Preparing for AI's economic impact: exploring policy responses • Hacker News Board

Re: Preparing for AI's economic impact: exploring policy responses

#61

Post by culll_kuprey » Wed, Oct 15, 2025, 1:54 PM UTC

lm28469 wrote: post #49

Cheer2171 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, so we can't address any specific problems with any technology, because we should actually be fixing all of society at the root of all those problems. So while you wait for our broken political system to solve those root causes, enjoy feeling smug about not having implemented any imperfect, temporary bandaids to stop some bleeding. Are you working on fixing those root problems? Or after dismissing short term polic…

> So while you wait for our broken political system Yeah we better let these important topics in the hands of very stable people like Musk or Thiel, they for sure know what the people want > make more money in the short run if governments don't do any tech regulation in the short run? "Money money money money", homo sapiens decerebration under capitalism is quite something to witness. Maybe just maybe there is more t…

I’ve come to understand there’s no point arguing. These people are as amoral and unscrupulous as they dogs they worship.

Re: Preparing for AI's economic impact: exploring policy responses

#62

Post by cudgy » Wed, Oct 15, 2025, 2:00 PM UTC

lm28469 wrote: post #49

Cheer2171 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, so we can't address any specific problems with any technology, because we should actually be fixing all of society at the root of all those problems. So while you wait for our broken political system to solve those root causes, enjoy feeling smug about not having implemented any imperfect, temporary bandaids to stop some bleeding. Are you working on fixing those root problems? Or after dismissing short term polic…

> So while you wait for our broken political system Yeah we better let these important topics in the hands of very stable people like Musk or Thiel, they for sure know what the people want > make more money in the short run if governments don't do any tech regulation in the short run? "Money money money money", homo sapiens decerebration under capitalism is quite something to witness. Maybe just maybe there is more t…

So how does the a country protect itself? If it opens markets, then it becomes at the whim of the global marketplace, which is completely greed, focused, ultra capitalism. We end up with what we have now in the US: lots of cheap crap, but poor income growth.

If it closes its markets and creates an insular market that provides workers decent pay and focuses on the citizens by having a self reliant economy that minimally require inputs or outputs from other countries, what is stopping companies from leaving the country? Capitalism or at least pure capitalism with open markets appears to be not working for the vast majority of the population of the worldor at least unable to be reconciled with the disparities between different countries. The only groups that appeared to benefit or gain improvements are those at the bottom, because they can be easily exploited while at the same time feeling like they’re making more gains economically. Once this group’s wages reach the level that is higher than the another group, the cycle repeats all the corporations rotate to the new low cost region, causing all sorts of disruption, etc..

Re: Preparing for AI's economic impact: exploring policy responses

#63

Post by cudgy » Wed, Oct 15, 2025, 2:09 PM UTC

notatoad wrote: post #12

i see the comments here are pretty cynical about this post, and probably for good reason. especially "you might have to start taxing consumption instead of income because people won't have income anymore" but at least a couple of these proposals seem to boil down to needing to tax the absolute crap out of the AI companies. which seems pretty obviously true, and its interesting that the ai companies are already saying…

AI companies are in a difficult position right now. Anthropic is taking the lead by looking like they care and are concerned about the effects of the technology that their feverishly building.

I don’t trust them. Their strategy is to say “don’t worry about all your jobs being taken by our technology. We (AI companies) are going to be taxed so much that you are going to be living a wealthy and fruitful life making meme photos and looking at AI porn. Don’t be concerned about how you’ll pay your bills. We’ll work it all out. Trust us.”

Re: Preparing for AI's economic impact: exploring policy responses

#64

Post by Jensson » Wed, Oct 15, 2025, 2:20 PM UTC

frozenseven wrote: post #46

musicale wrote: post #33

The most immediate impact might be the bursting of the AI bubble and a dotcom-like crash of tech stocks and businesses like Anthropic. Financial circularity could also lead to instability.

>bursting of the AI bubble I hope people will eventually revisit these predictions and admit they were wrong.

There is an AI bubble just like there were a dotcom bubble, they are not wrong everyone know there is an AI bubble even Sam Altman says that AI is currently a bubble. The question is how much value AI gives after the bubble has popped, but there is a bubble.

Re: Preparing for AI's economic impact: exploring policy responses

#65

Post by cudgy » Wed, Oct 15, 2025, 2:25 PM UTC

buu700 wrote: post #45

varispeed wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> its interesting that the ai companies are already saying that. This is just cheap PR to launder legitimacy and urgency. To create false equivalence between AI agent and an employee. I think this is a sign of weakness, having seen AI rolled out in many companies where it already shows signs of being absolute disaster (like summaries changing meaning and losing important details - so tasks go in wrong direction and t…

Personally, if I were going to publish something like this as a leader of a major AI company today, I would actually try very hard to put together a good faith proposal that I genuinely believed to be in the best interests of the public. I can't speak to this particular proposal or the motivations behind it, but I think my approach is the smart play in the present circumstances. Why publish something brazenly self-se…

“My current preference is a guaranteed educational/training stipend for any unemployed adult who wants one, and changing the standard career advice for the next generation from "learn to code" to "learn to startup".”

I agree with this sentiment in the short term for people that have coding or startup skills already. We may need to ask ourselves at some point. Why work for a company when I can use AI to create a competitor to my employer in two months?.

However, this is not a long-term solution as not everyone can be a startup. Startups fail at a huge rate and they’re gonna fail even more and more startups and more people are competing to be startups. Startups don’t pay money until they start making a profit which could be years, so it’s not a legitimate replacement for a current position. This seems like a very, very competitive low, low cost of entry race to the bottom type of market so many of the benefits may quickly disappear.

Re: Preparing for AI's economic impact: exploring policy responses

#66

Post by cudgy » Wed, Oct 15, 2025, 2:36 PM UTC

sateesh wrote: post #59

intended wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then There are NO options. We will have to live with that world and having no future. I’m aware that this level of nihilism is difficult for many to stomach - but it’s only nihilism if you believe in fairy tales. If we are talking about reality then we have to deal with the impossible challenges we are facing. The fact is that retraining will not work - nor is this the first time it’s been named as a hope up in the p…

Not that I completely disagree with you, yes indeed with excellent training not sure how many can be retrained to be good enough for new kind of job roles, skills. Also it isn't certain that there will be far more new jobs than what would get shed, in which case there won't be enough demand to absorb even the retrained (and skilled) labor.

Serious question. What should people retrain in? What jobs or training will provide long-term income potential? You don’t want to spend four years retraining for a job or career that only lasts for two years or seven years. My point is that let’s say a new technology comes out or new occupation. How long will it take for the AI and the robots to be able to perform that occupation? Can people train and actually work in that career before the robots take it over?

Is AI the proverbial apple in Adam and Eve? Are we justifying taking a bite of it just because it’s there? Are we helpless and unable to defend ourselves against it? My worry is that thoughts like these and questions like these are going through young people and their decisions about how to provide and proceed into a career. Are we headed towards learned helplessness?

Re: Preparing for AI's economic impact: exploring policy responses

#67

Post by cudgy » Wed, Oct 15, 2025, 2:44 PM UTC

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #20

blind_tomato wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Until the plurality of humans on the earth understand that human exceptionalism is no longer something to be taking for granted (and shouldn’t have been) there’s never going to be effective global governance of technology. Could you elaborate more on this? FYI fully agreed on the former sentences.

It’s taken for granted that humans are the best choice for how to accomplish tasks. The tasks humans are best at now are different than 10kya. The world changes, new human jobs are made and humans collectively move up the abstraction chain. Schumpeter called this creative destruction and “capital + technology” is the transition function. At the point where “capital + technology” does not need a human anymore and that…

“So unless humanity recognizes this and decides to organize as humans (not as europeans, or alabamans or han etc…) then this is the only possible outcome.”

Why do you think this is the only possible outcome? Aren’t we already organized as humans? Won’t people revolt when this really hits the fan?

Re: Preparing for AI's economic impact: exploring policy responses

#68

Post by AndrewKemendo » Wed, Oct 15, 2025, 2:45 PM UTC

WastedCucumber wrote: post #27

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And your claim is that those will never be solved? As a professional robotics engineer I can tell you for a fact they are coming soon.

There's nothing in that post claiming those problems will never be solved. I understand the claim as "the hardware conponent of robotics needs more work and this will take some time, compared to AI capabilities/software" Or soemthing like that. Maybe you could clarify what your experience on the matter is, how the state of th art looks to you, and most of all what timelines you imagine?

Just look up “fine dexterous manipulation with pressure feedback” to see the SOTA for dexterous manipulation

There’s at least a half dozen products, two recently from Unitree and Allegro announced.

Rodney Brooks wrote about the challenges - but frankly it was a submarine piece for his work

https://rodneybrooks.com/why-todays-humanoids-wont-learn-dex...

Re: Preparing for AI's economic impact: exploring policy responses

#69

Post by cudgy » Wed, Oct 15, 2025, 2:50 PM UTC

watwut wrote: post #47

> "you might have to start taxing consumption instead of income because people won't have income anymore" Proposal written by billionaire trying to shift taxation even more away from themselves and even more to everyone else. > Accelerate permits and approvals for AI infrastructure Oh, they want that? Who would not say.

They want to speed up the process of getting laws written to protect them and AI. One way to do that is to appear like you’re looking for a solution while at the same time mentioning how urgent things are and how we need to pass laws quickly. You can guess how those laws will be focused, but my guess is it will be focused on benefiting the AI companies and companies that plan to use AI companies to build their companies.

The reasons for that will be proposed as protecting the citizens from the evil other country that’s building AI. “Without strong AI, we can’t build weapons to defend the country.” and “without strong AI, our companies won’t be able to compete in the world marketplace.”

Re: Preparing for AI's economic impact: exploring policy responses

#70

Post by AndrewKemendo » Wed, Oct 15, 2025, 3:20 PM UTC

cudgy wrote: post #67

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s taken for granted that humans are the best choice for how to accomplish tasks. The tasks humans are best at now are different than 10kya. The world changes, new human jobs are made and humans collectively move up the abstraction chain. Schumpeter called this creative destruction and “capital + technology” is the transition function. At the point where “capital + technology” does not need a human anymore and that…

“So unless humanity recognizes this and decides to organize as humans (not as europeans, or alabamans or han etc…) then this is the only possible outcome.” Why do you think this is the only possible outcome? Aren’t we already organized as humans? Won’t people revolt when this really hits the fan?

No we’re not organized as humans

Revolt is a transitional process only, from one structure to another, it doesn’t change the fundamental math of the fact that humans are not eusocial