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

Young People Hate AI CEOs So Passionately That It's Almost Hard to Believe

futurism.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 199 posts

Re: Young People Hate AI CEOs So Passionately That It's Almost Hard to Believe

#181

Post by ethbr1 »

digitaltrees wrote: post #172
tim333 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Though a lot of that was a political choice to outsource to China and similar. We've had a lot of new tech since 1900 - cars, electric motors, internet, computers and the like and I'm not sure it's led to inevitable unemployment as opposed to people doing different jobs. The times there were mass unemployment like the great depression were more down to dumb economics and politics rather than tech. Even with AGI robot…

Yes it was political. But only possible by the shipping container which was a technology shift. It’s not purely that people shift to other jobs, it’s what jobs and where. A union manufacturing job and retail cashier job at dollar tree are not equivalent. And when the whole core of a company moves they aren’t replaced. The real number is work force participation. It’s down. Alot. Economic share of wages is down. Alot.

There's two concepts unaccounted for by the "but different jobs" pro-AI economic rewriting story.

1. As you say, new jobs of what sort, with what labor power, and at what pay?

Offshoring manufacturing was as much about breaking US labor unions as anything else. No unions in China, and no bad press about feuding with US workers. Just 'oops, new economic reality, things change, so sorry'.

Making high value add jobs disappear and replacing them with only low value add jobs isn't a net gain.

2. What mechanism do people see realistically distributing hypothetical bountiful gains from AI-boosted productivity?

Let's imagine AI works out perfectly: productivity gains through the roof, entire industries automated, record corporate profits across the board.

What plausible path do people see from that (and the unemployment it spiked) to most people being given a chunk of the profits?

Remember: they're already legally spoken for by the shareholders.

Introducing new corporate tax rates at the federal level? Ha!

And even if UBI manages the get through in some form... how much do you think that will be?

Which is to say, how much of their wealth do you think the richest will be willing to part with to redistribute?

Because history says as little as they can get away with.

Re: Young People Hate AI CEOs So Passionately That It's Almost Hard to Believe

#182

Post by ethbr1 »

palmotea wrote: post #162
tim333 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Though a lot of that was a political choice to outsource to China and similar. We've had a lot of new tech since 1900 - cars, electric motors, internet, computers and the like and I'm not sure it's led to inevitable unemployment as opposed to people doing different jobs. The times there were mass unemployment like the great depression were more down to dumb economics and politics rather than tech. Even with AGI robot…

> Though a lot of that was a political choice to outsource to China and similar. We've had a lot of new tech since 1900 - cars, electric motors, internet, computers and the like and I'm not sure it's led to inevitable unemployment as opposed to people doing different jobs. The times there were mass unemployment like the great depression were more down to dumb economics and politics rather than tech. None of those tec…

> Ok. So you have a small number of planters with big estates, what happens to all the other people (e.g. the "slaves" and other worksers, after the planters no longer need them)?

It's an apt metaphor, but probably not in the way parent intended it. History says there will certainly be hoarders of wealth... and then everyone else.

Re: Young People Hate AI CEOs So Passionately That It's Almost Hard to Believe

#183

Post by digitaltrees »

ethbr1 wrote: post #181
digitaltrees wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it was political. But only possible by the shipping container which was a technology shift. It’s not purely that people shift to other jobs, it’s what jobs and where. A union manufacturing job and retail cashier job at dollar tree are not equivalent. And when the whole core of a company moves they aren’t replaced. The real number is work force participation. It’s down. Alot. Economic share of wages is down. Alot.

There's two concepts unaccounted for by the "but different jobs" pro-AI economic rewriting story. 1. As you say, new jobs of what sort, with what labor power, and at what pay? Offshoring manufacturing was as much about breaking US labor unions as anything else. No unions in China, and no bad press about feuding with US workers. Just 'oops, new economic reality, things change, so sorry'. Making high value add jobs dis…

I agree with most of your points and think you’re asking the right questions. Unfortunately, our opinions don’t really matter.

The only thing I would say is that shareholders don’t have an exclusive legal right to profit. That is a policy choice and one that has shifted over time (American law has moved to the extreme shareholder maximizing end of the spectrum) and is currently different in other countries (Germany has a corporate governance structure that Requires an employee and union board of directors so it isn’t just shareholders interests that are represented in governance decisions.

Re: Young People Hate AI CEOs So Passionately That It's Almost Hard to Believe

#184

Post by skupig »

digitaltrees wrote: post #151
piloto_ciego wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Man, I see this stuff, and I think, "my god! think of the opportunity we have to replace the current economic system with something where we're not all in a fierce knife fight to try to stay employed so we don't starve!" We have to stop fearing the machines and start fearing the firmware running on our brains! It's capitalism that's the problem, not the robots... if anything the robots can liberate us from capital's…

Its not capitalism thats the problem, its that monopolies and capital concentration destroy capitalism, and we have let monopolies and capital concentration run uncheck for several generations. A capitalist system would be only small local businesses, no walmarts, no Tyson chicken, no google, when you have 1000s of small producers competing the price setting function of a market actually works, and the wealth is dist…

Yeah, or to put it a different way, an ineffective, easily corrupted, and insufficiently representative government is the problem.

