| |
| ▲ | sanderjd a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Ah that makes sense. I'm skeptical that AIs doing things on their own will be competitive with humans using AIs to do things. But I'm not incredibly confident in this and I think it's sensible to think the opposite. But to me, I just think about all the things I can accomplish with the aid of very good, fast, and cheap inference. | | |
| ▲ | devin a day ago | parent | next [-] | | I think the sad part is that whether it's any good or not, it will be cheaper, and that will be enough even at current performance levels to cut a huge number of jobs. I think people exist in the present moment largely because legal questions about liability are not settled well enough for executives to start the great purge. I believe on some level my continued employment is simply because people in leadership positions would be incredibly unwise to not have a human to blame when things start going wrong. People are expensive insurance policies for the time being. Once there is some legal framework to absolve executives of their own culpability or they figure out a good way to insulate themselves from personal responsibility, then the real "fun" will begin. | |
| ▲ | pixl97 a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | The problem comes in to how many bullshit jobs we'll have to create to ensure that enough people can still earn a living to ensure that we don't have riots and revolution in the street. Companies being profit seeking entities that are actively hostile to social wellbeing would gladly put all of our money in a machine money making loop and leave all but a few humans out. |
| |
| ▲ | throooooo a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Like mostly all tech, AI is destined to get cheaper with time. We're still pretty early on and are experiencing a hardware crunch, which will ease eventually. AI doesn't have workers rights, doesn't burn out, doesn't get sick, can be instantly onboarded, etc. The second we can be fully replaced with AI, we will be. Plan accordingly. I'm pursuing FIRE and considering moving into a trade. | | |
| ▲ | lelanthran 17 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > The second we can be fully replaced with AI, we will be. Plan accordingly. I'm pursuing FIRE and considering moving into a trade. Doesn't matter what plans you make, the impact will be across everyone! Moving into a trade won't help, because the supply is doubling while the demand is lowering. Fewer people with money to spend; they'll fix their own damn toilets if the decision comes down to "buy food" or "hire plumber". | |
| ▲ | giantg2 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I feel like trades will be impacted too. No reason robots can't do much of it cheaper and faster. They're even 3D printing houses. | | |
| ▲ | pkaye 17 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Trades will be impacted when a lot of people compete for those jobs and their wages go down. | |
| ▲ | kennywinker a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Afaik all the 3d printed houses have been expensive disasters. | | |
| ▲ | pigeons 20 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | So have the AI built software products. | | | |
| ▲ | DANmode 19 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Does this include or exclude places like China? | | |
| ▲ | kennywinker 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | Idk, has china printed houses successfully? And if there are reports of that can we trust that the information hasn’t been gov altered to make a failure seem like a success? | | |
| ▲ | DANmode 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | You could probably just look at the pictures of all of the structures, and housing developments, and decide for yourself how real they are. But leaving them out of this conversation like it doesn’t even exist is bonkers. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | idiotsecant 21 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | training data for physical tasks like that is much, much harder than just collecting the entire internet. It'll be resistant to AI much longer than knowledge work will be | | |
| ▲ | giantg2 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | We already have construction codes. Fitting techs with AR headsets could gather more data. Existing structures won't be the first step due to variences. The best place to implement this is modular building in controlled automated environments. Even if we enhance the current productivity, we will create a problem due labor supply driving down incomes, especially if people are coming from the other jobs affected by AI. | | |
| ▲ | idiotsecant 19 minutes ago | parent [-] | | You can barely capture folding laundry using task data, and you're vastly underestimating how much independent decision making the trades do in their regular work. If I'm honest this whole thing reads like someone who's never been exposed to the actual work. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | gobdovan a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | If AI would be that cheap and good, why not open a company and leverage it for yourself? | | |
| ▲ | kennywinker a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Doing what? Making something with ai: enjoy your 20,000 competitors. Making something without ai: who can buy it? | | |
| ▲ | sanderjd 20 hours ago | parent [-] | | If nobody can buy anything, the ai companies will go out of business too. | | |
| ▲ | ben_w 16 hours ago | parent [-] | | Out of business, but not necessarily out of existence. If there is really nothing for humans to do, whoever has control over (not necessarily ownership of) enough robots and AI to directly maintain and grow their collection of robots and AI, has something functionally equivalent to a breeding population of the stuff. (If they can't make more of themselves and humans made the initial batch, then that's a job humans can do so the initial condition has not been reached). None of this helps people figure out how to look after their own interests in the meantime. The rest of society may carry on as today without AI, akin to the Amish if we're lucky (rejecting further developments unless good for us) or like Pol Pot if we're unlucky (reject anything that nerds like because nerds liked AI and everything breaks down). On the other hand, the institutions may simply fail to handle reality, like in the Great Depression. |
|
| |
| ▲ | what a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | If AI would be that cheap and good, why would they rent it to you? Or even tell you about it? | | |
| |
| ▲ | skeptic_ai 21 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | You forget that once all lose their job will all go into trade. Means there will 1000x more people to compete with into trades, which means race to the fucking bottom and lowest salaries if you can even find job. Good for real estate owners, cheap repairs. But probably won’t get any rent paid because people can’t find jobs. | |
| ▲ | mestelan 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | What is FIRE here? | | |
| ▲ | jcheng 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | Financial Independence, Retire Early. It's a whole subculture online, based around the idea that if you can grow your investments to ~25X your annual expenses, you can safely stop working and live off those investments. https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/05/29/how-much-do-i-nee... In some kind of economic AI apocalypse, though, who knows if the assumptions behind FIRE will hold. |
| |
| ▲ | bitwize a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | If you're not FIRE now, it's too late! Enjoy serfdom! | | |
| ▲ | sanderjd 20 hours ago | parent [-] | | This doesn't seem consistent with what I'm seeing in the job market at the moment. | | |
|
| |
| ▲ | Gud 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | In the current economic system.
There is no natural law that states that only the people lucky enough to be born rich and/or well connected to real the rewards. AI could and should benefit us all. | | |
| ▲ | Matl 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | It could. Given the nature of people who have the capital to control it, I don't think it will. | | |
| |
| ▲ | Razengan a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | What if you could get politicians to give you UBI instead so you could work on more fulfilling work? | | |
| ▲ | jacquesm a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Like they do with the homeless today you mean? | | |
| ▲ | ben_w 16 hours ago | parent [-] | | Like setting the pension age to zero, paid for by nationalised ownership of AI and robotics. This may even be stable to enact and keep, as pensioners are famously more likely to vote than working people. |
| |
| ▲ | esseph a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Would never happen in a million billion trillion years | | |
|
|
