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

Ask HN: Can we just admit we want to replace jobs with AI?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 151 posts

Re: Ask HN: Can we just admit we want to replace jobs with AI?

#41

Post by weatherlite »

globalise83 wrote: post #36
gnfargbl wrote: post #15

But how is an individual supposed to "prepare" for AGI? The outcome of further automation will be to move even more capital under the control of an even smaller number of hands. It's that increasing inequality which is the problem, not AGI.

If you are right, a modest investment in an index fund of shares covering tech companies in the USA should generate enough returns over the next few years to retire in comfort.

They will have very good earnings if this happens but I'm not expecting them to become 10x their current market cap in a few years. So yeah I put some money on the index but retire comfortable sounds too good to be true to me.

Re: Ask HN: Can we just admit we want to replace jobs with AI?

#42

Post by sapphicsnail »

Throw83949489 wrote: post #18

> we aren't advancing humanity with AI, it is just focused on automating out jobs. We are doing both! You are assuming people like to work, and jobs are something good. Without jobs, people will have less stress and more free time. They will spend more time on leisure activities, with their families, and so on. Also jobs contribute to carbon emissions, we have to maintain cities, large offices, car makes CO2 for comm…

Companies aren't going to assign less work hours and still pay the same wages. A small group of people will become even richer and everyone else will have to work just as hard as before.

Re: Ask HN: Can we just admit we want to replace jobs with AI?

#43

Post by pizza »

gnfargbl wrote: post #15

But how is an individual supposed to "prepare" for AGI? The outcome of further automation will be to move even more capital under the control of an even smaller number of hands. It's that increasing inequality which is the problem, not AGI.

Maybe something like dividends for all citizens? Either way, atoms will still matter where no number of bits will fix your problem. It's also possible that AI will introduce unimaginably profitable ways for non-technical people to give others value, though, I wouldn't bet on it, or even that does pan out I can't see it becoming particularly widespread.

Re: Ask HN: Can we just admit we want to replace jobs with AI?

#44

Post by versteegen »

veunes wrote: post #16
jkhdigital wrote: post #12

All major technological advancements have eliminated some jobs and created others. In general, producing more with less human input is how society becomes richer. Is it a tragedy that we no longer need telephone switchboard operators, ice cutters, and lamplighters? There were surely countless mini-tragedies as the people who made their livelihoods that way struggled with stagnant wages and unemployment, but the next…

Yet the change isn’t without hardship, though. For the people who lose jobs due to new technologies, the transition can be difficult. But I agree innovation may seem disruptive in the short term for some, in the long run, it’s part of a broader process

> in the long run, it’s part of a broader process

Well put. And what is this broader process? Those who say new jobs will always be created as others become obsolete think that the broader process is standing still in stream: job titles change, average wealth and comfort increase, but the structure of civilisation will never change. That we'll all still have jobs and won't become unemployable. Eternal stasis sounds absurd to me.

But I don't assume that the change that happens will be bad. And I don't think all jobs will go. I think we'll end up with a fraction of people employed and well off, such as tradespeople, while the majority will busy themselves with unpaid labour. I already do.

Re: Ask HN: Can we just admit we want to replace jobs with AI?

#45

Post by weatherlite »

jkhdigital wrote: post #12

All major technological advancements have eliminated some jobs and created others. In general, producing more with less human input is how society becomes richer. Is it a tragedy that we no longer need telephone switchboard operators, ice cutters, and lamplighters? There were surely countless mini-tragedies as the people who made their livelihoods that way struggled with stagnant wages and unemployment, but the next…

Well if we have machines that can think, plan and reason and also exhibit incredible amounts of infinite empathy and patience and an IQ of a PHD physicist wtf is there for us to do exactly?

Sure, we'll have work for people taking care of children and the elderly (and even this might start to fade away as we get humanoid robots that become cheaper and more capable, staff losing it and beating up children is a frequent occurrence where I'm from) but what about the tens of millions of other jobs we all do?

I'm talking about the theoritcal case AGI is in fact achieved. For now - we're not there at all.

Re: Ask HN: Can we just admit we want to replace jobs with AI?

#46

Post by oytis »

physicsguy wrote: post #40

It feels to me like there'll start to be people retraining sooner rather than later. If you feel your job is threatened, you're likely to look at options that can't be easily displaced. I did a Physics degree and PhD and my 'backups' are going to do something in the very very regulated nuclear industry (currently crying out for people in the UK) or going into teaching. I think the people who will be most easily displ…

If an AI can do "most economically valuable jobs" retraining won't help. Unless you want to retrain for something that is not economically valuable enough to spend compute on it, and has having a human body as a non-negotiable prerequisite.

Re: Ask HN: Can we just admit we want to replace jobs with AI?

#47

Post by gunian »

it's just a new evolutionary/eugenic variable. the people who can get out, switch to trades and manual labor, learn to fish, minimize costs etc will pass the test and survive

then robots will become a thing and the same for manual labor i think the non manual labor work class was chosen because they have demonstrated problematic sentiments to the powers that be

a lot of people might die or UBI may become a thing. migration to less developed areas might happen although i doubt the powers that be will allow cross border movements they love their fiefdoms

the barons will always be there unless there is a skynet type event that wipes out humanity same shit different day if you a peasant like me and not a good dev without any dev education or connections most probably will die it is what it is

Re: Ask HN: Can we just admit we want to replace jobs with AI?

#48

Post by beardyw »

If we assume that very many people will be unemployed there will need to be a complete change in political focus towards supporting society rather than the individual. That is, wealth will need to be directed to those who need it rather than those who can grab it. The USA is one of the least politically prepared for that, but contains the wealth to resolve it. We will live in interesting times.

Re: Ask HN: Can we just admit we want to replace jobs with AI?

#49

Post by JimDabell »

usrnm wrote: post #22

The whole idea behind computers has always been replacing people, it's the foundation of our industry. From the very first scientific calculations that used to be performed by people before computers, replacing human labour is what allowed IT to grow so fast and so big. Most people on this site enjoy their fat paychecks because one person writing code can replace thousands of people that used to do stuff manually dec…

Not just computers, technology in general. Humanity has spent thousands of years inventing technology to reduce human effort. We always find new jobs to do because we want to achieve bigger and better things. Arguing against AI because it takes jobs is essentially an argument against virtually all technology.
Post reply on HN