Re: Young People Hate AI CEOs So Passionately That It's Almost Hard to Believe

#185

Post by preg_match »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #16
ohyoutravel wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet AI CEOs preach the “AI will take your job and you’ll be homeless” narrative so hard.

Their investment narrative, enterprise value, and potential liquidity event depends on this proclamation, regardless of how true it is.

We can't expect people to somehow deduce that AI CEOs are lying and therefore should like them.

Also, even if people DO know AI CEOs are lying... why would that make them likable? Liars are unlikable, almost as a rule. Of course people don't like and trust them.

So either AI CEOs genuinely believe the "permanent underclass" stuff, in which case you should hate them because obviously. Or they don't believe it, in which case you should hate them because they're liars. Either way they lose. The only way to win is to not say batshit insane stuff that implies everyday people will die en-masse. Which... yeah. I feel like anyone could've told them that.

Re: Young People Hate AI CEOs So Passionately That It's Almost Hard to Believe

#186

Post by tim333 »

digitaltrees wrote: post #183
ethbr1 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's two concepts unaccounted for by the "but different jobs" pro-AI economic rewriting story. 1. As you say, new jobs of what sort, with what labor power, and at what pay? Offshoring manufacturing was as much about breaking US labor unions as anything else. No unions in China, and no bad press about feuding with US workers. Just 'oops, new economic reality, things change, so sorry'. Making high value add jobs dis…

I agree with most of your points and think you’re asking the right questions. Unfortunately, our opinions don’t really matter. The only thing I would say is that shareholders don’t have an exclusive legal right to profit. That is a policy choice and one that has shifted over time (American law has moved to the extreme shareholder maximizing end of the spectrum) and is currently different in other countries (Germany h…

I figure your opinions and similar one will matter because in a democracy people can vote to redistribute the wealth however.

Re: Young People Hate AI CEOs So Passionately That It's Almost Hard to Believe

#187

Post by Sabinus »

palmotea wrote: post #163
DANmode wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, this isn’t my perspective, just again parroting what’s being asked for: if there’s less work to be done for everyone to have what they need, that would be considered a benefit by governed society, and universal basic income will likely be rolled out.

> if there’s less work to be done for everyone to have what they need, that would be considered a benefit by governed society Not necessarily. It's not going to be evenly distributed. It's not like today, but everyone works 4 hours a week. Some dudes will work 80, others won't work at all. That situation is what's most adventitious to shareholders. > and universal basic income will likely be rolled out. If UBI even h…

>If UBI even happens, it's going to enable a poverty-level existence.

Why? Remember all the work that's being done now would still be being done by robots. There should be more surpluses not less.

Re: Young People Hate AI CEOs So Passionately That It's Almost Hard to Believe

#188

Post by DANmode »

red-iron-pine wrote: post #167
DANmode wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, this isn’t my perspective, just again parroting what’s being asked for: if there’s less work to be done for everyone to have what they need, that would be considered a benefit by governed society, and universal basic income will likely be rolled out.

why likely? the guys who have all of the money are trying their hardest to crush it literally the ones related to this very site

Because the rich can only wear so many pairs of shoes, and buy so many chain-restaurant pizzas.

That’s the shortest I can make it.

Pandemic workplace closures exposed a lot of that.

Re: Young People Hate AI CEOs So Passionately That It's Almost Hard to Believe

#189

Post by owebmaster »

Sabinus wrote: post #187
palmotea wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if there’s less work to be done for everyone to have what they need, that would be considered a benefit by governed society Not necessarily. It's not going to be evenly distributed. It's not like today, but everyone works 4 hours a week. Some dudes will work 80, others won't work at all. That situation is what's most adventitious to shareholders. > and universal basic income will likely be rolled out. If UBI even h…

>If UBI even happens, it's going to enable a poverty-level existence. Why? Remember all the work that's being done now would still be being done by robots. There should be more surpluses not less.

Robots do most of the work of producing RAM and we got a shortage, not surplus.

Re: Young People Hate AI CEOs So Passionately That It's Almost Hard to Believe

#190

Post by rwz »

chillfox wrote: post #35
bbor wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, CEOs are rarely appreciated in general. But the anti-tech sentiment is absolutely a new and rapidly growing beast. It’s different — trust me.

A lot of tech recently has just made things worse. Uber made the taxi experience way worse and less predictable. Now, I can’t just walk out of a bar, get into a clean taxi and go home, I have to fiddle with an app, wait, wave trying to identify “my” ride, then hope it’s clean and safe. It’s a nightmare compared to what we had before. Uber eats made food delivery significantly worse and more expensive. It used to be t…

We might be living in different worlds, but for me Uber is infinitely better than taxis. I can get it anywhere, within minutes and it's clean and nice. I see where they are and I know exactly how much I'm going to pay to get to my destination. I don't even know how or where to hail a taxi these days, but all the taxis I got into at the train stations and in some airports were a huge downgrade from Uber — dirtier, older/shittier cars, inaccessible front seat.

Also, Uber Eats delivers food that used to be pretty much non-deliverable. There's no comparison, it's a pure net-additive capability. You just couldn't get a lot of foods without physically going there and now you can.

Post reply on HN