Live data from Hacker News

AI adoption and Solow's productivity paradox

fortune.com

381–390 of 783 posts

Re: AI adoption and Solow's productivity paradox

#381
post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I might not be a good programmer but I've been a very productive one. Someone who is good at writing code isn't always good at making money.

AI slop books made more money than JK Rowling, too.

Maybe in the future, yea. Most likely not because creating books is much easier now but total reading time can't increase nearly as fast. More books chasing the same amount of reading time.

Re: AI adoption and Solow's productivity paradox

#382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The future of work is fewer human team members and way more AI assistants. I think companies will need fewer engineers but there will be more companies. Now: 100 companies who employ 1,000 engineers each What we are transitioning to: 1000 companies who employ 10 engineers each What will happen in the future: 10,000 companies who employ 1 engineer each Same number of engineers. We are about to enter an era of explosiv…

This seems like a bot comment.

So is yours.

Re: AI adoption and Solow's productivity paradox

#383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Socialist economies larger than kibbutzes could only be created and sustained by totalitarian states. Socialism means collective ownership of means of production . And people won't give up their shops and fields and other means of production to the government voluntarily, at least not en masse. Thus they have to be forced at a gunpoint, and they always were. All the subsequent horror is downstream from that. This is…

This is exactly what I meant, a centrally-planned economy where the state owns everything and people are forced to give everything up is just one terrible (Soviet) model, not some defining feature of socialism. Yugoslavia was extremely successful, with economic growth that matched or exceeded most capitalist European economies post-WW2. In some ways it wasn't as free as western societies are today but it definitely w…

"just one terrible (Soviet) model"

It is the model, introduced basically everywhere where socialism was taken seriously. It is like saying that cars with four wheels are just one terrible model, because there were a few cars with three wheels.

Yugoslavia was a mixed economy with a lot of economic power remaining in private hands. You cannot point at it and say "hey, successful socialism". Tito was a mortal enemy of Stalin, stroke a balanced neither-East-nor-West, but fairly friendly to the West policy already in 1950, and his collectivization efforts were a fraction of what Marxist-Leninist doctrine demands.

You also shouldn't discount the effect of sending young Yugoslavs to work in West Germany on the total balance sheet. A massive influx of remittances in Deutsche Mark was an important factor in Yugoslavia getting richer, and there was nothing socialist about it, it was an overflow of quick economic growth in a capitalist country.

Re: AI adoption and Solow's productivity paradox

#384

Just to be clear, the article is NOT criticizing this. To the contrary, it's presenting it as expected , thanks to Solow's productivity paradox [1]. Which is that information technology similarly (and seemingly shockingly) didn't produce any net economic gains in the 1970's or 1980's despite all the computerization. It wasn't until the mid-to-late 1990's that information technology finally started to show clear benef…

Yet with IT, the bottleneck was largely technical and capital-related, whereas with AI it feels more organizational and cognitive

Re: AI adoption and Solow's productivity paradox

#385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's possible to automate the pointless stuff without realising it's pointless.

Made me think of this. https://imgur.com/T4DAGG8

The question is: did the fake numbers make any difference? Were the management decisions based on them better or worse?

Re: AI adoption and Solow's productivity paradox

#386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[dead]

What happens if (and I suspect this to be increasingly the case now) you make someone 3x faster at producing a report that nobody reads and those people now use LLMs to not read the report whereas they were not reading it in person before? Then everyone saves time, which they can spend producing more things which other people will not read and/or not reading the things that other people produce (using llms)? Producti…

Now you know why GDP is higher than ever and people are poorer than ever.

Re: AI adoption and Solow's productivity paradox

#387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I asked if anyone heard of twitter vaporware and only 3 people heard of it from influencers, none used it. Shocking results, I say!

No, these people ("managers, engineers" etc.) do just not work in tech & IT but in other fields and they do not read tech news in your country etc. Most people are just "not that deep in there" as most people on HN.

I spend between 1 and 2h a day on hn and I barely know what openclaw is. I've seen it mentioned once or twice and checked their website but that's all.

If one lets AI FOMO since the release of chatgpt drive them they'd be glued to their screen 24/7.

Re: AI adoption and Solow's productivity paradox

#388

Just to be clear, the article is NOT criticizing this. To the contrary, it's presenting it as expected , thanks to Solow's productivity paradox [1]. Which is that information technology similarly (and seemingly shockingly) didn't produce any net economic gains in the 1970's or 1980's despite all the computerization. It wasn't until the mid-to-late 1990's that information technology finally started to show clear benef…

The comparison seems flawed in terms of cost. A Claude subscription is 20 bucks per worker if using personal accounts billed to the company, which is not very far from common office tools like slack. Onboarding a worker to Claude or ChatGPT is ridiculously easy compared to teaching a 1970’s manual office worker to use an early computer. Larger implementations like automating customer service might be more costly, but…

I think the subscription price is only the visible tip of the iceberg

Re: AI adoption and Solow's productivity paradox

#389

Just to be clear, the article is NOT criticizing this. To the contrary, it's presenting it as expected , thanks to Solow's productivity paradox [1]. Which is that information technology similarly (and seemingly shockingly) didn't produce any net economic gains in the 1970's or 1980's despite all the computerization. It wasn't until the mid-to-late 1990's that information technology finally started to show clear benef…

The comparison seems flawed in terms of cost. A Claude subscription is 20 bucks per worker if using personal accounts billed to the company, which is not very far from common office tools like slack. Onboarding a worker to Claude or ChatGPT is ridiculously easy compared to teaching a 1970’s manual office worker to use an early computer. Larger implementations like automating customer service might be more costly, but…

> A Claude subscription is 20 bucks per worker

Talking about macro economics, I don’t think that number is correct.

Re: AI adoption and Solow's productivity paradox

#390

My experience has been * If I don't know how to do something, llms can get me started really fast. Basically it distills the time taken to research something to a small amount. * if I know something well, I find myself trying to guide the llm to make the best decisions. I haven't reached the state of completely letting go and trusting the llm yet, because the llm doesn't make good long term decisions * when working a…

I suspect the real breakthrough for teams won't be better raw models, but better ways to make the "AI-assisted thinking" legible and shareable across the group, instead of trapped in personal prompt histories
Post reply on HN