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

AI job grief: A psychological crisis hitting tech workers

jackmaguire.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 221 posts

Re: AI job grief: A psychological crisis hitting tech workers

#81

Post by mewpmewp2 »

mrdependable wrote: post #69
mewpmewp2 wrote: post #11

I am probably different to most people, but I always have trouble understanding why people want to have jobs so much. The obvious and direct answer immediately of course is "to be able to pay the bills". But of course if we automated those jobs with AI, we could direct AI produced value into universal basic income so people wouldn't lose their income. Then the concern is of course, that the owners will not share the…

How do you envision that playing out? It would basically be like everyone that didn’t still have a job living off minimum wage. Would no one be allowed to work also?

So I would envision that, as AI starts to makes jobs obsolete, the people whose jobs were made obsolete, would get some sort of balanced percentage of what they were making. The more they were making the lower the percentage would be. But it would balance to around median/average, so if you were making current median, this is around what you would still get. So it should not go under that. If you were making 3x median, maybe it would be 80% - 90% of that. To be able to still incentivise automation, but keep people's quality of life without drastic changes. I haven't thought this through, so these are just initial ideas. But main ideas would be to keep income level similar, while trying to find them other things to do.

Initially they would get it under some conditions that they might be studying something else or whatever else makes sense productivity wise. Ultimately not minimum wage.

Depending on how fast AI would automate things, the balance should change, but ultimately income should provide similar quality of life as was before, but increasing as time goes on for the less fortunate who were making less before.

So if someone who is making 3x median now, they might be getting 2.3x while doing nothing, and 2.7x while learning/doing something else productive. Someone who was making 1x median, would still get 1x median, but as AI produced value increases and more replacement happens, the 1x should climb and eventually e.g. in 10 years everyone's would equalize in such a way that no one's quality of life due to job displacement shouldn't suffer, but who previously had lower income would reach similar levels of income gradually as all jobs are replaced.

And you would be allowed to work or switch work if you wanted, but there would be some sort of formula for decreasing what you get, while still incentivising you to work if you want to. E.g. if you were making 3x being a software engineer and want to take up hand crafting something or construction, you could but, you might be maxed at getting total of what you were making before, so construction + bonus could make up to only 3x.

Re: AI job grief: A psychological crisis hitting tech workers

#82

Post by evenhash »

w29UiIm2Xz wrote: post #26
mewpmewp2 wrote: post #11

I am probably different to most people, but I always have trouble understanding why people want to have jobs so much. The obvious and direct answer immediately of course is "to be able to pay the bills". But of course if we automated those jobs with AI, we could direct AI produced value into universal basic income so people wouldn't lose their income. Then the concern is of course, that the owners will not share the…

Nobody who trades their labor for income would legitimately trust simply getting money for existing because we created such surplus. What happens if the checks stop rolling? It is undesirable to be that dependent on the state, in an environment where faith in institutions has declined. To give up labor is to give up any leverage one possibly has in our system.

Sure, but wouldn't the leverage of labor go to zero regardless, in this full-automation scenario?

Re: AI job grief: A psychological crisis hitting tech workers

#83

Post by lunar_mycroft »

oidar wrote: post #34
ashd157 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you are saying in the end of that piece that chess players came out stronger? You know how? Because AI is forbidden in tournaments and there are plenty of idle rich sponsors in Chess (it is popular among autocrats). So you are envisioning a future of software development where we have coding competitions sponsored by MBS where AI is forbidden? Like your Pelican meme, which is designed to cutify AI, this is propaga…

I believe that the average elo of players is increasing since powerful chess AI / Go AI.

Elo is zero sum. Each point gained by one player is lost by another. It follows that the mean elo is always exactly equal to the initial elo assigned to new players before they play any games, and can't change over time. If the highest ranked player are higher elo than before, the lower ranked players must be lower elo.

Re: AI job grief: A psychological crisis hitting tech workers

#84

Post by oidar »

lunar_mycroft wrote: post #83
oidar wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe that the average elo of players is increasing since powerful chess AI / Go AI.

