Live data from Hacker News

AI Won't Cause Unemployment

pmarca.substack.com

61–70 of 362 posts

Re: AI Won't Cause Unemployment

#61
post #11

You could also argue that the "red" categories align more closely with "needs" people have little to no choice but to pay, and are ripe for predatory pricing. It's true there are monopoly problems here, but the answer isn't to remove regulation it's to strengthen it. A return to real anti-trust in particular. The blue items lean more towards luxury items and discretionary spending, so pricing can't be so exploitative…

Even the American Enterprise Institute, where he's getting the chart from, frames it more in terms of globalization, competition, and of course given the source, regulation. Their preferred talking points on it are a little dubious as well: e.g., cars are subject to substantial regulation on all sorts of axes and yet are flat and therefore "blue" on the chart, while college textbooks aren't really meaningfully regula…

> (AEI's post also without irony points to the influence of open and free textbooks as something sure to bring down prices in the future, brought to you thanks to the free market).

Further irony: the open and free textbooks (and textbook alternatives, and increasingly efficient distribution of second hand textbooks) are probably one of the main drivers of the price rises. Publishers sell to tiny niches with a significant core market who find it really important to have the latest edition of the course text, and fringe around that that now has much cheaper alternatives. There's no mass market potential from pricing really low, so the publishers try to offset the loss of sales to the second group by squeezing the first group for higher prices. In any case, textbook revenues are already in decline despite the price rises.

Re: AI Won't Cause Unemployment

#62

I can't help but think Andreesen's gone off the deep end a bit, especially after he started gushing over Adam Neumann's second run at a real estate company (“We think it is natural that for his first venture since WeWork, Adam returns to the theme of connecting people through transforming their physical spaces and building communities where people spend the most time: their homes.”). > AI is simply already illegal ac…

I have no special love for this guy as he said some stuff that pissed me off in the past, but what is your specific argument against this post right here? > Hospital services? AI is clearly going to be involved, at least in things like radiology This is very far from the main point: accuracy of the claim that AI will wipe out (in this case health-related) jobs (and/or make health-related services cheaper). "involved"…

> This is very far from the main point: accuracy of the claim that AI will wipe out (in this case health-related) jobs (and/or make health-related services cheaper). "involved" here is so vague as to be meaningless.

Let me rephrase: AI is better at human beings at the sort of pattern-matching work that radiology entails, so the majority of radiologists will be unemployed (I'll say in 20 years, if you want to check back down the line a bit and see how I did). This will both improve patient outcomes (fewer mistakes) and lower costs. Some radiologists will remain in supervisory/research/needing to have a human to rubber stamp type roles.

> It may be crystal clear to you that AI will bring the cost of popular education down, but it is not clear to me at all, and adding "clearly" and "obviously" to some future claim does not make it any more convincing. He's trying to work with existing trends and data, you are saying "clearly the trend will reverse just because".

I'm not saying anything "just because." I'm saying that technological changes in the form of AI will cause the trend to change, as technological changes have caused numerous economic upheavals. Nonetheless, I will be more specific - AI will give everyone a completely knowledgeable, fully personalized tutor. It will be able to very specifically identify places where a student is having difficulty and create custom exercises that are tailored to not only the subject, but also the student's optimal methods of learning. It will be able to custom tailor curriculum to fit a student's specific knowledge and career goals. The relative inefficiency of the large-scale lecture model of higher education will be so significant that the value it'll retain will just lie in the brand cache of the institute of higher learning (effectively, you passed the Stanford admissions AI's muster, so you're smart).

Re: AI Won't Cause Unemployment

#63
post #29
post #11

You could also argue that the "red" categories align more closely with "needs" people have little to no choice but to pay, and are ripe for predatory pricing. It's true there are monopoly problems here, but the answer isn't to remove regulation it's to strengthen it. A return to real anti-trust in particular. The blue items lean more towards luxury items and discretionary spending, so pricing can't be so exploitative…

I don’t know if this is the best way to frame it, but at least it’s not disconnected from reality like the article.

