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

The dead economy theory

owenmcgrann.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

771–780 of 1001 posts

Re: The dead economy theory

#771

Post by keiferski »

It seems kinda obvious to me that a cyborg (human plus AI) is going to outcompete AI-only in most scenarios. Anytime you ask an AI to do everything itself, you get the typical slop generic result that’s clogging up YouTube and Google search results.

However there is a space in the economy where “good enough” is all that matters, and “perform better” doesn’t really matter, usually because consumers aren’t discerning enough to care.

This is the range of the labor market that is really at risk. The high-end, cyborg one is probably fine, at least in terms of human labor needs.

Re: The dead economy theory

#772

Post by hyperadvanced »

This article is good but it presupposes the norm of democracy and it presupposes (somehow) that the collapse of western democracy will not result in war. Both of these are fundamental misunderstandings, and while I love neither democracy nor war, the dissolution of the American economic system would result in both less democracy and more war.

Re: The dead economy theory

#773

Post by epsteingpt »

keiferski wrote: post #771

It seems kinda obvious to me that a cyborg (human plus AI) is going to outcompete AI-only in most scenarios. Anytime you ask an AI to do everything itself, you get the typical slop generic result that’s clogging up YouTube and Google search results. However there is a space in the economy where “good enough” is all that matters, and “perform better” doesn’t really matter, usually because consumers aren’t discerning e…

This is the AI bureaucrat theory: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48321576

Re: The dead economy theory

#774

Post by RandomLensman »

well_ackshually wrote: post #750
unusualmonkey wrote: post #741

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry that's no realistic. People start businesses, including law firms, all the time with little to no capital. Assuming token costs will be prohibitive assumes: A) tokens will be really expensive and B) you need to fund tokens before you have revenue. Your asserting AI makes the economy more capital intensive, when I think you'll see in practice it's the opposite.

In the same way that you cannot compete against Ford at making cars without capital because Ford used their capital to automate manual labor at prices and speeds you'll never be able to reach. "Intellectual" jobs, that require thought were yet spared, as the only way to use capital for that was just to pay for more meat: see Accenture, CapGemini, IBM, etc. You could carve yourself a spot for some people because it wa…

The price for legal work going down might very well create more demand, including for people operating "law machines". Not sure we know where future equilibria lie.

Re: The dead economy theory

#775

Post by RandomLensman »

NothingAboutAny wrote: post #755
iliaxj wrote: post #457

The article doesn't seem to take his train of thought quite far enough. If AI suddenly makes it possible for a law firm to be run with a skeleton crew, then what's stopping all those people you fired from starting new law companies, where AI also does most of the work, and competing with you for the same market? And ultimately, if AI gets to be so good that it can competently do a lawyer's job, what reason do big law…

> I foresee a wave of entrepreneurship coming. why would anyone pay anyone else for anything when they could just get an AI to do it? any service would now be worthless, there will be people with hardware and people without. 3 futures: one where the hardware is shared. one where it is not. one where the first person with enough of it kills everyone else.

Why would everyone want to do everything themselves? No comparative advantage at all and infinitely capable robots?

Re: The dead economy theory

#776

Post by epsteingpt »

minimal_action wrote: post #236

I have led AI integration in a university faculty. From this experience I can conclude that good work is only produced when humans are in the loop. It's not a technical barrier, but a categorical one. "Good" work is defined by humans and our judgment is irrational but rooted in our evolutionary survival needs. In other words, AI don't have human motivation by definition. Without human in the loop, the top most motiva…

AIs are bureaucrats, no more - no no less: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48321576

Re: The dead economy theory

#777

Post by throwawayqqq11 »

iliaxj wrote: post #457

The article doesn't seem to take his train of thought quite far enough. If AI suddenly makes it possible for a law firm to be run with a skeleton crew, then what's stopping all those people you fired from starting new law companies, where AI also does most of the work, and competing with you for the same market? And ultimately, if AI gets to be so good that it can competently do a lawyer's job, what reason do big law…

The big picture can be extended to all economic branches, where steady competition drives down profit margins to near zero, like it is the case for eg. grocery chains already. Functioning markets are solving distribution problems and maybe, some day we will even consider something like algorithmic/HF trading not as a margin siphon but as a (public) service of automated distribution. The bigger picture has to go beyond the How/Who into the the Why/When, which opens up the end conditions of profit driven enterprise and capitalism itself.

Re: The dead economy theory

#778

Post by qsera »

iliaxj wrote: post #457

The article doesn't seem to take his train of thought quite far enough. If AI suddenly makes it possible for a law firm to be run with a skeleton crew, then what's stopping all those people you fired from starting new law companies, where AI also does most of the work, and competing with you for the same market? And ultimately, if AI gets to be so good that it can competently do a lawyer's job, what reason do big law…

> what's stopping all those people you fired..

Reputation, (or lack of it) and the big clients that come with it.

Isn't that obvious?

Re: The dead economy theory

#779

Post by nullbio »

josh-sematic wrote: post #747

Anthropic employees: I believe many of you actually do think your work is for the betterment of humanity. That’s great! If you truly do believe that, it’s time to start demanding your leadership lobby for real, structural solutions to unemployment that leave everyday people with a say in how companies like yours operate. “The market will find new jobs” is not as strong of a historical pattern as “the concentration of…

Betterment of humanity and betterment of the economy are not the same thing. Our existing economic structures leave much to be desired.

Re: The dead economy theory

#780

Post by 5701652400 »

IAmGraydon wrote: post #558
5701652400 wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

did you try to find job these days? it is a nightmare. did you try to create a business? starting own business has never been harder, competition is extreme. market is over-saturated. monopolies are everywhere. barrier for entry (capital required) never been higher. and after finding job they likely get into another roudn of layoff. just check RedNote, SWEs complaining just about that. people getting laid off before…

You’ve got to be kidding. Starting a business has never been easier or cheaper at any time in history. If you can’t, it’s because you’re short on good ideas.

your ideas never been a problem. check App Store, every single idea has thousands of exact same apps.

and if you are talking about creating company to make your own car/hardware/farm/restaurant/factory. good luck.

Post reply on HN