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

Marx, Keynes, and AI

unpopularfront.news

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 104 posts

Re: Marx, Keynes, and AI

#31

Post by 3ddds »

whstl wrote: post #29
watwut wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the alarmist writing I see about AI displacing workers or suddenly and drastically changing the economy ... are from pro-ai boosters trying to create hype around AI. They are not criticism of ai, they are openly stated goals and aspirations.

About pro-AI boosters: One of the people in the company I work for/with is a non-programmer that has a “vibe coding consulting” gig on the side. Basically half of their Linkedin is about how they’re shipping features at half the speed as developers, with quality, etc. They’re not. They took about three months to prototype something that was rejected for not working/unreadable code. Another team built the same feature…

I think there is a time and place where the outputs of LLMs belong.

The issue is this requires NUANCE.

And the more certain people expose themselves to LLMs and forgo that ability to sit there and think painstakingly about nuanced things - the more useless they become IMO.

Re: Marx, Keynes, and AI

#32

Post by nateb2022 »

moffers wrote: post #16
bwhiting2356 wrote: post #7

U.S. unemployment rate is steady at ~4% and we are now almost 4 years after the release of ChatGPT. The Jobs Apocalypse seems to be always on the horizon. UBI is being pushed by college educated workers burnt out of white collar work (understandably), but when you suggest to them working construction, teaching school, or working in a hospital, they deflect and go quiet.

But total unemployment is going up: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/U6RATE

Correlation isn't causation; in the last few years we've experienced some significant economic headwinds like COVID and the current oil crisis. AI rollout is not happening in a vacuum.

Re: Marx, Keynes, and AI

#33

Post by UpsideDownRide »

pasquinelli wrote: post #3

i'm sure it's meant in some kind of technical sense that is precisely defined in the field of economics, but this use of the word "rational" is irritating: > This demand externality traps rational firms in an automation arms race, displacing workers well beyond what is collectively optimal. you can't be trapped in a sub-optimal situation and be rational at the same time. the rational thing for these rational competit…

Yeah it's a pet peev of mine as well. People define very tight space and then proclaim actions irrational if they don't make rational sense in that setting.

Which wouldn't be a problem in itself if there was discussion about the defined space and if it is an actually good model.

A big chunk of economics is like that, if the data doesnt fit the model then too bad for the data. Same goes for metrics used, externalities are like a side note in economy books and not an example of fundamental issues with current economic toola and modeling.

And it's not limited to introductory level either. Nordhaus had most asinine assumptions in his model and he got the pseudo-Nobel.

It's not pretty.

Re: Marx, Keynes, and AI

#34

Post by UpsideDownRide »

idontwantthis wrote: post #5
pasquinelli wrote: post #3

i'm sure it's meant in some kind of technical sense that is precisely defined in the field of economics, but this use of the word "rational" is irritating: > This demand externality traps rational firms in an automation arms race, displacing workers well beyond what is collectively optimal. you can't be trapped in a sub-optimal situation and be rational at the same time. the rational thing for these rational competit…

> you can't be trapped in a sub-optimal situation and be rational at the same time Yes you can that’s what tragedy of the commons is. Rational means you take the choice that provides the most value for yourself. Without a cartel (hard) or government regulation this situation happens all the time.

Yes and no. It's not a new problem for humans and it's a pretty solvable problem if social pressure and structures can be applied once it is identified. As long as the resource is to be used by a community that depends on it and not an outsider then we are able to keep ourselves mostly in line for the benefit of the group.

Re: Marx, Keynes, and AI

#35

Post by MattDamonSpace »

Not compelling for the basic reason laid out at the start of the article: this is just a re-phrasing of Marx

The guy was telling a story about capitalist economies in the 1800s. Little, if anything, about the next 100+ years has proven his stories or concerns valid.

