151–160 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should come here and find some meaning painting my fence. While you are at it, the toilet in the basement is clogged, there is shit water all over the place. You could find meaning there too.
Just because I find reward in work, doesn't mean that all work is equally rewarding to me, or that I have an infinite desire for work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can be working without it being your only source of income. If everybody was given let’s say ten million dollars in capital (and endless social security), those who wanted could work. The rest of us wouldn’t mind letting the machines do the work.
By whom? ...and what will happen when every single person goes and tries to buy a 50" TV? Hm? Did we suddenly invent a magical TV making machine? Come on... this is Real Life, not Magical Fairy Land. We're not talking about a magical cornucopia that generates an endless amount of physical goods that can be used to accommodate the needs of every person. We're very specifically talking here about technological shift th…
Naturally this is purely hypothetical, parent argued that work gives meaning to life(which I generally agree with). I argued you can still be working, even if less efficiently than the machines.
Maybe it will be a gradual change. Agriculture and manufacturing is already highly automated, for better or worse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What a profoundly naive opinion. Most people find meaning, fulfillment, even contentment in working, especially when the problems are engaging and the solutions produce value. Many people claim their lives would be better if they never had to work, but they are bullshitting themselves with childhood naivete. Not working is a sucking void of boredom, nihilism, hedonism, and despair. I've been through some of that befo…
I agree completely. Additionally, people who hold this belief fail to realize that “I don’t want to work.” ACTUALLY means “I want others to work so I don’t have to.” For example, how are you going to eat? You are either going to grow, cultivate, and harvest your own food (i.e. work) or you’re expecting others to do that work for you. Oh, you say it can be “automated”? Well, who’s going to design, build, and maintain…
2 years ago we would both have agreed that that would be impossible. My belief is that most likely AI will hit another roadblock soon, following a "punctuated equilibrium" model so there will still be a large number of non-automatable jobs. But if I'm wrong and the pace of change of the last 2 years continues for another 10...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just because I find reward in work, doesn't mean that all work is equally rewarding to me, or that I have an infinite desire for work.
Humanity learning to automate art before toilet plumbing is a travesty of scale not previously imaginable.
1) Chaudry's article is amazing in its lack of creative thinking. If people like Priya can be ~10 times more productive wielding some AI tools, that means that many companies can potentially produce 10 times as many products/services and make more things that will enrich peoples' lives. Though some people in some companies might be laid off, it doesn't necessarily mean that more people will be laid off than new jobs…
Much in line with #3, I see GPT as a (IMHO, welcome) return to the days of a secretarial pool. You couldn't rely on a pool secretary to be conduct your business without oversight (because they had many Jr. Executives utilizing their services and weren't deeply engaged in your day-to-day like a dedicated Sr Executive Assistant might be), but they were experts in typing, drafting, and professional correspondence generally. GPT promises more, as it can express some level of subject matter expertise in almost every topic, but I believe that, for the foreseeable future, it will be best utilizable as a productivity enhancing assistant rather than as a full replacement for those with the expertise needed to check its results.
Edit: On the flip side, companies that still have secretarial pools (though I'm only aware of such pools still existing in government agencies, which won't be replaced due to need for secrecy) will probably end up firing a lot of secretaries.
It often generates code that won't compile or won't run correctly, but that sort of goes in the correct direction, enough that I can spot the blunders and refine my questions. Quite often I even learn a few new things when using it to explore libraries and frameworks I don't know that well but in languages that I am very comfortable with.
Now, for example, I am a lousy front end developer. Not really my area of expertise. I can do minor maintenance on an existing code base, but that's about it. ChatGPT has been more a hindrance than helpful in that particular domain, because I can't easily spot the flaws in its output, and I don't know in which directions to properly refine my questions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Jobs often make people feel useful. While many can be the happy unemployed person playing Counterstrike 24/7, many others need some sort of occupation for self-realization. This is actually a common problem, which can even became a major psychological issue, with people entering retirement. Maybe one day we can live in a world where machines are doing all the work and there are fulfilling hobbies for everybody, but I…
Anyone who has been unemployed may know how badly it affects a persons self-worth.
1) Chaudry's article is amazing in its lack of creative thinking. If people like Priya can be ~10 times more productive wielding some AI tools, that means that many companies can potentially produce 10 times as many products/services and make more things that will enrich peoples' lives. Though some people in some companies might be laid off, it doesn't necessarily mean that more people will be laid off than new jobs…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can be working without it being your only source of income. If everybody was given let’s say ten million dollars in capital (and endless social security), those who wanted could work. The rest of us wouldn’t mind letting the machines do the work.
As any student who takes Econ 101, or reads history, (or has heard of a country called Argentina? or has opened a newspaper during the past year of post-Covid inflation?) will learn, this assumption is factually incorrect. If you give everyone ten million dollars, there will be a phenomenal and rapid increase in the price of goods, especially consumer staples (since everyone got that money, and everyone buys staples)…
Money is the measure of the productive capacity of an economy. If you increase the money without increasing the capacity then you get inflation. But let's be charitable and assume that "Gud" was talking about increasing the capacity commensurately. Because that's what's happening. AI, robots and almost zero marginal cost green energy are going to increase the productive capacity of economies dramatically over the next decade or two.