Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI eats jobs, then offers to help you find a new one at Walmart

theregister.com

61–70 of 238 posts

Re: OpenAI eats jobs, then offers to help you find a new one at Walmart

#61
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He didn't say "contradiction," he said "kafkaesque," meaning "characteristic or reminiscent of the oppressive or nightmarish qualities of Franz Kafka's fictional world" (according to Google).

I don't see why it would be "kafkaesque" either. In fact I fail to see any connection between those two facts other than that both are decisions to allow or not allow something to happen by OpenAI.

It's oppressive and nightmarish because we are at the mercy of large conglomerates tracking every move we make and kicking our livelyhoods out from under ourselves, while also censoring AI to make it more amenable to pro-corporate speech.

Imagine if ChatGPT gave "do a luigi" as a solution to walmart tracking your face, gait, device fingerprints, location, and payment details, then offering that data to local police forces for the grand panopticon to use for parallel reconstruction.

It would be unimaginable. That's because the only way for someone to be in the position to determine what is censored in the chat window, would be for them to be completely on the side of the data panopticon.

There is no world where technology can empower the average user more than those who came in with means.

Re: OpenAI eats jobs, then offers to help you find a new one at Walmart

#62
post #7

How many jobs have they actually 'eaten'? For now, we mostly have AI labs and those in proximity claiming some number of jobs will be obsolete, but the actual job loss has yet to manifest.

In my personal experience I've seen: - OCR eat a good chunk of data entry jobs, - Automated translation eat a number of translation jobs, - LLM have eaten quite a few tier I support roles. I don't have numbers tho, maybe people are still doing data entry or hiring translators on mechanical turk.

I have a friend who used to do book translations. Due to some craftsman union rules, the minimum rate for translations has been set (and of course that's what everybody pays). Machine translation didn't decrease these rates, but they haven't been increased in 15 years, which made inflation completely eat it up.

Initially machine translation was way worse (by professional standards) than people assumed, essentially useless, you had to rewrite everything.

As time went on, and translation got better, the workflow shifted from doing it yourself to doing a machine pass, and rewriting it to be good enough. (Machine translation today is still just 'okay', not professional quality)

On the initially set rates 15 years ago you could eke out a decent-ish salary (good even if you worked lots of hours and were fast). Today if you tried to do the work by hand, you'd starve to death.

Re: OpenAI eats jobs, then offers to help you find a new one at Walmart

#63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there? I don't see any contradiction there. For me it's funny that the first time most programmers ever think about the ethics of automating away jobs is when they themselves become automated.

The number of bullshit jobs has been growing since the Internet, and programmers have facilitated them by adding unnecessary complexity. This time the purported capabilities of "AI" are a direct attack on thinking. Outsourcing thinking is creepy and turns humans into biorobots. It is different from robotic welding in an assembly line. Even if new bullshit jobs are created, the work will just be that of a human photoc…

I don't see how thinking about some source code is an innately more human activity than welding. Both can be done by humans, both couldn't be done by anything but humans until automation came along and now both can be done by humans and automated systems.

I also fail to see how LLMs can turn humans into "biorobots". You can still do all the things you could do before LLMs came along. The economic value of those things just decreased enourmously.

Re: OpenAI eats jobs, then offers to help you find a new one at Walmart

#65
post #29
post #7

How many jobs have they actually 'eaten'? For now, we mostly have AI labs and those in proximity claiming some number of jobs will be obsolete, but the actual job loss has yet to manifest.

It's rarely (maybe never) a direct one-to-one elimination of jobs. Most attempts to replace a single complete human job with an AI agent are not successful (and large companies, generally, aren't even attempting that). Rather, the phenomenon is more like a diffuse productivity gain across a large team or organization that results in a smaller headcount need over time as its final net effect. In practice, this materia…

When my father joined an attorney's office as recently as the 80s, there was a whole team of people that worked with: Of course, there were the attorneys who actually argued the cases, but also legal assistants who helped create various briefs, secretaries who took dictation (with a typewriter, of course) to write those documents, receptionists who managed the attorney's schedules and handled memos and mail, filing clerks who helped keep and retrieve the many documents the office generated and demanded in a giant filing room (my favorite part of visiting as a kid: row after row of rolling shelves, with crank handles to put the walkways where they were needed to access a particular file), librarians who managed a huge card catalog and collection of legal books and acquired those that were not in the collection as needed... it was not a small team.

