Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Students boo commencement speaker after she calls AI next industrial revolution

404media.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 242 posts

Re: Students boo commencement speaker after she calls AI next industrial revolution

#11

Post by danaris »

richwater wrote: post #9
jklinger410 wrote: post #6

If you want people to like AI, show them a future that doesn't leave them in abject poverty.

That's quite an unsubstantiated leap. The world has gone through plenty of digital transformations and the number of people in poverty has only _shrank_.

Yes, but during those transformations, the CEOs of the companies selling the products involved weren't actively and aggressively marketing them as being able to replace all the humans they employ.

You can't have it both ways: either LLMs are an amazing, revolutionary technology that can replace many human jobs in unprecedented ways, or it's going to be a mild transition that really only helps people.

Re: Students boo commencement speaker after she calls AI next industrial revolution

#12

Post by satisfice »

richwater wrote: post #9
jklinger410 wrote: post #6

If you want people to like AI, show them a future that doesn't leave them in abject poverty.

That's quite an unsubstantiated leap. The world has gone through plenty of digital transformations and the number of people in poverty has only _shrank_.

Then it should easy to show a world where we are all not in abject poverty. We’re waiting.

Re: Students boo commencement speaker after she calls AI next industrial revolution

#14

Post by ryandrake »

KK7NIL wrote: post #8
happytoexplain wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confused - you're suggesting that past suffering justifies present suffering?

He's pointing out that labor has always opposed labor saving technology, despite that being the basis of our modern quality of life.

In the past, "labor saving technology" has always spawned alternate jobs that people could take with some retraining. This time it might be truly different. If one day AI can actually do all knowledge work, there might not be anything left for former knowledge workers to do. There's no physical law that says new technology necessarily produces 1:1 new, different jobs.

Re: Students boo commencement speaker after she calls AI next industrial revolution

#15

Post by [deleted] »

richwater wrote: post #9
jklinger410 wrote: post #6

If you want people to like AI, show them a future that doesn't leave them in abject poverty.

That's quite an unsubstantiated leap. The world has gone through plenty of digital transformations and the number of people in poverty has only _shrank_.

[deleted]

Re: Students boo commencement speaker after she calls AI next industrial revolution

#18

Post by zamadatix »

danaris wrote: post #11
richwater wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's quite an unsubstantiated leap. The world has gone through plenty of digital transformations and the number of people in poverty has only _shrank_.

Yes, but during those transformations, the CEOs of the companies selling the products involved weren't actively and aggressively marketing them as being able to replace all the humans they employ . You can't have it both ways: either LLMs are an amazing, revolutionary technology that can replace many human jobs in unprecedented ways, or it's going to be a mild transition that really only helps people.

It isn't the first time a new technology has been pitched to replace many worker's jobs, both successful and unsuccessful versions of the promise have come to pass several times.

I think what they are saying is "that something can replace a job does not inherently imply the next step is poverty". From that perspective, you can absolutely have it both (and many other combinations of) ways.

Re: Students boo commencement speaker after she calls AI next industrial revolution

#19

Post by xantronix »

hirvi74 wrote: post #13

[flagged]

Most people in uni have compulsory humanities courses, so I imagine it's not too hard for them to attribute actions by moneyed interests to boost AI to the furtherance of capital, surveillance, and a widening of the economic gap. The fact remains, though, most of these degrees (with the obvious exception of those specific to current AI/LLM technologies) could have been attained without AI before.
Post reply on HN