Elo is zero sum. Each point gained by one player is lost by another. It follows that the mean elo is always exactly equal to the initial elo assigned to new players before they play any games, and can't change over time. If the highest ranked player are higher elo than before, the lower ranked players must be lower elo.

>Elo is zero sum.

In a closed, static pool only.

Re: AI job grief: A psychological crisis hitting tech workers

#85

Post by jmyeet »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #11

I am probably different to most people, but I always have trouble understanding why people want to have jobs so much. The obvious and direct answer immediately of course is "to be able to pay the bills". But of course if we automated those jobs with AI, we could direct AI produced value into universal basic income so people wouldn't lose their income. Then the concern is of course, that the owners will not share the…

That's easy to explain. We live in a society that will absolutely NOT do that. We will let people starve and die on the streets like it's some personal moral failure while we start minting trillionaires. Your job is food, water, shelter, transportation, health insurance, education and everything for your children.

There is an alternate reality where the benefits of automation are shread with society so that we don't have to work as much, collectively. But in the US in particular, that's "communism".

We are (IMHO) bouldering a future that I can only describe as neo-feudalism where nobody owns anything and the only housing and jobs are working on the estates of trillionaires, a techno-serf if you will. The intermediate stage is probably fascist apartheid states with ever-shrinking in-groups where an increasingly militarized police force is used to enforce order as wealth inequality spirals out of control.

Google has ~190k employees (according to Google) and an annual profit of $133 billion. So despite a bunch of people being comparatively well-paid, the profit per employee is still ~$700k. There were times when that was well over $1 million. So by other measures, you're still being underpaid at ~$500k+/year.

Re: AI job grief: A psychological crisis hitting tech workers

#86

Post by kevinsync »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #56
geophph wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think for me it's hard to conceptualize what "do what I want to do all day, stress free, for the rest of my life." really means. Maybe it's just because i've been conditioned since a child to expect to "work" and "do things", but periods of my life where i've had that similar amount of freedom have always felt somewhat aimless and purposeless to me. But would i feel that way if i had never felt the need to work and…

I could think of so many fun things to do. Sports, video games, building things for fun specifically, learning, films, books, shows, travelling, being with family, etc. You could still do competitive sports in different avenues right. I feel like I could focus so much more on health and wellbeing, and things that I actually enjoy etc. It's not like in grand scheme of things any job realistically matters, except for t…

I agree with you completely, but I also have never been able to square the idea of how any of that stuff would still exist if we didn't have jobs.

Sports (in some aspects) needs facilities, gear, arenas, other people to participate with. Building things usually requires materials (unless you're bushcrafting) that requires a fully-functioning supply chain. Video games and shows and films (at the quality level we expect them to be) require herculean efforts from thousands of people each, and massive investments, to go from concept to completion. Travel in and of itself is predicated on the ideas that the hospitality industry exists, infrastructure for flight, rail, bus, car all exist (and are operational), that the very people that are the fabric and heartbeat of the culture you're traveling to experience exist, and are operating restaurants, businesses, etc.

Every leisure activity that we think of occupying our time with instead of a job requires the collective efforts of the rest of society to even exist, and kind of implies that your ability to lead a life of leisure is an anomaly. Some things can arguably be replaced with AI and robots, but the texture and tactility that we crave from most of these activities would be gone. Traveling to Scotland to get a plate of haggis and hang out in a pub just wouldn't be the same if your driverless taxi took you to the unmanned airport full of kiosks and humanoid sentries, to be loaded half-conscious into a metal tube and flown across the planet, ultimately driven to the ends of the Earth and dropped off at a 600 year old crumbling building where you're met by R2-D2 wearing a kilt and a tam o'shanter, talking like Groundskeeper Willie LOL

Re: AI job grief: A psychological crisis hitting tech workers

#87

Post by bluefirebrand »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #11

I am probably different to most people, but I always have trouble understanding why people want to have jobs so much. The obvious and direct answer immediately of course is "to be able to pay the bills". But of course if we automated those jobs with AI, we could direct AI produced value into universal basic income so people wouldn't lose their income. Then the concern is of course, that the owners will not share the…

> But of course if we automated those jobs with AI, we could direct AI produced value into universal basic income so people wouldn't lose their income

Why would I ever believe that this would happen at all though? I don't trust the people making decisions to actually do this

And even if they do, what does that look like for me? I find it difficult to believe that we would live unchanged. Are we talking nice urban apartments, big suburban houses, or shitty cyberpunk megacity apartment habs?

