Perhaps this is a form of Gell-Mann Amnesia (but kinda inverted) where everyone views AI as too inaccurate for their own niche, but perfectly fine for every other field that they know comparably little about.

▲

beng-nl 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I’ve been thinking about this, or a variant of it.

Hypothetically, I’m scared and sad that AI can replace me (it currently can’t, not literally, but a lot of my skill and expertise, built up over say 30 years, that used to be valuable and rare is now cheap to get from an AI).

Let’s try to see the upside. How ‘powerful’ would it make me if, at the cost of my own edge being dulled, can access everyone else’s edge?

I am still my own expert. Now with AI I have a minor expert in everything else as well. What is the best way to use that? don’t have an answer but it’s an aspect I haven’t seen discussed much and I think it is worth bringing up.

▲

kqr 2 hours ago | parent [-]

As of today, "minor expert" is the wrong way to phrase it. The flagship LLMs today are at best at an initiate or apprentice level in every field.[1] This is not meant as a derisive remark – having something at hand that is initiate level in every field is remarkable and useful. But it's nowhere near expertise anywhere.

[1]: https://entropicthoughts.com/stop-using-junior-and-senior

	▲	brabel 42 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		You seriously think current LLM is just at apprentice level in programming? It can write stuff one shot that I’d expected even some experts to struggle to do even with ample more time allowed.

▲

dmje an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think it’s this but also that we all see the value in our own niche because it’s ours, and have more trouble seeing the values in other niches. So it becomes a self perpetuating positive reinforcement thing.

▲

dyauspitr an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You think every person only thinks of their own job and no one dreams of anything bigger from humanity’s perspective? I’m never going to be in some kind of space colony but do I want to see them happen? You betcha.

	▲	weatherlite 37 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> You think every person only thinks of their own job and no one dreams of anything bigger from humanity’s perspective? Yes, the vast majority of people care about their jobs first rather than a theoretical future where mostly rich people colonize space. It's much easier to imagine yourself becoming poor than living in Mars.

▲

typon 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Actually I think AI will largely automate software and math and really not much else in the short to medium term. (speaking as a computer/math person)

	▲	overgard an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I don't see why that should be the case. The only reason software is getting focused on first is: 1. Software devs are obviously going to have a better idea how to apply AI to software development compared to other fields. So of course the coding tools are going to be the first things made. 2. Formal verification makes the problem easier by allowing for iterative feedback (compilers, proofs, etc.) The second argument is, I think, somewhat valid, but ignores that a lot of other professions also have similar verification systems even if they're a bit less rigorous. The first argument just explains why things are the way they are now, it's not indicative of the future. I don't want to fall into the trap of thinking that other jobs than mine require less cognitive horsepower or whatever, but I don't see what's particularly special about other jobs if it can do hard STEM stuff.
	▲	weatherlite 31 minutes ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		I thought the same but i dont think so anymore. My wife is a senior manager at a big 4 consultancy gig and she says copilot became freaking good at understanding tax, multinational company structure etc etc. Even if you need a few partners and experts at the top to validate things you can cut huge amounts of workers.
	▲	xyzal an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Exactly. Regarding software, it is trained on a massive corpus of code and the feedback loop can be very fast (playing well into LLM's upsides) and results are ... mediocre. Recently I had to go through some building regulations and Claude's advices were catastrophic.

▲

NoMoreNicksLeft an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The real trouble isn't that it can replace us. Instead, consider that when there have been two comparable technologies in the market, the market has invariably chosen the lowest-quality/worst one. Why? That's easy to understand... while the chosen option is objectively the worst, it's always the cheapest. And cheapest wins. It's not "can AI do his job?" so much as "is the AI cheaper than a human?". And I think we all know the answer to that... even if the silicon's expensive now, volume pricing, data center buildouts, and other economic forces will soon make it cheaper.

The thing that is truly mysterious to the managerial and ruling classes though... when everyone is unemployed, who will be able to afford to buy your junk? Whatever industry you're in, whatever it is you're selling, the people buying that have the money to buy it because they still have jobs. If you're cutting jobs at your company, that helps the bottom line, but every other company is doing the same thing. And they're laying off your customers.

	▲	piokoch 37 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		If this were true, nobody would be buying iPhones, nobody would be buying Teslas, in fact, nobody would be buying premium class cars.

▲

globular-toast 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It's normal Gell-Mann amnesia and, yeah, it's a really big part of why AI is so accepted.