Live data from Hacker News

Yes, AI Will Take Your Job

blog.calebjay.com

31–33 of 33 posts

Re: Yes, AI Will Take Your Job

#31

Lots of points on AI is just a "tool" and that's where I think misconception and misunderstanding will be most devastating for some. - Yes, engines did replace horses, it was utility revolution - Yes, computers replacing pen, paper and calculators - Yes, internet has revolutionized access, borderless business, communication and digital transformation All the inventions have been about tool replacing another tool, but…

It's no different from the perspective of a business. A human is a tool in that context as much as a cotton gin or a horse is.

The difference is that it's less clear how humans can "just adapt to use the new tool" when the tool thinks. But this isn't actually that much of a difference -- were the horse ferriers re-employed as engine designers and manufacturers? No. From their perspective the engine was just as much of an existential threat.

The question remains: how do we mitigate the impact of making human labor obsolete on society and on the humans impacted. How do we make sure humans still have a way to contribute to society and the economy? The alternative is disastrous.

Re: Yes, AI Will Take Your Job

#32
post #15

i'm so tired of those HN blog articles where the title is always someone over confidently claiming something they have no expertise over (sorry, being a software engineer and founder doesn't make you a job market expert nor a historian, and doesn't make your opinion relevant). I wish there were options on HN to filter out "my opinion is a fact and you're all wrong" articles

> I wish there were options on HN to filter out "my opinion is a fact and you're all wrong" articles

Don't wish. Just vibecode it for your personal use. Seriously.

Re: Yes, AI Will Take Your Job

#33
post #2

I think this article takes some assumptions for granted: 1. AI will get better, and at a price point that makes sense for businesses to operate on. 2. "Managers" (non-technical users) will be as good at using AI as "frontend engineers" (technical users) or make something of comparable quality. 3. All or most technical problems can be solved by AI. I think the title and take for this type of doom thinking is not reall…

In my view the article makes the following points. 1. AI does not need to get better for the MBA to use it instead of your labor. 2. They don't need to be good at using AI because they don't care about quality. 3. Most technical problems are unsolved right now and AI won't change that. If you observer the processes PMs follow they can just drop in an AI agent instead of a dev. Just tell it to do stuff and look at the…

"they won't get fired if it keels over" ?

In a company that badly managed, AI or not AI the ship's going down.

Post reply on HN