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

The AI backlash is only getting started

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 272 posts

Re: The AI backlash is only getting started

#221

Post by monocasa »

gruez wrote: post #210
monocasa wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that kind of work would have been split up by gender. The etymology of "woman" is literally "weaving person", and those kinds of tasks were up to the mostly adult women who also wouldn't have been working in the fields, so it ends up being a wash when painting with a wide brush.

> The etymology of "woman" is literally "weaving person" [citation needed] >Except that kind of work would have been split up by gender. It's still work. It doesn't magically have zero value because it was done by women. The methodology cited by the book counts only counts hours worked if it's farming or wage employment, but doesn't count any household labor, which means anything that's shifted from being made at hom…

> It's still work. It doesn't magically have zero value because it was done by women. The methodology cited by the book counts only counts hours worked if it's farming or wage employment, but doesn't count any household labor, which means anything that's shifted from being made at home to being bought would could as extra hours worked, even if it saves time overall.

Nobody said it had zero value. The point is that labor roles were extremely gender striated, and the record is mostly kept only for men's labor. So saying that they worked more because of the example task you gave doesn't make sense when societally that work was put onto others.

Re: The AI backlash is only getting started

#222

Post by 627467 »

vitorfblima wrote: post #19

The untold promise of IA is to replace labor. That's probably the only reason why some people are willing to spend trillions of dollars in pursuing this technology. Mere tools would never justify this kind of investment. It's no surprise that people are getting angry, even though many are using AI in their everyday life.

> untold promise of IA is to replace labor

Untold? AI going for (insert your favorite) jobs has been on headlines, conferences, substacks, etc non-stop before chatgpt was able to consistently reply twice without hallucinating

Re: The AI backlash is only getting started

#223

Post by monocasa »

watwut wrote: post #209
monocasa wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that kind of work would have been split up by gender. The etymology of "woman" is literally "weaving person", and those kinds of tasks were up to the mostly adult women who also wouldn't have been working in the fields, so it ends up being a wash when painting with a wide brush.

Women were working fields and were working with farm animals too. They did not done work that required physical strength unless they had no choice, but that does not mean they did not "worked fields". Second, work being split by gender does not matter here. Women are, by definition, people too. And weaving, sewing, candles crafting were all literal necessity. A weaving woman would sell or exchange results of her work…

The point is that the data we have is on men's work. No one said that women were bored SAHM hobbies. Just that pointing out extra tasks that need to be done in addition to the record we have of men working 150 days a year doesn't make much sense when that additional work wasn't done by men.

Re: The AI backlash is only getting started

#224

Post by spwa4 »

watwut wrote: post #207
spwa4 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it wasn't. And it wasn't because of government regulation. The land you require for preindustrial peasanting was, of course, tightly regulated and owned by ... well, not you. Read the whole "tragedy of the commons", especially the part about government deciding to just sell the whole thing to the highest bidder, which instead of fixing the problem, set off another wave of city migration. If you stayed on the land…

Pretty much all historians writing about industrial revolution are claiming completely opposite of what you do. Industrial revolution was a catastrophe for an average worker. The child mortality went up during industrial revolution. Social problems went up. It took quite a lot of violence for things to settle.

No they aren't. There very much was a reason during the industrial revolution why people were driven to the cities and into the factories.

Re: The AI backlash is only getting started

#225

Post by rescripting »

BeetleB wrote: post #124
baron816 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are they built in people’s backyards? There’s a famous case in Northern Virginia that has admitted they messed up zoning which gets cited in every story to make it look like they’re all built in people’s backyards, but the vast majority of them are in industrial zones.

For a lot of folks (including near where I live), "building in my small city" is the same as "backyard". The narrative is "Use up a lot of land, pay almost no taxes, and employ almost no people."

Don't forget "drive up utility prices" and barring that, "pollute the air with gas generators".

Re: The AI backlash is only getting started

#226

Post by Gud »

The problem is that a majority of the world sustain their living by selling their labour as a commodity, while a small minority control the economy via ownership of capital.

For the owning class of people most of us are the same thing as a bucket of paint, a car or any another commodity.

It doesn't have to be this way, but it is.

Re: The AI backlash is only getting started

#227

Post by hackable_sand »

adrians1 wrote: post #158
xydone wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a feeling that comparing a safe, sustainable energy source to large language models is disingenuous. If you support LLMs and the field, you can just state it outright, without insincere comparisons.

If you oppose LLMs and the field because of pure irrational instinct, like those people in the past, you can just state it outright, no need for complicated arguments.

You made a strawman afraid of fire

How much clown makeup do you guys put in your coffee?

Re: The AI backlash is only getting started

#228

Post by yunwal »

justonepost2 wrote: post #113
yunwal wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "by definition" Who's definition are we talking about here

The definition of AGI?

Nobody has mentioned AGI in this thread until this comment. And either way, there's no evidence that AGI as you're defining it is going to be solved anytime soon. Sam Altman and Dario may claim it will to pump their incoming IPOs, but outside of la la land, OpenAI and Anthropic aren't making any big robotics plays, which leaves a huge chunk of the "G" in AGI completely unattended to.

Re: The AI backlash is only getting started

#229

Post by joquarky »

justonepost2 wrote: post #138
coef2 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironically, developers may turn out to be easier to replace than taxi drivers. We've seen technological progress replaced workers or made certain roles obsolete, and this may become another example. I hope governments and public institutions take a more active role in supporting people going through the transition.

Good to know we can maybe count on the government to send us a few 1000 dollar checks on the way to the human zoo.

I'm hoping I get assigned to the nice terrafoam housing that they build before they start drastically cutting corners.
Post reply on HN