711–720 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As of now yes. But we are still in day 0.1 of GenAI. Do you think this will be the case when o3 models are 10x better and 100x cheaper? There will be a turning point but it’s not happened yet.
Remember when RPA was going to replace everyone?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are. The audience of this talk is not normal people. He’s excited and is targeting a specific group in his messaging. The author is a person like majority.
I don't understand what you mean. The audience of this talk is Axios, a large news website targeting the general public.
50% of a group of workers losing their jobs to this tech is not a worrisome future for him. It's a pitch!
AI / GP robotic labor will not penetrate the market so much in existing companies, which will have huge inertial buffers, but more in new companies that arise in specific segments where the technology proves most useful.
The layoffs will come not as companies replace workers with AI, but as AI companies displace non-AI companies in the market, followed by panicked restructuring and layoffs in those companies as they try to react, probably mostly unsuccessfully.
Existing companies don’t have the luxury of buying market share with investor money, they have to make a profit. A tech darling AI startup powered by unicorn farts and inference can burn through billions of SoftBank money buying market share.
I think the real white collar bloodbath is that the end of ZIRP was the end of infinite software job postings, and the start of layoffs. I think its easy to now point to AI, but it seems like a canard for the huge thing that already happened. just look at this: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1JmOr In terms of magnitude the effect of this is just enormous and still being felt, and never recovered to pre-2020 lev…
> because he simply thought he could run a lot leaner Because he suddenly had to pay interest on that gigantic loan he (and his business associates) took to buy Twitter. It may not be the only reason for everything that happened, but it sure is simple and has some very good explanatory powers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reality of most people is that they need to work to financially sustain themselves. Yes, there are people who just like what they do and work regardless, but I think we shouldn't discount the majority which would drop their jobs or at least work less hours had it not been out of the need for money.
Although in democracies we've largely selected that system. I've been to socialist places - Cuba and Albania before communism collapsed where a lot of people didn't do much but were still housed and fed (not very well - ration books) but no one seems to want to vote that stuff in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Keynes lived in a time when the working class was organized and exerting its power over its destiny. We live in a time that the working class is unbelievably brainwashed and manipulated.
It is very possible that foreign powers use AI to generate social media content in mass for propaganda. If anything, the internet up to 2015 seemed open for discussion and swaying by real people’s opinion (and mockery of the elite classes), while manipulation and manufactured consent became the norm after 2017.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Yet we're what? 5 years into "AI will replace programmers in 6 months"? Realistically, we're 2.5 years into it at most.
No, the hype cycle started around 2019, slowly at first. The technology this is built with is more like 20 years old, so no, we are not 2.5 years at most really.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yet we're what? 5 years into "AI will replace programmers in 6 months"? 10 years into "we'll have self driving cars next year" We're 10 years into "it's just completely obvious that within 5 years deep learning is going to replace radiologists" Moravec's paradox strikes again and again. But this time it's different and it's completely obvious now, right?
Four years into people mocking "we'll have self driving cars next year" while they are on the street daily driving around SF.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reality of most people is that they need to work to financially sustain themselves. Yes, there are people who just like what they do and work regardless, but I think we shouldn't discount the majority which would drop their jobs or at least work less hours had it not been out of the need for money.
Although in democracies we've largely selected that system. I've been to socialist places - Cuba and Albania before communism collapsed where a lot of people didn't do much but were still housed and fed (not very well - ration books) but no one seems to want to vote that stuff in.
I'll take capitalism with all its warts over that workers paradise any day.