I mainly meant to say that there's way more going on than what's described.

Re: AI Won't Cause Unemployment

#64

I think there is real difference between a) devaluing someone's work, and b) and voiding work of value. What makes AI different from previous technological innovations is that it seems to have the potential to make peoples labor worthless, rather than merely devalued. To give examples, if your writing is worse than ChatGPTs then your writing is worthless. If your art is worse than stable diffusion then your art is wo…

But this is the story of technology for two centuries or more. Somehow we kept income and aggregate growth going even as we needed far fewer farmers, factory foremen, and travel agents.

Eh, time to go watch "humans need not apply" again then.

None of us know where we are on the S curve currently.

Re: AI Won't Cause Unemployment

#65
post #46

I think there is real difference between a) devaluing someone's work, and b) and voiding work of value. What makes AI different from previous technological innovations is that it seems to have the potential to make peoples labor worthless, rather than merely devalued. To give examples, if your writing is worse than ChatGPTs then your writing is worthless. If your art is worse than stable diffusion then your art is wo…

How is this different from previous leaps in industrialization or technological innovation? If you make widgets worse than a machine in a factory then your labor is worthless.

We moved from farming and digging ditch to offices where we think for a living. But tell me, what is left after physical labor and thinking? Sex work? I don't think most of us are cut out for that. And with AI taking on creative work it won't be long before someone makes a Cherry 2000.

Re: AI Won't Cause Unemployment

#66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something snapped in him when crypto shit the bed. His new obsession with AI is him working some stuff out.

It's because he stopped drinking recently. https://pmarca.substack.com/p/on-pausing-alcohol (In all seriousness, I'm very happy it's becoming more fashionable to not drink)

It is not fashionable to not drink.

What is fashionable: to drink a lot for many years, then stop drinking and blather on about how much better life is.

Re: AI Won't Cause Unemployment

#67
post #55

What an incredibly, idiotically reductionist interpretation of cherry-picked data this is. First of all, he selected a fairly random, non-representative set of goods and services. I can immediately think of a glaringly obvious counter-example that his dataset excludes: energy. It's one of the most highly regulated industries in the US and yet energy inflation has been barely positive over the last 20 years ( https://…

His interpretation of “industries that are allowed to innovate vs those where it’s illegal” is laughable.

Has Marc considered that there might be some other fundamental difference between the inflation-positive sectors of health, education, food and housing, vs the inflation-negative ones of TVs, cars and software subscriptions? I’ll give you a hint Marc: some of these are essential to life and society and some are not.

Re: AI Won't Cause Unemployment

#68

I think there is real difference between a) devaluing someone's work, and b) and voiding work of value. What makes AI different from previous technological innovations is that it seems to have the potential to make peoples labor worthless, rather than merely devalued. To give examples, if your writing is worse than ChatGPTs then your writing is worthless. If your art is worse than stable diffusion then your art is wo…

But this is the story of technology for two centuries or more. Somehow we kept income and aggregate growth going even as we needed far fewer farmers, factory foremen, and travel agents.

Arguably there is a larger portion of people unable to adapt as specialization has skyrocketed. Look at how much education is now expected, more than 12y in most industries. And the portion of the working age population under employed or on SSDI.

Re: AI Won't Cause Unemployment

#69

Something tells me that if someone came up with a technology that threatened to make venture capitalists unemployed and bankrupt, Andreesen would suddenly become very pro-luddite.

Machines have been able to flip a coin for a while now, but it doesn't seem to have automated away any VCs.

Re: AI Won't Cause Unemployment

#70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's because he stopped drinking recently. https://pmarca.substack.com/p/on-pausing-alcohol (In all seriousness, I'm very happy it's becoming more fashionable to not drink)

It is not fashionable to not drink. What is fashionable: to drink a lot for many years, then stop drinking and blather on about how much better life is.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN