just cannot think critically about complex issues that involve people other than themselves.

	▲	panzagl 3 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> I expected more/better from folks who digest mathematical proofs and Arxiv papers for funsies Hate to break it to you, but the real hard problems are in the humanities.
	▲	bravoetch 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Unfortunately there is no way to slow down technological progress. The plea for mercy in the face of rapid change is heard, and now it's time to adjust instead of asking for pause. The Guardian opinion piece is sad to me, in that the view of humanity freed from work is seen as a problem. I prefer to think that we could adjust our economic goals from 'high employment' to more wholesome metrics about mental health and happiness.
	▲	samiv 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Some people seem to think that the capital owning class is somehow going to grow a conscious and start sharing their wealth with the common folks. Let's be real that has never happened willingly only by force and bloodshed have the working people ever gotten anything. Moreover it's possible to use military power to lock things down so hard that the people don't even have a chance to revolt. For example North Korea, or any other despotic regime in the world. If you think the musks and zuckerbergs are going to ever give anyone anything think again! The post scarcity post work future means complete poverty for the majority of the worlds people. (So in fact the complete opposite, lots of work and lots of scarcity)
	▲	mulr00ney 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		>Like...jesus, I expected more/better from folks who digest mathematical proofs and Arxiv papers for funsies, yet so many people here just cannot think critically about complex issues that involve people other than themselves. People who LARP about digesting mathematical proofs and Arxiv papers for funsies.
	▲	danaris 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> The point is to slow it down so we have time to adapt. ...and also to try to pry it loose from the fingers of the capitalists, so we have a hope of being able to share in the prosperity it brings.