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

Most AI value will come from broad automation, not from R & D

epoch.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 319 posts

Re: Most AI value will come from broad automation, not from R & D

#221

Post by IshKebab »

anon7000 wrote: post #215
IshKebab wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah the thing is there were better jobs that ex-farmers (or at least their children) could go to. I'm unconvinced that's the case this time round. Especially for unskilled people.

Is that really true 120 years ago? We have a lot of hindsight bias, but things really weren’t amazing for the average person in the US even one hundred years ago. Today, the average person has affordable access to a lot of things that may have been luxuries, or simply didn’t exist, 100-200 years ago. Running water, electricity, internet, mobile phones, modern sanitation & infrastructure, and any number of tiny cheap…

> Is that really true 120 years ago? We have a lot of hindsight bias, but things really weren’t amazing for the average person in the US even one hundred years ago.

I didn't say they were. I said they had better jobs to go to than working in the fields. I'm not saying their lives were better than ours are now. Obviously not.

Re: Most AI value will come from broad automation, not from R & D

#222

Post by techpineapple »

gnulinux wrote: post #98
bashfulpup wrote: post #69

Very typical SV argument that R&D is "complex" and everything else is "simple". Would it blow your mind if I told you 10yrs ago that we'd have AI that can do math/code better than 99% of humans but ordering a hotdog on doordash would be cutting edge and barely doable? I don't disagree that "common" tasks are more valuable. I only argue that the argument these are easily automatable is a viewpoint based on ignorance.…

> if I told you 10yrs ago that we'd have AI that can do math/code better than 99% of humans This not even remotely close to true. Like not even a little bit. I use Cursor and Gemini for work daily and I'd be hard pressed to think AI is a "better" programmer than any professional software engineer. Sure it makes writing code faster and more efficient, because you just click tab and three lines are written for you. It…

I realized today while coding with cursor that AI seems to operate exactly the way I intuit it does, which is it acts like a junior engineer who works by copying existing code but doesn’t understand why. For a lot of tasks that works great, I do this a lot as a senior engineer, but I know when not to. you can’t let it run wild, because it doesn’t know when not too.

Re: Most AI value will come from broad automation, not from R & D

#223

Post by graemep »

ryandrake wrote: post #159
aiajsbdbdjxjx wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody’s arguing things aren’t better in some ways than the past. But your argument amounts to what is essentially trickle down economics. The median American is getting a marginal improvement - the top .1% American has gotten an astronomical improvement. The wealth gap increasing is a moral failure of our billionaires. They should take pride in building a better tomorrow for their fellow countrymen. And what we have…

It's not just a moral failure of the billionaires. Many of us live in democracies, so we are choosing (through our elected officials) that creating a few billionaires is more important than building a better tomorrow. The sorry state of things could be undone in a single election if people didn't explicitly want and vote for the sorry state of things.

We have a limited choice of who to vote for. Here in the UK that is the big parties think, and most of the smaller ones too. The same is true in many democracies.

Douglas Adams described it well:

"No," said Ford, who by this time was a little more rational and coherent than he had been, having finally had the coffee forced down him, "nothing so simple. Nothing anything like so straightforward. On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people." "Odd," said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy." "I did," said Ford. "It is." "So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't people get rid of the lizards?" "It honestly doesn't occur to them," said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want." "You mean they actually vote for the lizards?" "Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course." "But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?" "Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?"

Re: Most AI value will come from broad automation, not from R & D

#224

Post by tmnvix »

scarface_74 wrote: post #174
dragontamer wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a weird non-sequitur you did. > But that doesn’t mean that the other 60% are homeless and starving. No one said starving. I'm saying that the average person is in worse straights than the average person from the 1980s. If your message is 'Maybe not everyone needs a house' then it kinda sounds like you agree with me?

The home ownership rate in 1980 was also in the mid 60s… https://www.census.gov/library/publications/1991/demo/sb91-0... In fact home ownership rate has consistently been in the mid 60s since 1960 https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/home-ownership-ra... In which way is the average person worse? Worse health? Worse life expectancy? More homeless people?

From your source:

> Home Ownership Rate refers to the percentage of homes that are occupied by the owner

So this rate is not that of people that own a home, but homes that are owned by someone that resides there.

Consider people in shared housing, young adults staying with parents, etc.

Re: Most AI value will come from broad automation, not from R & D

#225

Post by achierius »

scarface_74 wrote: post #162
OJFord wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, 'having that much money (or credit worthiness to borrow it) regardless of what you do with it', then? Many people don't want to be itinerant, they want a settled home to make their own and enjoy for a long time if not life. 'Forever home' is a phrase and a positive one because that is a goal people have.

And those same people who want their “forever home” and aren’t willing to move to where the jobs are unemployed and underemployed. I want a million dollars a year income. No one owes me that. Move to where the jobs are. I moved from my hometown in south GA the week I graduated from college because there were no jobs.