My sense of worth is tied to the work I do because the work I do can provide the income to afford the life I want and choose to live. Which is probably very different from the lifestyle that will "be provided for me" under a UBI plan

Re: AI job grief: A psychological crisis hitting tech workers

#88

Post by bluefirebrand »

StevenWaterman wrote: post #37
w29UiIm2Xz wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody who trades their labor for income would legitimately trust simply getting money for existing because we created such surplus. What happens if the checks stop rolling? It is undesirable to be that dependent on the state, in an environment where faith in institutions has declined. To give up labor is to give up any leverage one possibly has in our system.

> What happens if the checks stop rolling Late 18th century France

Let's hope if it comes to that sort of action, we do it before the noble class has easy and free access to autonomous terminator robots

Re: AI job grief: A psychological crisis hitting tech workers

#89

Post by bluefirebrand »

shuckles wrote: post #46
randycupertino wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we could direct AI produced value into universal basic income so people wouldn't lose their income. This would never get approved in the USA. Think of the backlash here against "Obamaphones" and "welfare queens" - we can't even get paid parental leave approved! Let alone disability, social security or SNAP/food benefits. UBI is not even an option. Even now we're taking away food benefits and tying it to mandatory w…

This is a superficial complaint. In practice, the US doles out enormous amounts of social assistance. Disability, social security, and healthcare are an enormous part of the federal budget. Maybe it will be gated behind make-work or some other scheme.

> This is a superficial complaint. In practice, the US doles out enormous amounts of social assistance

Good point. So we should ask those people how the reliance on social assistance has really worked out for them. Do they generally feel respected and valued by the systems that pay them? Are they happy with the amount of assistance they receive?

Re: AI job grief: A psychological crisis hitting tech workers

#90

Post by mewpmewp2 »

kevinsync wrote: post #86
mewpmewp2 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could think of so many fun things to do. Sports, video games, building things for fun specifically, learning, films, books, shows, travelling, being with family, etc. You could still do competitive sports in different avenues right. I feel like I could focus so much more on health and wellbeing, and things that I actually enjoy etc. It's not like in grand scheme of things any job realistically matters, except for t…

I agree with you completely, but I also have never been able to square the idea of how any of that stuff would still exist if we didn't have jobs. Sports (in some aspects) needs facilities, gear, arenas, other people to participate with. Building things usually requires materials (unless you're bushcrafting) that requires a fully-functioning supply chain. Video games and shows and films (at the quality level we expec…

If AI replaced jobs one by one, these things should still have to exist, right?

I'm not sure I follow the logic here. I would still see all of this existing and even more due to demand. The idea with automation would be that everything that people want would still be there and even more. I would think we build more football stadiums, more hobby facilities, replacing business offices and other things we don't need with those.

I would also see e.g. video games being even greater than they are now, because people would be able to follow their passion and creativity and build games that won't require monetization and are unaffected by outside pressure. I have massive amount of video game ideas that I think would be super awesome, but not really easily monetizable. I would probably build a lot of them, especially with being able to do those so much faster with AI. If AI can do all the games by itself and doesn't require my or anyone's creativity, then super, I will just play them, because by definition they have to be better than anything so far, and if they are not, then by definition human creativity still matters there and they can build, either way seems good to me.

As for travel, I think there would be people out there doing this out of hobby, having pubs as a hobby thing, hosting people as a hobby, spreading their existing culture out of passion, not because they need to make money. I would actually prefer that type of travel over feeling like they only act friendly to me because I will be paying to them. In this case it would be visiting people who want you to visit them with no exchange of anything, both sides would be doing it out of curiosity or desire.

Post reply on HN