121–130 of 388 posts
My takeaway here: 3.XT $ of US salaries are the TAM for AI companies. Apple, a very successful company, makes 300B/y revenue? (ish) ~10% is all you need to be Apple. And, it can work by taking all of 10% of the jobs and collecting the whole salary (the AI employee -- dubious proposition), or by taking 10% of everyone's salary and automating part of everyone's job (the AI "tool" -- much more plausible). If "part" bein…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> AI has already won. It's taking over. It might be a year or two, or five, or ten, but AI isn't slowing down, nobody is going to pause, and there's a whole shit ton of work people do that won't be meaningful or economically relevant in the very near term Maybe it was linked from a comment somewhere on HN but just today I saw a post saying “Microwaves are the future of all food: if you don’t think so, you better get…
I know it's not the point of the comment but it's a bit of a flawed analogy. Microwaves have wone to a large extent, such that people without them are a bit of an oddity, and cooking with an oven is more of a special occasion thing than the default cooking method that it was before.
Ovens are a special occasion thing in my house because our oven is huge and I can usually do the same thing in the air fryer, which is just a small convection oven.
Bet on high job-growth market: Security guard for data centers. Stand in front with a gun while mobs come to burn down the data center that took their jobs. (I think I'm half joking).
It's kinda cool to see a whole lot of otherwise intelligent people who are so dogmatically and ideologically opposed to anything AI that they're going to willfully dismiss anything that AI produces regardless of utility. It's not great for them, but it's a definite advantage for people who are already in the mindset of distinguishing and discriminating information and sources on merit, instead of running an "AI bad"…
a. "Has already won"
b. "Might be a year or two, or five, or ten"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> AI has already won. It's taking over. It might be a year or two, or five, or ten, but AI isn't slowing down, nobody is going to pause, and there's a whole shit ton of work people do that won't be meaningful or economically relevant in the very near term Maybe it was linked from a comment somewhere on HN but just today I saw a post saying “Microwaves are the future of all food: if you don’t think so, you better get…
I know it's not the point of the comment but it's a bit of a flawed analogy. Microwaves have wone to a large extent, such that people without them are a bit of an oddity, and cooking with an oven is more of a special occasion thing than the default cooking method that it was before.
I’m from northern Europe. I might use the micro to heat up leftovers or a cup of water for tea or whatever in a pinch, but in this household (and at all my friends’), the stove and the oven cooks the food. I know literally no-one who could say they cook most meals in the micro.
I didn’t have a microwave oven before we bought a house. It took up too much space to justify, for such a relatively rarely-used appliance.
My takeaway here: 3.XT $ of US salaries are the TAM for AI companies. Apple, a very successful company, makes 300B/y revenue? (ish) ~10% is all you need to be Apple. And, it can work by taking all of 10% of the jobs and collecting the whole salary (the AI employee -- dubious proposition), or by taking 10% of everyone's salary and automating part of everyone's job (the AI "tool" -- much more plausible). If "part" bein…
"TAM" = ?
Data is coming from BLS. Their data lags the true state of affairs, and their growth projections are never reliable. Remember when they touted from 2000-2010 that Actuaries are the hottest growing field with the best forward looking outlook? BLS forward looking guidance means nothing when technology revolutionizes the nature of work.
Putting aside the slop facade place atop the data....why would we trust the data?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know it's not the point of the comment but it's a bit of a flawed analogy. Microwaves have wone to a large extent, such that people without them are a bit of an oddity, and cooking with an oven is more of a special occasion thing than the default cooking method that it was before.
> cooking with an oven is more of a special occasion thing than the default cooking method that it was before. This is an incredible self-report. If you consider microwaved meals to be your default method of cooking and not something primarily for reheating leftovers or defrosting frozen meat, I sincerely hope you've gotten your cholesterol and blood pressure checked recently. That is not normal.
this is nuts! I use an oven every day dude - so its a special occasion is it?
The default method for cooking is using an oven or using a stove. Microwaving is for heating up left-overs for the most part.
One of the dangers of people who are too close to programming is that they think of life as binary.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A surfboard is no use in a tsunami. You will drown. The author will drown. Do not celebrate the tsunami.
Amen. Well said OP comment is not clever
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know it's not the point of the comment but it's a bit of a flawed analogy. Microwaves have wone to a large extent, such that people without them are a bit of an oddity, and cooking with an oven is more of a special occasion thing than the default cooking method that it was before.
Most houses still have ovens. Microwaves are pretty widespread as well. But, their main job is to warm up food which was cooked in an oven (either locally or at a centralized oven in a food manufacturing factory). Microwave and ovens are mostly complementary tools. Although, the analogy seems sort of useless, in that the food preparation ecosystem is really not any less complex than the program creation ecosystem, so…
I've lived without a microwave for a long time and it's only a little bit inconvenient because things take longer to reheat.