Live data from Hacker News

AI's real threat to jobs isn't job loss, it's lower paychecks, new research says

businessinsider.com

21–25 of 25 posts

Re: AI's real threat to jobs isn't job loss, it's lower paychecks, new research says

#21
At the end of the day, the real threat of AI is degradation of businesses, eventually leading to extinction of those of them still absolutely convinced AI will replace everybody. The real AI adoption is extremely low, but many business leaders are (willfully?) blind. Eventually, the pendulum will swing in other direction and there will be enormous demand for human labour. It will happen when businesses finally start to realize that AI is ruining their businesses.

Re: AI's real threat to jobs isn't job loss, it's lower paychecks, new research says

#23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hahahhahahahhahha….you serious?

Doesn't seem insane. OpenAI made Luna more efficient and dropped prices 80% this week.

I think it’s more useful to apply OP’s question to about real, established businesses that already price products at the market rate. Not companies riding an unsustainable speculative bubble and playing pricing games in a desperate attempt to attract and retain users who they can later upsell or raise prices on to show “growth” and keep getting investor money.

Re: AI's real threat to jobs isn't job loss, it's lower paychecks, new research says

#24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hahahhahahahhahha….you serious?

Doesn't seem insane. OpenAI made Luna more efficient and dropped prices 80% this week.

We all know these aren’t the real prices.

When was the last time tech that wasn’t propped up by a VC bubble ever gone down in price.

Re: AI's real threat to jobs isn't job loss, it's lower paychecks, new research says

#25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't seem insane. OpenAI made Luna more efficient and dropped prices 80% this week.

We all know these aren’t the real prices. When was the last time tech that wasn’t propped up by a VC bubble ever gone down in price.

The television in my living room is cheaper than the one I had in 2005, and the insane part is that it was cheaper to buy before you even bother adjusting for inflation. I owned a Zenith 42" in 2005 I had purchased for $1400. The Samsung 65" I have now cost $649 I believe
Post reply on HN