You can't both tout status-quo economic figures and then point at hypothetical alternatives. If people did as you say and took those lower-paying jobs, then the average person would be less well off -- perhaps closer to the experienced reality for many.

Re: Most AI value will come from broad automation, not from R & D

#226

Post by tmnvix »

nthingtohide wrote: post #104
buckle8017 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The availability of fertile land.

Vertical farming / hydroponics will solve that.

Doesn't work well for potatoes (and other carbohydrate heavy crops) as far as I'm aware.

Re: Most AI value will come from broad automation, not from R & D

#227

Post by ToucanLoucan »

scarface_74 wrote: post #162
OJFord wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, 'having that much money (or credit worthiness to borrow it) regardless of what you do with it', then? Many people don't want to be itinerant, they want a settled home to make their own and enjoy for a long time if not life. 'Forever home' is a phrase and a positive one because that is a goal people have.

And those same people who want their “forever home” and aren’t willing to move to where the jobs are unemployed and underemployed. I want a million dollars a year income. No one owes me that. Move to where the jobs are. I moved from my hometown in south GA the week I graduated from college because there were no jobs.

Well the problem, and stick with me here, is that we have people everywhere. So, as a consequence of that, having broad opportunities for everyone to earn a decent living, in more than a handful of places in the entire country, is an unambiguously good thing. And like, maybe this is pink-haired commmie-scum thought of me to say, but perhaps you shouldn't need to leave your childhood home, friends, support system, and familiar places when you finish your schooling in order to earn a living? Just because it's... really bad for you, and makes for a less stable you, which on balance over millions of times for everyone else who grew up with you, makes for a less stable society?

> I want a million dollars a year income. No one owes me that.

Why is this always where this type of conversation goes? No one has spoken about any entitlement here, but frankly, while you aren't owed a million dollars a year, I'd say you're owed something. Assuming you're working full time, I'd say you're owed at least a living wage.

Re: Most AI value will come from broad automation, not from R & D

#228

Post by treis »

goatlover wrote: post #204
treis wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think we're that far away but I also think it looks different than humanoid robots. I can see a drain plumbing system that maps out a new construction home and some sort of automated robot that builds out large sections of pipe. It wouldn't completely eliminate the plumber. But it'd change it from something like measuring, cutting, and gluing 100 times to walking around with a camera for 5 minutes and then gl…

That's just for new construction though. What about all the existing homes that need repairs?

Sure, but it's still an AI plumber even if it can't replace every single plumber.

Re: Most AI value will come from broad automation, not from R & D

#229

Post by ttoinou »

somenameforme wrote: post #131
rqtwteye wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technical progress would be fantastic if the benefits didn't go mainly to the top. I am pretty sure in the not too far future we will have enough technology that you can live off the land somewhere with the help of some robots. Or have them do all your housework. In principle, this is great, but our society is not set up for a lot of people not working while the technology is progressed by a relatively small number o…

There's a simple litmus test for these sort of nearish future dystopias - how long before you have an 'AI plumber' or an 'AI electrician'? I'm not just listing random skilled trades, but listing jobs that are extremely complex, 100% context sensitive in a way that just doesn't generalize well, requires a mixture of high dexterity and high strength, and a million other things. To say nothing of the numerous [oft extre…

Its more likely that we’ll hire plumbers who are going to throw a robot at the job and double check the work

Re: Most AI value will come from broad automation, not from R & D

#230

Post by scarface_74 »

ToucanLoucan wrote: post #227
scarface_74 wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And those same people who want their “forever home” and aren’t willing to move to where the jobs are unemployed and underemployed. I want a million dollars a year income. No one owes me that. Move to where the jobs are. I moved from my hometown in south GA the week I graduated from college because there were no jobs.

Well the problem, and stick with me here, is that we have people everywhere. So, as a consequence of that, having broad opportunities for everyone to earn a decent living, in more than a handful of places in the entire country, is an unambiguously good thing. And like, maybe this is pink-haired commmie-scum thought of me to say, but perhaps you shouldn't need to leave your childhood home, friends, support system, and…

What exactly does society even with a strong safety net (which I support) owe anyone? Universal healthcare? Yes. A method to enable people to have safe shelter? Yes. Even public transportation to get to jobs - Yes. I’m even in favor of affordable public college education.

But everyone should be able to own a home? No.

People today are living all across the country and not be homeless and the people who live in the poorest states repeatedly vote for politicians that want to cut government services and cut the safety nets. Right now they are cheering DOGE. Why should I feel sorry for rural America? They are getting exactly what they voted for.

We are under no obligation as a country to make sure that people who want to live the rest of there life in the MiddleOfNowhere Oklahoma can stay there for the rest of their life who don’t want to move. Besides again, these people overwhelmingly voted for politicians who don’t want to help them.

They are also cheering for the dismantling of the Education department, defunding colleges, cutting Medicaid, inflationary tariff policies, etc.

Post reply on HN