301–310 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This has been the promise over and over again, for centuries, and it has consistently not paid off. Where's the predicted society where automation allows us all to work for two hours a day, and spend the rest at leisure? The extra value has gone to enrich the oligarchs rather than to the people. Maybe that should change.
How do you deprive an oligarch of their ill gotten wealth without violence?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your comment is amazing in its naivete. The first sentence in the post you are replying to already includes awareness of everything you said and more, while nothing in your comment suggests you understood the post at all. Priya doesn't become 10 times more productive, someone else uses the tool to do her job, which no longer exists.
Or half her team gets fired
Job loss is one thing, but in all honesty, my main concern with AI is that it’ll wipe out humanity. My thoughts: - If we ever achieve an AGI with legitimate consciousness/self-awareness/agency, I believe it will be dramatically more powerful than humans - Humans have driven countless numbers of species extinct, not because we’re trying to, but because we’re so much more powerful than them that we wipe them out by acc…
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…
Everything you write can be true, and this can still be disastrous for some individual, whose life may be badly damaged.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> that means that many companies can potentially produce 10 times as many products/services and make more things that will enrich peoples' lives. This has been the promise over and over again, for centuries, and it has consistently not paid off. Where's the predicted society where automation allows us all to work for two hours a day, and spend the rest at leisure? > Though some people in some companies might be laid…
> Where's the predicted society where automation allows us all to work for two hours a day, and spend the rest at leisure? if you'd like the standard of living of a few centuries ago, you can probably fund that by programming for a couple hours a week. instead you want entertainments, medicines and foods that take correspondingly more effort to produce.
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…
> that means that many companies can potentially produce 10 times as many products/services and make more things that will enrich peoples' lives. This has been the promise over and over again, for centuries, and it has consistently not paid off. Where's the predicted society where automation allows us all to work for two hours a day, and spend the rest at leisure? > Though some people in some companies might be laid…
> GPT4 gave the correct answer in 1/10th the time it would take Priya and cost a lot less. [...] Priya has tried to learn coding, but she has struggled. Not that she gets a lot of time to do it either. 1) Show Priya how to use GPT4 to do her current job in 1/10th of the time. 2) Let her use part (50%+) of the time saved to learn coding or whatever other skill she needs (not sure coding is it).
Why? No really: why? Businesses are profit-seeking entities. Why not just fire nine people? You save money . (Yes, this could be a really stupid decision for the company in question. I agree with you. I'm not saying what should happen. I'm saying what will happen, and that that is really bad.)
If it's like many businesses in the classification world, they aren't lacking for work, so it's more like they'll be able to do 10x the work done by keeping the same number of people.
I asked GPT4 to write me a simple document. Took like 9 tries and I had to proof read it and make adjustments. And that's with a simple paragraph in a written language. Forget about doing the header and the footer properly. It's silly that I have to spell it out on HN of all places. Writing code is much more complex. There's a reason we call the job "Software Engineer". GPT doesn't know what it doesn't know. It doesn…
When we built the first airplane it could barely carry a single person and didn't go far... We are just barely touching digital general intelligence, and we're not even using API enabled versions that use tooling. And that's what we have today. Tell me, what is AI going to do tomorrow? >If you're worried about GPT taking over your job you just show your own lack of knowledge and experience. Oh, I'm glad you popped ou…
The big oversight here is that Priya does not want a job , what Priya wants is an income . The point of life is not working, the point of life is to enjoy it. We should strive to eliminate as many jobs as we possibly can, the less we have to work the better it is. To make this possible we need to find a way to a new system that doesn't directly link labour with income .
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…
This doesn't just apply to software development. There are a lot of garbage jobs, dead end positions, where the people are effectively not doing anything. That is a weight on our economy but we can't just cut them out. What would those people do if they didn't have to waste so much of their time to live? Sure there are going to be people that go all in on becoming puddles on the couch, but I'd argue more people have passions they would actually have the energy to pursue.
People could spend more time with their families without being stressed out and burned out by everything else in the world. I'd argue that would most likely lead to healthier childhoods for kids, likely with better supplemental education as well leading to a smarter society in the long run.
People get tired of partying, and the people that don't make good examples for the next generation of what not to do. You can see that in our current society as the younger generation is drinking significantly less and doing fewer drugs to the point major alcohol manufacturers are concerned about their bottom lines.
There will always be degenerates, but people want the fulfillment that comes with actually doing things like you said. They will find that one way or another.
I've been using ChatGPT a lot. I'm no longer feeling much anxiety over the future of software engineering. GPT is a great tool. Still just a tool. It helps remind me how to do things I do rarely. To get code that exactly fits my requirements, I'd have to get so specific that I might as well just write the silly code myself. But for shell scripts, SQL, stuff like that, it's pretty decent. Yesterday I asked it to give…