Most of the alarmist writing I see about AI displacing workers or suddenly and drastically changing the economy ... are from pro-ai boosters trying to create hype around AI.

They are not criticism of ai, they are openly stated goals and aspirations.

▲

nateb2022 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

There's a lot of that type of slop on LinkedIn (with accompanying slop comments) but they're not taken anywhere as seriously as the more thoughtful blog posts like this

Also in technical circles, we're pretty aware of the marketing/self-promotional nuance of the "our AI accidentally hacked X company" type of press releases, which perhaps the general public may not take with as large a grain of salt

▲

watwut 2 days ago | parent [-]

I dont read linkedin. I was not referencing linkedin. Among other sources, the primary one is literally AI companies themselves. And people close to them.

The "it will replace workers" is pro-ai talking and selling point.

	▲	nateb2022 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		I agree there, I think if we differentiate between first and second order AI companies (companies producing models vs applying those models to everyday tasks) I do think a lot of the hype comes from the 2nd order companies, since they necessarily must make a bold claim to be worthy of VC money. A lot of the 1st order companies are marketing their AI to consumers who are doing work, rather than looking to market their AI to business who are replacing those consumers. If anyone has the means to replace a worker, it's definitely OpenAI or Anthropic moreso than a 2nd order startup trying to replace the human doing the job. And on a restrospective point, I think one of the easiest jobs for AI to do right now is software engineering. But on the whole, while there certainly have been layoffs, software engineering hiring has still been mostly a net positive[0]. And that's just for formal software engineering jobs; if we define a software engineer as a human creating software, then I think AI as a tool has created a LOT more (perhaps not employed as one, but say, a realtor creating their own sofware for personal use) software engineers than the amount that it's actually replaced. In a sense, because of AI, there are more software engineers now than ever before. [0]: https://newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/state-of-the-job-...

▲

whstl a day ago | parent | prev [-]

About pro-AI boosters:

One of the people in the company I work for/with is a non-programmer that has a “vibe coding consulting” gig on the side.

Basically half of their Linkedin is about how they’re shipping features at half the speed as developers, with quality, etc.

They’re not.

They took about three months to prototype something that was rejected for not working/unreadable code. Another team built the same feature from scratch in a week.

Seeing the other side of the grift is kind of pathetic.

▲

3ddds a day ago | parent [-]

I think there is a time and place where the outputs of LLMs belong.

The issue is this requires NUANCE.

And the more certain people expose themselves to LLMs and forgo that ability to sit there and think painstakingly about nuanced things - the more useless they become IMO.

	▲	whstl a day ago \| parent [-]
		I agree. It requires good judgement, domain knowledge, good work ethic. Grifters who think the LLM can do it all for them will definitely not survive in a competitive market.