LMAO it's too early and too small to see anything yet
Generative AI is not replacing jobs or hurting wages at all, say economists
51–60 of 503 posts
Re: Generative AI is not replacing jobs or hurting wages at all, say economists
#52My primary worry since the start has been not that it would "replace workers", but that it can destroy value of entire sectors. Think of resume-sending. Once both sides are automated, the practice is actually superfluous. The concept of "posting" and "applying" to jobs has to go. So any infrastructure supporting it has to go. At no point did it successfully "do a job", but the injury to the signal to noise ratio wipe…
Why is this a worry? Sounds wonderful
I'm a bit worried about the social impacts.
When a sector collapses and become irrelevant, all its workers no longer need to be employed. Some will no longer have any useful qualifications and won't be able to find another job. They will have to go back to training and find a different activity.
It's fine if it's an isolated event. Much worse when the event is repeated in many sectors almost simultaneously.
Re: Generative AI is not replacing jobs or hurting wages at all, say economists
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you sure suggesting google search is in decline? The latest Google earnings call suggests it’s still growing
Google Search is distinct from Google's expansive ad network. Google search is now garbage, but their ads are everywhere are more profitable than ever.
Most Google ads comes from Google search, its a misconception Google derives most of their profits from third party ads that is just a minor part of Googles revenue.
Re: Generative AI is not replacing jobs or hurting wages at all, say economists
#54Have any of these economists ever tried to scrape by as an entry-level graphic designer/illustrator? Apparently not, since the sort of specific work which one used to find for this has all but vanished --- every AI-generated image one sees represents an instance where someone who might have contracted for an image did not (ditto for stock images, but that's a different conversation).
I miss the old internet, when every article didn't have a goofy image at the top just for "optimization." With the exception of photography in reporting, it's all a waste of time and bandwidth.
Most if it wasn't bespoke assets created by humans but stock art picked by if lucky, a professional photo editor, but more often the author themselves.
Re: Generative AI is not replacing jobs or hurting wages at all, say economists
#55My primary worry since the start has been not that it would "replace workers", but that it can destroy value of entire sectors. Think of resume-sending. Once both sides are automated, the practice is actually superfluous. The concept of "posting" and "applying" to jobs has to go. So any infrastructure supporting it has to go. At no point did it successfully "do a job", but the injury to the signal to noise ratio wipe…
Are you sure suggesting google search is in decline? The latest Google earnings call suggests it’s still growing
I've all but given up on google search and have Gemini find me the links instead.
Not because the LLM is better, but because the search is close to unusable.
Re: Generative AI is not replacing jobs or hurting wages at all, say economists
#56Not replacing jobs yet. Seen a whole lot of gen AI deflecting customer questions which would have been previously tickets. That is a reduced ticket volume that would have been taken by a junior support engineer. We are a couple of years away from the death of the level 1 support engineer. I can't even imagine what's going to happen to the level 0 IT support.
I mean, if it really works in the end, we just redefine levels humans need to deal with. There are lots of problems with AI, but I can't see one here.
Re: Generative AI is not replacing jobs or hurting wages at all, say economists
#57Have any of these economists ever tried to scrape by as an entry-level graphic designer/illustrator? Apparently not, since the sort of specific work which one used to find for this has all but vanished --- every AI-generated image one sees represents an instance where someone who might have contracted for an image did not (ditto for stock images, but that's a different conversation).
It looks like the writing is on the wall too for other menial and low-value creative jobs too - so basic music and videos - I fully expect that 90+% of video adverts will be entirely AI generated within the next year or two. see Google Veo - they have the tech already and they have YouTube already and they have the ad network already ... Instead of uploading your video ad you already created, you'll just enter a desc…
> fully expect that 90+% of video adverts will be entirely AI generated within the next year or two
And on the other end we'll have "AI" ad blockers, hopefully. They can watch each other.
Re: Generative AI is not replacing jobs or hurting wages at all, say economists
#58My primary worry since the start has been not that it would "replace workers", but that it can destroy value of entire sectors. Think of resume-sending. Once both sides are automated, the practice is actually superfluous. The concept of "posting" and "applying" to jobs has to go. So any infrastructure supporting it has to go. At no point did it successfully "do a job", but the injury to the signal to noise ratio wipe…
Probably the first significant hit are going to be drivers, delivery men, truckers etc. a demographic of 5 million jobs in US and double that in EU, with ripple effects costing other millions of jobs in industries such as roadside diners and hotels. The general tone of this study seems to be "It's 1995, and this thing called the Internet has not made TV obsolete"; same for the Acemoglu piece linked elsewhere in the.…
Generative AI has failed to automate anything at all so far.
(Racist memes and furry pornography doesn't count.)
Re: Generative AI is not replacing jobs or hurting wages at all, say economists
#59My primary worry since the start has been not that it would "replace workers", but that it can destroy value of entire sectors. Think of resume-sending. Once both sides are automated, the practice is actually superfluous. The concept of "posting" and "applying" to jobs has to go. So any infrastructure supporting it has to go. At no point did it successfully "do a job", but the injury to the signal to noise ratio wipe…
Resume-sending is a great example: if everyone's blasting out AI-generated applications and companies are using AI to filter them, the whole "application" process collapses into meaningless busywork
Re: Generative AI is not replacing jobs or hurting wages at all, say economists
#60Based on the speed most companies operate at - no surprises here. The internet also didn't have most of its impact in the first decade. And as is fairly well understood, most of the current generation of AI models are a bit dicey in practice. There isn't much of a question that this early phase where AI is likely to create new jobs and opportunities. The real question is what happens when AI is reliably intellectuall…
Does the same follow for The Metaverse, or for Blockchain?
My absolutely unqualified opinion is that blockchain will survive but won't find much uses apart from those it already has; while the metaverse- or vr usage and contents- will have an explosive growth at some point, especially when mixed with AI generated and rendered worlds- which will be lifelike and almost infinitely flexible. Which btw, is also a great way to spend your time when your job has been replaced by another AI and you have little money for anything else.