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

The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

newrepublic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 399 posts

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#131

Post by site-packages1 »

animegolem wrote: post #121
troosevelt wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you lost your $60,000 a year job due to this, do you really believe a basic income funded by it will make up that loss? It won't. Basic income in the US is usually proposed at $12k per year, which would add another $3 trillion to the budget. Do you think you can even get that just taxing these companies? I don't. People who bring up basic income need to get serious about the numbers involved because I never see it…

And even if you did get the 60k and never can find work again are you gonna be happy about the next door neighbor working for 120k and getting his 60k on top?

Well I can tell you that I work 40+ hours a week and am very unhappy my neighbor has a more expensive house than me. Someone should do something!

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#132

Post by zmmmmm »

operatingthetan wrote: post #38
MBCook wrote: post #16

Are they? I heard a presentation from some pro-AI people on Friday to the large company I work at. They said they surveyed people at an AI conference and 93% of people were excited about it. This was said with a straight face like “people love puppies!”. No self awareness at all.

In consulting firms and corporations you kind of have to pretend to be into it, it's just the culture.

It is hazardous to swim against that tide currently from a career perspective - people rapidly categorise you as generically anti-AI even if you try to express a reasonable nuanced view. It's pretty toxic.

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#133

Post by nobodyandproud »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #36
nobodyandproud wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t even. Unlike vaccines, the patent misbehavior by Monsanto says otherwise about GMO.

That's not an issue with GMOs. That's an issue with patents and attempts to restrict replanting.

That’s basically the face of GMOs, so it is an issue for GMOs. GMOs for whatever reason have a terrible ambassador and I haven’t seen evidence to the contrary.

For vaccines, a good portion of the population remember vaccines being developed and marketed to help people. Then there are immigrants that remember more recently how life changing vaccines are.

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#134

Post by deepsquirrelnet »

> In a provocative GitHub post, machine-learning engineer Han-Chung Lee argued that even rosy internal numbers that do show AI-assisted productivity gains are suspect, as they’re produced to hit adoption targets no one can effectively audit.

Isn't this fundamentally what MBAs do with their time? Keep going with this analysis, because it goes much deeper... In my experience, BI is often a house of cards. A lot of times it's just narrative crafting, just like we're all encouraged to do when we write our resumes.

Can you embellish a story? Can you invent a convincing political narrative? As far as I can tell, that's the fundamental unit of US corporation.

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#135

Post by pydry »

fluoridation wrote: post #109
pydry wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just as hyperloop was designed as a techbro pie in the sky notion to kill high speed rail, basic income as an idea is designed to kill more realistic attempts to shore up welfare, e.g. * A job guarantee like we had during the great depression * Lowering retirement age * Raise minimum wage * Expanding medicare to everyone It's worth remembering that if AI really can do everyone's jobs then it'll be wildly deflationary…

Job guarantees and higher minimum wages are just UBI with extra steps, while lowering retirement age is just conditional UBI by another name. If you're giving people more money in exchange for nothing (or nothing of any value to anyone, as in the case of a job guarantee), it's effectively indistinguishable from UBI.

"When our grandparents built the hoover dam, the lincoln tunnel and the triborough bridge with a job guarantee that was just money for nothing - UBI with extra steps."

^ this would be an accurate representation of your opinion then?

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#136

Post by operatingthetan »

yoyohello13 wrote: post #99
Tyrubias wrote: post #41

This was evident everywhere except within the AI industry itself. The rhetoric from many of the industry’s top leaders has been “this technology will eliminate millions of jobs, fundamentally reshape countless other jobs, and automate the use of lethal force, but we’re going to develop it anyways”. Many of the current economic woes, including mass layoffs, have been blamed on AI by the very executives conducting said…

I’m frankly more shocked that people in the industry are surprised the general public hates them. Like it’s been non-stop fear mongering and hype from them for years, AI has basically done nothing to improve the lives of normal people, wtf did they expect?

If they are in a cult that shuns outside opinions, it could be a surprise when they find out...

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#137

Post by jazz9k »

CodeCompost wrote: post #101
guzfip wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You basic income is 12k? Congratulations, your rent just went up 12k a year.

This is the part most people don't understand or intentionally ignore. It will accelerate inflation and 12K will be worth even less than it is now.

The natural progression of this is always government price fixing, which always ends up in complete destruction of the economy.

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#138

Post by cortesoft »

retired wrote: post #102
cortesoft wrote: post #44

I feel like their are (at least) three main critiques of AI, and I wish we could debate them separately, because I think they each have different resolutions. The first is the fear of job loss, and I feel like this is the most straightforward to deal with. Personally, I think the solution should be to share the productivity of AI with society at large, in particular since AI owes most of its abilities to training on…

Needing less offices, less people driving to those offices, less A/C and heating for those offices and less resources building those offices could offset the energy usage of AI.

The people still need to be somewhere, so while commuting could be reduced I am not sure about heating/cooling usage.

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#139

Post by oytis »

cortesoft wrote: post #44

I feel like their are (at least) three main critiques of AI, and I wish we could debate them separately, because I think they each have different resolutions. The first is the fear of job loss, and I feel like this is the most straightforward to deal with. Personally, I think the solution should be to share the productivity of AI with society at large, in particular since AI owes most of its abilities to training on…

Universal basic income is not an adequate replacement for a good career. Universal unconditional prosperity might be one, but it's not clear whether AI can really do that.

Re: The AI industry is discovering that the public hates it

#140

Post by JuniperMesos »

retired wrote: post #58
badc0ffee wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> housing crisis worsens as datacenters are build I take your other points, but I can't see the connection there. I've heard that they increase electricity rates in many cases (poorly managed electric utilities that can't build out grid capacity without raising rates for everyone), but not that they're affecting housing.

For The Netherlands, construction work causes emissions. There are limits to these emissions. Building a data center means you can't simultaneously build a house anywhere nearby the construction site as that would cause the local emissions to go over the set limits. Next to that there is net congestion. The energy grid is currently critical, if you add a data center that means you will not be able to connect 20 to 30…

> For The Netherlands, construction work causes emissions. There are limits to these emissions. Building a data center means you can't simultaneously build a house anywhere nearby the construction site as that would cause the local emissions to go over the set limits.

This is an insane regulation, and I wonder if it was passed by NIMBYs whose actual goal is to prevent the construction of housing near them.

Post reply on HN