When he retired a few years ago, most of that was gone. The attorneys and paralegals were still required, there was a single receptionist for the whole office (who also did accounting) instead of about one for each attorney, and they'd added an IT person... but between Outlook and Microsoft Word and LexisNexis and the fileserver, all of those jobs working with paper were basically gone. They managed their own schedules (in digital Outlook calendars, of course), answered their own (cellular) phones, searched for documents with the computers, digitally typeset their own documents, and so on.

I'm an engineer working in industrial automation, and see the same thing: the expensive part of the cell isn't the $250k CNC or the $50k 6-axis robots or the $1M custom integration, those can be amortized and depreciated over a couple years, it's the ongoing costs of salaries and benefits for the dozen humans who are working in that zone. If you can build a bowl screw feeder and torque driver so that instead of operating an impact driver to put each individual screw in each individual part, you simply dump a box of screws in the hopper once an hour, and do that for most of the tasks... you can turn a 12-person work area into a machine that a single person can start, tune, load, unload, and clean.

The same sort of thing is going to happen - in our lifetimes - to all kinds of jobs.

Re: OpenAI eats jobs, then offers to help you find a new one at Walmart

#66
post #5
post #2

For full irony they take your data, then use that data to replace your job.

It's not irony so much as it is brazenly criminal. No one should be in a position of training someone else's AI to replace their job function without consenting to it and without being compensated. The most valuable thing AI can do right now is write code, and it couldn't do that without thousands of StackOverflow volunteers.

Wouldn't the language / frameworks documentation be sufficient?

Re: OpenAI eats jobs, then offers to help you find a new one at Walmart

#68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there? I don't see any contradiction there. For me it's funny that the first time most programmers ever think about the ethics of automating away jobs is when they themselves become automated.

It's not a comment on the ethics of replacing jobs but the hypocrisy of companies using "ethics" as reasoning for restricting content. They are pursuing profits. Their ethical focus is essentially a form of theater.

Replacing jobs is not an ethical issue.

Automation and technology has been replacing jobs for well over a century, almost always to better outcomes for society. If it were an ethical issue, then it would be unethical not to do it.

In any case, which jobs have been replaced by LLMs? Most of the actual ones I know were BS jobs to begin with - jobs I wish had not existed to begin with. The rest of the ones are where CEOs are simply using AI as an excuse to execute layoffs (i.e. the work isn't actually being done by an LLM).

Re: OpenAI eats jobs, then offers to help you find a new one at Walmart

#69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a comment on the ethics of replacing jobs but the hypocrisy of companies using "ethics" as reasoning for restricting content. They are pursuing profits. Their ethical focus is essentially a form of theater.

Then why are you even talking about the replacement of jobs?

I've already explained it. I don't know how to break it down any further without coming off as patronizing. You seem dead-set on defending OpenAI and not getting the point.

Re: OpenAI eats jobs, then offers to help you find a new one at Walmart

#70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The number of bullshit jobs has been growing since the Internet, and programmers have facilitated them by adding unnecessary complexity. This time the purported capabilities of "AI" are a direct attack on thinking. Outsourcing thinking is creepy and turns humans into biorobots. It is different from robotic welding in an assembly line. Even if new bullshit jobs are created, the work will just be that of a human photoc…

I don't see how thinking about some source code is an innately more human activity than welding. Both can be done by humans, both couldn't be done by anything but humans until automation came along and now both can be done by humans and automated systems. I also fail to see how LLMs can turn humans into "biorobots". You can still do all the things you could do before LLMs came along. The economic value of those thing…

Then go weld. There are still some positions for humans.
Post reply on HN