| ▲ | lelanthran 6 hours ago |
| To me looks like, if we're not collectively careful, civilisation will soon be on a path to an evolutionary dead-end. Anything that can replace a deeply experienced s/ware engineer can replace anyone in the employment stack, meaning that only the owners of capital will be left, and they too will soon fade as the economy falls off a cliff and money has no value, because the only value that money has is the value of a human backing that, with thought, with ideas, with human output. Whether you like it or not, "Economic output" is just a different phrase for "Human output that is valuable". When all human output is valued at the fractions of a penny per month of work, there is no future. |
|
| ▲ | hax0ron3 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| >Anything that can replace a deeply experienced s/ware engineer can replace anyone in the employment stack Well, except for roles where being human is an inherent part of the value for customers: bartender, prostitute, certain kinds of boutique sales, professional athlete, stage actor, etc. And for roles that have to be human for legal reasons. Of course such roles make up a small part of the entire job market. |
|
| ▲ | ilovecake1984 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This is so blinkered and egocentric. Just because LLMs are good at translating English to code, doesn’t imply they are good at many other jobs. Coding isn’t that hard, it’s just not enjoyable to most people. The enjoyment has always been the barrier to entry. |
| |
| ▲ | thin_carapace 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | the grandparent commentor predicts 'that which replaces a sweng can replace anything'. llms sure do replace certain language related tasks, sometimes, when correctly piloted. however the majority of the world do not work language related jobs. perhaps if robotics firms bridge the gap to reality using some novel architecture this prediction could come a bit more true? until then it does seem blinkered to assume a set of weights could build a house. hard agree on the last statement. programming is language. if you're literate you can code. |
|
|
| ▲ | trumpdong 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| No lelanthran, software engineering and plumbing are not the same job. No lelanthran, LLMs can't be plumbers. |
| |
| ▲ | lelanthran 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > No lelanthran, software engineering and plumbing are not the same job. No lelanthran, LLMs can't be plumbers. Who said that? More to the point, how many plumbers does society need? | | |
| ▲ | hbcdbff 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Anything that can replace a deeply experienced s/ware engineer can replace anyone in the employment stack Direct quote | | |
| ▲ | lelanthran 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | >> Anything that can replace a deeply experienced s/ware engineer can replace anyone in the employment stack > Direct quote And, in your (and GP's mind), that means the same thing as "LLMs can replace plumbers"? After all, I said: >>>> When all human output is valued at the fractions of a penny per month of work, there is no future. I mean, I know it's fashionable to not read the article, but are we all really responding without even reading the comments? Are two paragraphs well beyond the attention span of the readers here? Okay, lets go with that asinine comeback: What do you think happens when the only work left for humans to do involves 100% physical labour and 0% thought? How many plumbers does a society need? Electricians? Even in construction, you can automate almost everything away with cranes and similar. Now imagine that all the doctors, all the office workers, all the warehouse workers, all the bankers, lawyers, teachers, ... basically any job that requires thought ... all those people are now joining the legions of plumbers. That sort of 1000x increase in supply will drive prices to pennies. The LLM doesn't need to replace plumbers directly; all it needs to do is replace everyone else, and the value of plumbers approach zero anyway. | | |
| ▲ | trumpdong 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Are plumbers not "in the employment stack"? How about hairdressers? Are they in the employment stack? I have zero doubt that half of humanity can all have jobs continuously expanding the mansions of the other half who don't do any work but receive all the benefits. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | est31 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | A new generation of AI companies is out there to take over blue collar jobs as well. Check recent YC batches. Software engineering was a nice target because inputs and outputs are just data and you don't need to figure out robotics. But idk, 3 years ago it seemed illusory (at least for me) that LLMs could take over software engineering, but now here we are. They are still not 100% there yet (software engineers still have jobs), but we are getting ever closer. Companies are in the process of figuring out robotics, and even if it's not figured out, then we might introduce a gig-ified blue collar economy where an unskilled, underpaid gig worker implements instructions by AI. Plus a lot of blue collar work already today involves robots (cranes, excavators, trucks, etc). | |
| ▲ | mike_hearn 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | LLMs not but generalized multi-modal VLA models, yes. Seems some on HN haven't been keeping up with progress in physical robotics. Unique physical work is lagging behind a bit, but not by much. Expect to see robots doing simple plumbing jobs within a few years, not a few decades. |
|
|
| ▲ | p-e-w 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Anything that can replace a deeply experienced s/ware engineer can replace anyone in the employment stack Nope, just knowledge workers. We’re decades away from automating many manual labor professions, even “unskilled” ones. Turns out brains just aren’t as special as we thought. |
| |
| ▲ | esafak 6 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | I think the manual professions are not far behind. It's just that the development is being done in China, so most readers here are not aware of it. | |
| ▲ | techblueberry 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > Nope, just knowledge workers. We’re decades away from automating many manual labor professions, even “unskilled” ones. How do you figure? We’ve already automated away way more manual labor jobs than we currently have. | |
| ▲ | theshackleford 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > Nope, just knowledge workers. Nope, just a specific kind. Those who developed and cultivated only a very specific skill set at the expense of all others. I used to think being a generalist, and having persued technical roles with a people facing element was to my detriment, but it’s turned out to be the best decision I ever made. | | |
| ▲ | tempest_ 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I had the opposite thought. Being a generalist was very useful to me 5 years ago. Now AI models have made everyone a generalist. That wide but not terribly deep skillset was immediately devalued by the AI models. You can argue that the models fuck up 20 percent of the time, or that they make poor code but there is a massive part for the industry that is totally fine with that and I think people ignore it to their detriment. |
| |
| ▲ | lanfeust6 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The major blocker for manual labor automation in that fashion is cheap energy. China is ahead of the pack with the States' weight behind aggressive expansion of solar tech, and still can't do that. |
|
|
| ▲ | juleiie 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| That sounds more like a problem of close minded narrow focus on economic output instead of culture, virtue and spiritual traditions. AI is fundamentally an equivalent to slave economy. Cheap, plentiful workforce. This time ethically neutral. You either get Greece or Rome. I’d prefer Greece but it will probably be Rome.
