Earlier quoted context omitted.
The ownership class is doing no such thing. Zoning, regulation, nimby-ism are what keep prices high.
> Zoning, regulation, nimby-ism And who exactly do you think controls these items?
[flagged]
I'm not worried about AI job loss
421–430 of 582 posts
Re: I'm not worried about AI job loss
#422[flagged]
(I work in house handling the tax function.)
If AI tools worked, they would eliminate the bookkeepers. Their job is data entry and validation.
But bookkeeping is extremely important. Bad bookkeeping has killed more companies than bad accounting. Without proper books, the accounting, finance, and tax teams are just cosplaying.
Re: I'm not worried about AI job loss
#423[flagged]
Yeah bro, its been three years. We are just beginning. We will replace the vast majority of professional service workers in 10 years including lawyers as Ai shifts to local and moves away from the cloud.
Lawyers, doctors, and accountants aren't just paid to be knowledge workers.
They're paid to accept responsibility for when they fuck up (even when it's not intentional).
Programmers aren't held responsible for their screw-ups. If they were, software wouldn't be the buggy mess it is today.
Re: I'm not worried about AI job loss
#424Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What society is ready for that? A free society.
I interpreted the parent comment as asking what society _specifically_? Not some abstract concept, but something that exists a step or two away from where we are right now.
That is correct, living in Sweden with pretty high levels of social protection, but even so, high levels of white collar unemployment would make our very high risk housing market (we as a population has a very high loan ratio, much of it committed to housing) collapse once people can’t pay. That would make the banks likely to collapse because their money no longer exist and they’re all of a sudden real estate brokers with inventory far below what they paid out in loans.
Union coffers would deplete fast, there would be no blue collar work so they also get dragged in with the storm.
Oh and of course, the stock exchange will crash completely.
Covid gave us a glimpse, this would make it look like child’s play, because there’s no solution and it’s not getting better.
The rich will of course get richer, even if absolute value goes down, the relative value of their wealth will go up.
Re: I'm not worried about AI job loss
#425AI is increasing my job security at the moment because the junior developers I work with use AI without discretion. On of them didn’t remember having worked on a feature they built with AI assistance in the recent past. To his credit he admitted he didn’t know how the code worked.
How much is the subject matter expertise you built at the last job was useful at your current job?
Re: I'm not worried about AI job loss
#426Earlier quoted context omitted.
I bet we're about to see a lot of 10-person $100M+ ARR companies emerge. That's a scale where teams can be tight and excel.
when. people have been saying that since 2022. when and how. hmm?? show your work. or is this just more slype being spewed...
I think something around that scale (say maybe 20 employees, but definitely not hundreds) was possible even before LLM got popular, but the people involved needed to be talented and focused. I'm not sure if AI will really change that though.
Re: I'm not worried about AI job loss
#427I’m fascinated by the confidence in the cyborg theory that there will always be value in having a human in the loop. Especially for domains like code where the inputs and outputs are bits not atoms. This is exactly what chess experts like Kasparov thought in the late 90s: “a grandmaster plus a computer will always beat just a computer”. This became false in less than a decade.
Chess is a "kind" learning environment. The world tends to have more "wicked" environments.
Re: I'm not worried about AI job loss
#428The strongest point this article makes is that humans themselves are the greatest obstacle to change and progress.
That doesn't exactly bolster the author's position. Sure, there's already companies 30 years behind the curve.
But in an increasingly competitive and fast moving economy, "the human is slowing it down by orders of magnitude" doesn't exactly sound like a vote in favor of the human.
Re: I'm not worried about AI job loss
#429Whenever I get worried about this I comb through our ticket tracker and see that ~0% of them can be implemented by AI as it exists today. Once somebody cracks the memory problem and ships an agent that progressively understands the business and the codebase, then I'll start worrying. But context limitation is fundamental to the technology in its current form and the value of SWEs is to turn the bigger picture into a…
0%? This is as wrong as people who say it can do 100% of tasks.
Re: I'm not worried about AI job loss
#430Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The steamroller is still many inches away. I'll make a plan once it actually starts crushing my toes." You are in danger . Unless you estimate the odds of a breakthrough at <5%, or you already have enough money to retire, or you expect that AI will usher in enough prosperity that your job will be irrelevant, it is straight-up irresponsible to forgo making a contingency plan.
> You are in danger. Unless you estimate the odds of a breakthrough at It's not the odds of the breakthrough, but the timeline. A factory worker could have correctly seen that one day automation would replace him, and yet worked his entire career in that role. There have been a ton of predictions about software engineers, radiologists, and some other roles getting replaced in months. Those predictions have clearly be…
We are the French artisans being replaced by English factories. OpenAI and its employees are the factory.