Re: Marx, Keynes, and AI

#36

Post by whstl »

3ddds wrote: post #31
whstl wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About pro-AI boosters: One of the people in the company I work for/with is a non-programmer that has a “vibe coding consulting” gig on the side. Basically half of their Linkedin is about how they’re shipping features at half the speed as developers, with quality, etc. They’re not. They took about three months to prototype something that was rejected for not working/unreadable code. Another team built the same feature…

I think there is a time and place where the outputs of LLMs belong. The issue is this requires NUANCE. And the more certain people expose themselves to LLMs and forgo that ability to sit there and think painstakingly about nuanced things - the more useless they become IMO.

I agree. It requires good judgement, domain knowledge, good work ethic.

Grifters who think the LLM can do it all for them will definitely not survive in a competitive market.

Re: Marx, Keynes, and AI

#37

Post by francisofascii »

bwhiting2356 wrote: post #7

U.S. unemployment rate is steady at ~4% and we are now almost 4 years after the release of ChatGPT. The Jobs Apocalypse seems to be always on the horizon. UBI is being pushed by college educated workers burnt out of white collar work (understandably), but when you suggest to them working construction, teaching school, or working in a hospital, they deflect and go quiet.

hospital and construction works get about $20/hour. Being a teacher will require going back for a 2nd degree. Is that the alternative for knowledge worker when getting laid off?

Re: Marx, Keynes, and AI

#38

Post by kingstnap »

bwhiting2356 wrote: post #7

U.S. unemployment rate is steady at ~4% and we are now almost 4 years after the release of ChatGPT. The Jobs Apocalypse seems to be always on the horizon. UBI is being pushed by college educated workers burnt out of white collar work (understandably), but when you suggest to them working construction, teaching school, or working in a hospital, they deflect and go quiet.

I think the jobs thing will be a slowly then all at once thing.

Firstly, AI is sort of like this to begin with. It's useless for something until it gets hill climbed and is useful for something. AI agents for chip design was an idiotic idea just a year ago but now AI is writing RTL everywhere.

Secondarily jobs are like this as well. When the marginal shitty gig work goes from 0.1 return on investment to 0 return on investment due to oversaturated workers only then do the flood gates of having nothing to do open.

Thirdly market crashes always happen suddenly and chaotically. And such a AI market crash would cause serious divesment and job losses for blue and white collar workers. Its hard to understate the blast radius.

Lastly if you are talking about the US unemployment rate in particular that one will be cooked until the evidence is undeniable. There are enormous financial and political stakes on that particular number.

Re: Marx, Keynes, and AI

#39

Post by munificent »

Excellent article:

> This last point is crucial: it’s not that capitalist CEOs are just evil people—well, some definitely are—no, the structural logic is coercing them to do something destructive in order to survive. They can’t help themselves.

I spend a lot of time thinking about how much of the world going sideways is from bad actors and how much is from emergent behavior of complex systems. The answer is both.

In particular, there is a level above this that I want to draw attention to. The structure of corporate competition coerces executives into choices that are bad for the world. This is true even for entirely well-meaning executives.

However, executives are not stupid or unaware. So over time, it becomes known that being in an executive position will require you to make choices that are perhaps "economically rational" for the firm but otherwise require compromised morals. And once that awareness gets out, the system selects CEOs that are OK with that moral compromise.

So it's less a question of "is it bad actors or bad systems" and more "it's a bad system that produces bad actors".

Re: Marx, Keynes, and AI

#40

Post by mc32 »

ikrenji wrote: post #17
bwhiting2356 wrote: post #7

U.S. unemployment rate is steady at ~4% and we are now almost 4 years after the release of ChatGPT. The Jobs Apocalypse seems to be always on the horizon. UBI is being pushed by college educated workers burnt out of white collar work (understandably), but when you suggest to them working construction, teaching school, or working in a hospital, they deflect and go quiet.

by some measures unemployment is at 25% and this aligns with my personal experience much better than frankly the bs 4% rate that is being pushed by this admin https://www.lisep.org/tru

4% may be optimistic but 25% is great depression levels of unemployment and it’s nowhere near that. We could be at 6%.
Post reply on HN