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

Replacement.ai

replacement.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 725 posts

Re: Replacement.ai

#341

Post by onraglanroad »

brookst wrote: post #324
onraglanroad wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> employee contracts in the US are very rare in tech Is that true? I've never had a job where I didn't sign a contract (in the UK and for multinationals including American companies). I wouldn't start without a contract. And I'm not in any rockstar position. It's bog standard for employees.

Do these contracts provide guarantees to you, or just to the employer? In the US it is entirely one sided and provides no protection from arbitrarily being fired without cause.

There are statutory rights that you have anyway, such as for a full time position you are entitled to 28 days leave, so the contract normally covers extra stuff (so I have 33 days under my current one).

Plus it covers things like disciplinary procedures, working hours etc. It's really weird to me that you don't have that. Are you sure it's normal?

To address your specific point, you can mostly be fired without reason if you're a new employee. You get more rights after 2 years so companies generally have a procedure to go through after that. You can always appeal to an employment tribunal but they won't take much notice if you've been there a couple of months and got fired for not doing your job.

Re: Replacement.ai

#342

Post by metabagel »

devolving-dev wrote: post #326

I've never really been convinced that robots or AI replacing humans is a real problem. Because why would they do that? If I had an army of super intelligent robots, I would have them waiting on me and fulfilling my every whim. I wouldn't send them off to silicon valley to take all of the programming jobs or something like that. You might say: "but you'll need money!". Why would I need money? The robots can provide my…

> The robot masters would just split away and have their own economy.

Good thing there are no resources to fight over - land, minerals, and water.

Re: Replacement.ai

#343

Post by zer00eyz »

TechSquidTV wrote: post #86

Personal belief, but robots coming for your jobs is not a valid argument against robots. If robots can do a job better and/or faster, they should be the ones doing the jobs. Specialization is how we got to the future. So the problem isn't robots, it's the structure of how we humans rely on jobs for income. I don't necessarily feel like it's the AI company's problem to fix either. This is what government is for, and n…

> Personal belief, but robots coming for your jobs is not a valid argument against robots.

Replace the word robot with "automation" or "industrialization" and you have the last 200 years of human history covered.

The Ludites could have won and we would all have 1500$ shirts.

Do you know any lamp lighters? How about a town crier?

We could still all be farming.

Where are all the switch board operators? Where are all the draftsmen?

How many people had programing jobs in 1900? 1950?

We have an amazing ability to "make work for ourselves", and history indicates that we're going to keep doing that regardless of how automated we make society. We also keep traditional "arts" alive... Recording didnt replace live performances, TV/Film didnt replace Broadway... Photography didnt replace painting...

Re: Replacement.ai

#344

Post by Spivak »

rapatel0 wrote: post #190
everdrive wrote: post #171

[flagged]

If robots are a better partner, then maybe your are not that great a partner...

This is a perfect microcosm of this discussion. You're going to be replaced by robots because they will be better than you at everything but also if they're better than you at anything then that's your personal moral failing and sucks to be you.

HN Comment in 2125: Why would I have casual sex with a real guy, I can have a sexual partner who I can tailor perfectly to my in the moment desires, can role play anything including the guy in the romance novel I'm reading, doesn't get tired, is tall and effortlessly strong, has robotic dexterity, available 24/7, exists entirely for my pleasure letting me be as selfish as I want, and has port and starboard attachments.

What makes you think that sex is some sacred act that won't follow the same trends as jobs? You don't have to replace every aspect of a thing to have an alternative people prefer over the status quo.

Re: Replacement.ai

#345

Post by oxag3n »

username223 wrote: post #297
allturtles wrote: post #32

This is a brilliant piece of satire. "A Modest Proposal" for the AI age. The leader bios are particularly priceless. "While working for 12 years as the Director of HR for a multinational, Faith realized that firing people gave her an almost-spiritual high. Out of the office, Faith coaches a little league softball team and looks after her sick mother - obligations she looks forward to being free of!"

"I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed, is, at a year old, a most delicious nourishing and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee, or a ragout." Would Sam Altman even understand the original, or would he just wander ignorantly into the kitchen and fling some s…

Why did I read that FT article start to finish?

Seems like a waste of time, but at the same time the feelings were similar to looking Hannibal Lecter in the kitchen scene.

Re: Replacement.ai

#346

Post by Imustaskforhelp »

citizenpaul wrote: post #186
Loughla wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that AI and advanced robotics (and matter synthesis and all that future stuff) must come with a post scarcity mindset. Maybe that mindset needs to happen before. Either way, without that social pattern, I'm afraid all this does is enshrine a type of futuristic serfdom that is completely insurmountable.

> post scarcity mindset A total shift of human mentality. Humans have shown time and again there is only one way we ever get there. A long winding road paved with bodies.

I searched some day and there is enough food to end world hunger once or (twice I know for a fact once, but I had a reddit article which said twice but I am not pulling that source but you get it)

> Less than 5% of the US’ military budget could end world hunger for a year. [1]

My friend we live in 1984, when the main character discovers that eurasia and others have enough food / resources to help everybody out but they constantly fight/lessen it just so that people are easy to be manipulated in times of war.

I discovered this 5% statistic just right now and its fucking wild. US itself could end world hunger 20 times but it spends it all on military. I don't know if its wrong or not but this is fucking 1984. The big brother has happened. We just don't know it yet because the propaganda works on us as well, people in 1984 didn't know they were living in 1984.

And neither do we.

Have a nice day :)

Sources [1]: https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/hunger-global-citiz...

Re: Replacement.ai

#347

Post by collinmanderson »

beeflet wrote: post #338
collinmanderson wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> isn't "we made a machine to do something that people used to do" basically the entire history of of technology? I know, right? Machines have been gradually replacing humans for centuries. Will we actually get to the point where there are not enough jobs left? It doesn't seem like we're currently anywhere close to the point of not having any jobs available. Has anyone thought about how the Federal Reserve plays a ro…

We're already here. Most jobs are fake.

It seems like the _quality_ of the jobs (or median job) may have gone down, but the _quantity_ of jobs relative to population has remained roughly steady, right?

Re: Replacement.ai

#348

Post by metabagel »

steve_adams_86 wrote: post #124
lateforwork wrote: post #111

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…

Plus, many billionaires fund campaigns to spread the ideology of a cripplingly limited government.

Re: Replacement.ai

#350

Post by para_parolu »

timeon wrote: post #286
kwar13 wrote: 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?

No cheap sugar?
Post reply on HN