71–74 of 74 posts
This is how my job in tech is right now. Execs asking us to build systems and agents and subagents so they can just input figma designs and their flawed requirements and get rid of all labor. How does a person not hate themselves doing this work that's effectively existential suicide? Every word into claude is another word of my career's death note.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The really interesting question is: What are we going to do when a technology so quickly and thoroughly displaces the need for human labor, in a society that constantly demands you trade your labor for the right to exist and participate in society?
I think capital will always be looking for better returns, and as long as human beings can add marginal value somewhere in that equation, there will be demand for human labor. Working in tech has taught me to stay vigilant. I've seen the cycles and seen people survive each one. Perhaps that's why I feel better prepared for this. Anyone whose job primarily consists of manipulating bits should probably assume that sign…
Probably some wunderkind, well financed by his capital rich parents, can "make it".
For the people tightening nuts and bolts and wiping floors, life will be lacklustre.
If you haven't been following the current explosion of video gen models, including all the content you see on social media, you should pay attention. I have no doubt in my mind that right now, in August of 2026, given a couple of weeks, an amateur with a high-end last-gen GPU or somebody with maybe a thousand bucks worth of AI credits, given a good amount of exploration/tinkering to fill the gaps that GenAI cannot cu…
> I have no doubt in my mind that right now [...] an amateur with a high-end last-gen GPU or somebody with maybe a thousand bucks worth of AI credits [...] can crank out a high quality 1h+ feature film with only minor uncanny artifacts. Then why are there no examples of this? There aren't even examples of steps towards it--the half hour film that's nearly production quality, etc.
We all live in our personal info bubbles and sometimes it's hard to find information if you don't actively seek it out. This doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you are saying people whose jobs AI can do are the silent film actors... Who are the "talkie" actors in this analogy; the people whose jobs AI won't take over?
I'm saying the "tech = job loss" scenario is somewhat false. Teamsters were horse carriage drivers and then drove trucks. The horse driver job was "destroyed by technology"? Or was it changed? Jobs are not static entities to be defended or lost. They are dynamic opportunities shaped by technology. Every technology creates different opportunities. No one cries for silent movie era job losses or horse driver jobs. If A…