AI Won't Cause Unemployment

> Just look at the communities in some poorer parts of the UK, who were relying on coal, mining and steam locomotive(yes, for that many generations the effects of job losses are felt)

In order to make money selling coal, someone has to buy that coal. They're selling something that nobody buys anymore. Try selling ice cubes in the North Pole.

The purpose of those coal jobs was jobs creation, not problem solving.

New generations need to be re skilled in understanding that jobs don't come from government policies but from problem solving. And government can only create new problems.

>Fears about new technology replacing human labor and causing overall unemployment have raged across industrialized societies for hundreds of years, despite a nearly continual rise in both jobs and wages in capitalist economies. The jobs apocalypse is always right around the corner;

So by using the term "overall unemployment", the argument is framed in such a way the argument cant really be won. Why even bother debating?

However in the UK look at the Victorian seaside resorts, these have never recovered from their Victorian popularity because the airplane makes it quicker and easier to jet to better place's like Majorca or Ibiza.

Any politician attempting to suggest otherwise with schemes, is just deluded, wasting tax payers money, unless the country has its own Brexit & Covid in which to force people to holiday at home ...

Of course some seaside towns might become a hub for oil or windfarms[1], but that doesnt really help those already in a downhill trajectory living there, through lack of employment or age.

Look at the mining towns, the electricity grid and gas pipelines have put those miners out of business, and there are always going to be some who never recover because they are too old to retrain or dont have finances to escape to places with better pay and job opportunities.

I think people are poor at recognising the disruptive technology that can put them out of work, or lower their income.

The internet lowered the wages of programmers and call centre staff as work could be offshored more cheaply using the internet.

Banking and investing, gambling on spotting the trends which will become profitable over different timelines can be done anywhere in the world where fast communications exist provided you are not High Frequency Trading [1] where you then need your computers to be as close to the exchange as possible in order to manipulate markets.

Disruptive technology will always displace people, just look at the Middle East, places like Dubai, they have the already more favourable climate, so they can take modern building practices and turn a load of sand dunes into something quite spectacular.

You cant do that in places like the UK or Canada, where the weather is brutal and the winters are long, because everybody needs sunshine, and these man made inventions like heating and light just don't cut it for humans. They are stops gaps to help you survive the length of the a winter today if you dont have the finance to have a second home in the Maldives or Morroco, but if the planets orbit were to change, lengthening the winter, you would see things change more, a greater concentration of people moving back to the equator.

So AI will change jobs, getting rid of some and creating others, like the lab technician, tasked with the boring mundane error prone job of cell counting for blood tests, or spotting cancer cells in tissue biopsies, will be automated by AI. And AI will perform new jobs as routine, like spotting and counting bacterial biofilms in all tissue samples, when previously this was not routine, those jobs counting cells and biofilms will morph into management of AI roles, in much the same way a typical manager manages people.

Just like we see with programming languages coming and going, there are diverging and converging trends to be seen everywhere which will guide the future.

The takeaway is, recognise when something has peaked and find the next thing to peak on a timescale that works for you.

This is what investments is all about.

[1] https://www.google.com/search?q=great+yarmouth+lowestoft+win...

[2] https://www.ted.com/talks/kevin_slavin_how_algorithms_shape_...

Company size drops too though. Enough automation and every person has the abilities that took hundreds of people in their parents' day. Sure, the wealthiest will be able to leverage their gains the furthest - that's just how capital works - but it's also reducing people's dependency on these big firms and enabling them to personally capture the gains from the drastically-improved means of production. If and when communities are able to self-sufficiently produce most of what they need with just a few people and some AI tools, the game changes. Sure, at that point the rich would already be building death stars and wealth inequality would be even more laughable than it is today, but it'd at least still be a step-up in quality of life from the current regime.

Interesting meaning interesting to humans? If an AI is doing all of the work then maybe it doesn't matter what we consider interesting? You gave a prompt asking for 2023 nostalgia pop music in the care home, and the AI found novel theorems to generate it for you, but it didn't even notice or care! Maybe there will be some hobbyist human Mathematians and the AI can throw them a clue once in a while, like a good murder mystery host.

Red lines are those industries where people care more about job creation than problem solving.