Live data from Hacker News

Replacement.ai

replacement.ai

21–30 of 725 posts

Re: Replacement.ai

#21

I kind of get it, but at the same time...isn't "we made a machine to do something that people used to do" basically the entire history of of technology? It feels like somehow we should have figured out how to cope with the "but what about the old jobs" problem

[deleted]

Re: Replacement.ai

#22

I kind of get it, but at the same time...isn't "we made a machine to do something that people used to do" basically the entire history of of technology? It feels like somehow we should have figured out how to cope with the "but what about the old jobs" problem

Manual labor was replaced with factory labor, factory labor replaced with knowledge work. If knowledge work is replaced with AI, what do we go to then? Not to mention that the efficiency gains of the modern tech industry are not even remotely distributed fairly. The logical extreme conclusion of an AI company would be where the CEO, Founder, 100% owner, and sole employee coordinates some underling AIs to run the entire company for him while he collects the entire profit and shares it with no one, because American government is an oligarchy

Re: Replacement.ai

#23
post #12

satire i suppose

Only a bit https://businesscloud.co.uk/news/artisan-ai-stop-hiring-huma...

This isn't real! This is a phantom of the attention economy! AI SDR companies are all very similar and the product doesn't really work so there's too much capital in a small market. The winning strategy is to quickly grab as many eyeballs as possible. 11x got dunked because of revenue manipulation in pursuit of more eyeballs, and this is also shenanigans in pursuit of more eyeballs. People are afraid AI will replace all jobs so saying you're replacing all jobs with AI evokes the consensus fear response and makes people emotionally engage with your marketing. The meme exists because people are afraid of the meme.

Re: Replacement.ai

#24
If I could just do nothing because machines would do all the work then it's fine for me. But of course it won't work this way, only the owners of the capital will be on the receiving side, others will not be able to acquire that capital.

Re: Replacement.ai

#25

I kind of get it, but at the same time...isn't "we made a machine to do something that people used to do" basically the entire history of of technology? It feels like somehow we should have figured out how to cope with the "but what about the old jobs" problem

"we made a machine to do everything so nobody does anything" is a lot different though

Re: Replacement.ai

#26

I kind of get it, but at the same time...isn't "we made a machine to do something that people used to do" basically the entire history of of technology? It feels like somehow we should have figured out how to cope with the "but what about the old jobs" problem

We invent machines to free ourselves from labour, yet we’ve built an economy where freedom from labour means losing your livelihood.

Re: Replacement.ai

#27
The hypothesized superintelligent AI will be essentially immortal. If it destroys us, it will be entirely alone in the known Universe, forever. That thought should terrify it enough to keep us around... even if only in the sense that I keep cats.

Re: Replacement.ai

#28

I kind of get it, but at the same time...isn't "we made a machine to do something that people used to do" basically the entire history of of technology? It feels like somehow we should have figured out how to cope with the "but what about the old jobs" problem

> isn't "we made a machine to do something that people used to do" basically the entire history of of technology?

kinda, I guess. but what has everyone on edge these days is humans always used technology to build things. to build civilization and infrastructure so that life was progressing in some way. at least in the US, people stopped building and advancing civilization decades ago. most sewage and transportation infrastructure is from 70+ years ago. decades ago, telecom infrastructure boomed for a bit then abruptly halted. so the "joke" is that technology these days is in no way "for the benefit of all" like it typically was for all human history (with obvious exceptions)

Re: Replacement.ai

#29

I kind of get it, but at the same time...isn't "we made a machine to do something that people used to do" basically the entire history of of technology? It feels like somehow we should have figured out how to cope with the "but what about the old jobs" problem

If ML is limited to replacing some tasks that humans do, yes it will be much like any past technological innovation.

If we build AGI, we don't have a past comparison for that. Technologies so far have always replaced a subset of what humans currently do, not everything at once.

Re: Replacement.ai

#30

I kind of get it, but at the same time...isn't "we made a machine to do something that people used to do" basically the entire history of of technology? It feels like somehow we should have figured out how to cope with the "but what about the old jobs" problem

that is the point of Luddism! the original Luddite movement was not ipso facto opposed to progress, but rather to the societal harm caused by society-scale economic obsolescence. the entire history of technology is also powerful business interests smearing this movement as being intrinsically anti-progress, rather than directly addressing these concerns…

Somehow modern Luddite messaging doesn't communicate that clearly either. Instead of "where's my fair share of AI benefits?" we hear "AI is evil, pls don't replace us".
Post reply on HN