From the past we can predict the future. |
| |
| ▲ | techblueberry 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | > That sounds more like a problem of close minded narrow focus on economic output instead of culture, virtue and spiritual traditions. I’m starting to be more sensitive to the argument that without god, people are unable to have a strong moral foundation. Not for the people expressing creativity in how they fuck, but as a check on those in power. | | |
| ▲ | goosejuice 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Most people already have god. | |
| ▲ | kakacik 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It takes a special kind of issues-riddled mind in very unhealthy place, for the lack of better words, to assume that people without strong faith have less morals. In my own experience such people are often far from objectively moral or good people themselves, and overcompensate some deep issues. | | |
| ▲ | techblueberry 22 minutes ago | parent [-] | | > In my own experience such people are often far from objectively moral or good people themselves, and overcompensate some deep issues. It is very true in my experience. It is also very not true in my experience. FWIW I’m an atheist. Curious what you mean by issues-riddled mind. What issues? What’s the unhealthy place? There is no one person I’d accuse of lacking morality through godlessness, but I do see a trend. Most particularly in the people and communities who would have previously chosen godliness and replaced it with nothing, not those who previously would have chosen godlessness. |
| |
| ▲ | jplusequalt 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | >i’m starting to be more sensitive to the argument that without god, people are unable to have a strong moral foundation. Not for the people expressing creativity in how they fuck, but as a check on those in power. If this were true, why did the medieval peasant have less rights and autonomy in society than we do now? | | |
| ▲ | techblueberry 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Balance in all things. Also, I’m “starting to be more sensitive to” I’m not fully bought in. |
| |
| ▲ | juleiie 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | There has been said so much about it in the past and I always believed it to be true, as an atheist. I like to think that one of the symptoms is politics becoming really absolutist, idealistic and cultish. You do not debate followers of a different religion. But many topics really becoming kind of a mini religions. I don’t know for sure though, there are arguments against it too and other factors. I think substantial amount of people really need some kind of subjective spiritual experience to their life and maybe ignoring that need breeds some maladaptive tendencies | |
| ▲ | thin_carapace 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | maybe if people werent busy fucking around so creatively they could band together as families and follow agreed social practices to ensure distribution of labor and charitable action in their local communities, maybe then people would care more about their neighbours and less about consuming shit. no thanks ... everyone too busy creatively fucking around and consuming shit while ignoring reality (eg partner count directly correlates to divorce rate, fill the blanks what divorce correlates with). maybe thats a reason that god was deleted from the western cultural lexicon, so that broken communities could be capitalized upon? no way, surely god is merely a deprecated irrelevant vestige. it's not like a fractured social fabric is a ripe substrate of raw suffering to mine profit from. surely a few hundred generations were enough for our morals to have been encoded into genetics, we don't have to bother consciously practicing morality any more. that's for the narrow minded. <alt version of above paragraphs from ludicrous perspective of individual experiencing theocracy and its own form of propaganda> ..... this isn't intended to be aimed at anyone except those who delete god to make money, and those who use god to make money. there's plenty of negative aspects to religion. the argument is intended to focus on the sheer idiocy of expecting morality to spontaneously manifest in the absence of external motivation or any teaching of lessons already collectively learned the hard way. | | |
| ▲ | techblueberry 16 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Part of the problem is some of the most creative fuckers are those spearheading the “band together as families” movement. | |
| ▲ | juleiie 20 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | I think that social justice replaced the religious preaching of values in many circles but it was well… it’s not a sort of thing that many find appealing to follow. Concepts like "checking your privilege" or being "canceled" closely parallel religious ideas of original sin and repentance, where individuals must acknowledge their unearned moral failings to become "good". Actions like using specific pronouns, displaying yard signs, or performing land acknowledgments function similarly to reciting a catechism; they signal allegiance to a shared belief system and reassure the in-group Protests and social movements often evoke the communal, revival-like atmosphere of religious gatherings, providing participants with a sense of purpose and belonging. But what’s most convincing is that many times it is hypocritical in the same way religions are. There is no room for questioning or doubt and yet the actions do not align with the performance. Which means it isn’t driven by dry results but fulfills a deeper human need. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | darkstarsys 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Owners of capital, yes, but also owners of the means of production (which now means AI companies). See https://blog.oberbrunner.com/blog/ai-risks-taxonomy/#economi... |
| |