Live data from Hacker News

Replacement.ai

replacement.ai

281–290 of 725 posts

Re: Replacement.ai

#281

I have still not seen, firsthand, someone lose their job to "AI". Parts and pieces, sure. But when the entire Venn diagram of 'this job' is laid out, it requires a cerebellum connection at some point. A vivid picture of someone's job being totally dissolved to AI is missing.

I know translators that have. Not because there’s nothing left to do for humans in quality translation, but because demand and compensation dropped so much that you can’t make a living from it anymore.

Re: Replacement.ai

#282
post #160
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s worth (re)watching the 1985 movie Brazil in particular the character of Harry Tuttle, hearing engineer https://youtu.be/VRfoIyx8KfU Neither government or corporations are going to “save us” simply because sheer short termism and incompetence. But the seem incompetence will make the coming dystopia ridiculous

I do wonder if somewhere like China might be better off - they might not have muh freedumb, but their government seems keen to look after the majority and fund things that corporations wouldn't.

I believe that if the elites in China didn't need the populace, they would dispense with them.

Re: Replacement.ai

#283
post #277
post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Equating “business” to “profound human intimacy” might be one of the most HackerNews comments of all time

My job is more important than intimacy. Intimacy won't keep me warm, or fed.

If intimacy doesn’t keep you warm you might be doing something wrong.

Re: Replacement.ai

#284
Am I the only one who thinks this is just cringe?

I definitely think AI companies marketing claims deserve mockery...but this isn't even good/interesting/smart satire??

It feels like we've fully completed the transition to Reddit here, with its emotional and contradictory high school political zeal (being both progressive and anti-progress at the same time) dominating the narrative.

Something about upvote-based communities is not holding up well in the current climate.

If humans have regressed enough intellectually where they are praising this as "Brilliant social commentary" then we absolutely SHOULD be replaced by AI.

Re: Replacement.ai

#285

You don't need money. What you need is wealth. I am going to leave it to PG to explain the difference [1]: Wealth is not money. Wealth is stuff we want: food, clothes, houses, cars, gadgets, travel to interesting places, and so on. You can have wealth without having money. If you had a magic machine that could on command make you a car or cook you dinner or do your laundry, or do anything else you wanted, you wouldn'…

My main concerns: 1. When such wealth is possible through autonomous means, how can the earth survive such unprecedented demands on its natural resources? 2. Should I believe that someone with more wealth (and as such, more power) than I have would not use that power to overwhelm me? Isn't my demand on resources only going to get in their way? Why would they allow me to draw on resources as well? 3. It seems like the…

These concerns are already perfectly applicable to the current state of the world, no? More planetary boundaries keep getting crossed due to unnecessarily large resource usage, the poorest people don't have access (even though they could) to the resources necessary to survive...

Re: Replacement.ai

#286
post #260

Agriculture used to be more than 50% of ALL employment in the USA. Now it's barely 2%. Ever wondered why? I understand the spirit of this, but most of this alarmism is misguided in my view.

Americans used to be not fat. Ever wondered why?

Re: Replacement.ai

#288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you end up with is a dozen people owning all the wealth and everyone else owning nothing, resulting in the robots not doing anything because no one is buying anything, resulting in a complete collapse of the economic system the world uses to operate. Mass riots, hunger wars, political upheaval, world war 3. Nuke the opposition before they nuke you.

That’s one scenario, but there are others. There are lots of open-weight models. Why wouldn’t ownership of AI end up being widely distributed? Mabybe it's more like solar panels than nuclear power plants?

Because the open models are not going to make as much money?

Re: Replacement.ai

#289
post #259
post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Equating “business” to “profound human intimacy” might be one of the most HackerNews comments of all time

Jobs aren't just business. Humans derive a lot of meaning from being useful and valued.

You’re right and validating the point.

A specific part of GP’s comment keeps getting overlooked:

  So the problem isn't robots, it's the structure of how we humans rely on jobs for income.
Humans being forced to trade time for survival, money, and the enrichment of the elite, is a bug. We are socially conditioned to believe it’s a feature and the purpose.

Nobody is saying robots should replace human connection and expression

Edit: tone

Re: Replacement.ai

#290
post #16

I kind of get it, but at the same time...isn't "we made a machine to do something that people used to do" basically the entire history of of technology? It feels like somehow we should have figured out how to cope with the "but what about the old jobs" problem

Not really, because this time it's not machine to do something that people used to do, but a machine to do anything and everything that people used to do.

Enjoy eating a bowl of pasta ?
Post reply on HN