[deleted]
Ex-Google Exec Says "The Idea That AI Will Create New Jobs Is 100% Crap"
81–90 of 141 posts
Re: Ex-Google Exec Says "The Idea That AI Will Create New Jobs Is 100% Crap"
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
what is this "something else" in this case?
You never know beforehand. Before they existed, few would have believed the disappearing jobs would be replaced by web designers, uber drivers, youtubers, drone pilots etc.
so if you don't know beforehand, can you even be sure that "something else" exists?
Re: Ex-Google Exec Says "The Idea That AI Will Create New Jobs Is 100% Crap"
#83Can someone, more informed than me, about the job landscape, name these jobs people keep claiming AI is creating? Thank you in advance.
There are a profound number of people who now seem to just spend all day giving interviews and yapping about their AI takes. Geoffrey Hinton seems to be in the headlines constantly going "godfather of AI" and giving some random obtuse warning or call for action. Eric Schmidt also spends a lot of time yapping. And of course people like Gary Marcus. Simon Willison also does a lot of writing but at least his blog is act…
Agree. Being enough for these people isn't enough, they also think we should care what they have to say.
I would not include simonw with the other 3 at all. His opinions are informed by use instead of just other thoughts. Simon also releases a lot of utility tools.
Re: Ex-Google Exec Says "The Idea That AI Will Create New Jobs Is 100% Crap"
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Automation has already created more job opportunities, why should this be any different? This is the "the climate has changed before" argument for economics. > why would do that as opposed to keeping your headcount and instead offer 9 services to the public generating more streams of revenue? Because there might not be enough demand for those 9 services.
> This is the "the climate has changed before" argument for economics It's really not, you cannot cause a recession by increasing productivity, money doesn't disappear.
That's at least more of an argument than "it never happened before so it cannot happen in the future".
Money cannot disappear, but circulation can be confined to ever-smaller segments of the economy. Let's assume a world in which AI is good enough to do 90% if all white-collar jobs and companies have replaced positions with AI accordingly. Then the amount of money that entered the wider economy through salaries will now stay locked up in B2B transactions between AI companies, their corporate customers and their contractors. How will all the laid-off people get money? Some would probably get into blue-collar work, others will try their hand starting a business (that will also compete with AI), but all of them? What will happen to the businesses that were relying on those employees as customers?
Re: Ex-Google Exec Says "The Idea That AI Will Create New Jobs Is 100% Crap"
#85I think he is wrong, in a short run AI will create more jobs. We need more things to run AI and to make more things like power generation, connectivity, sensors, silicone, datacenters, monitoring, security, construction and so on. All of these things and more require massive workforce skilled or not skilled.
Re: Ex-Google Exec Says "The Idea That AI Will Create New Jobs Is 100% Crap"
#86Well I came here to say "...We'll need a universal basic income (UBI) in an AI-driven world".
Eventually, at some point. Most industry would have been disrupted. There should be a working group of the major players/stake holders in the space to figure out how this is implemented.
I work in tech and I don't see that happening for another decade and half or so.
Where is this discussion thread?
└── Dey well
Re: Ex-Google Exec Says "The Idea That AI Will Create New Jobs Is 100% Crap"
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it doesn't destroy jobs forever, people get new, better jobs in a more efficient economy. Still doesn’t explain how new jobs are created. Efficient economy doesn’t mean more jobs. You could displace a thousand workers and create a single new better job, but that means nothing.
I think programming is a good example profession. For a simple model, let's say you hire programmers for three reasons: 1. Because you have (X) work to get done to run your business. Once that work is done, there is no more work to do. 2. Because they get work done that makes more money than you pay them, but with diminishing marginal returns. So the first programmer is worth 20x their salary, the 20th is worth 1.01x…
> So the first programmer is worth 20x their salary, the 20th is worth 1.01x their salary.
> If most programmers are in the second bucket, then suddenly there's _much_ more stuff that can be built (and money made) per-programmer. So businesses will be incentivized to hire many more programmers.
How do these two reconcile? If hiring more programmers is diminishing returns, why would a business hire more?
Re: Ex-Google Exec Says "The Idea That AI Will Create New Jobs Is 100% Crap"
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's just basic economics; when something makes the economy more efficient, it doesn't destroy jobs forever, people get new, better jobs in a more efficient economy. Perhaps AI will finally raise the bar so high lower-IQ individuals won't be able to find any meaningful employment, but this has never happened in before and I doubt it'll happen again. I don't think I've seen a respected economist go on a news broadcast…
> It's just basic economics Is it ? > when something makes the economy more efficient How does "ai" make "the economy" more efficient exactly ? > people get new, better jobs Which law dictate that these jobs are better ? I don't see people getting better jobs personally, I see a shit load of people pushed into more and more precarious jobs, with less and less workers rights and job security, with stagnating wages des…
> It's just basic economics
Yes, if you look up any video of an economist talking about AI, they'll bring up the industrial revolution and point out how people thought it would bring the end of employment and instead created more and better jobs. The generally accepted viewpoint is AI will make things more efficient, and thus people will be freed to do other, more important work.
Re: Ex-Google Exec Says "The Idea That AI Will Create New Jobs Is 100% Crap"
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's just basic economics; when something makes the economy more efficient, it doesn't destroy jobs forever, people get new, better jobs in a more efficient economy. Perhaps AI will finally raise the bar so high lower-IQ individuals won't be able to find any meaningful employment, but this has never happened in before and I doubt it'll happen again. I don't think I've seen a respected economist go on a news broadcast…
Why are the lower-IQ individuals high?
I'm not sure if you're being serious but it was just poor phrasing. It really should have read "AI may raise the bar higher, such that low-IQ individuals ...".
That said, I'm sort of assuming simple tasks will get done with AI, which isn't a given and is something I could easily be wrong about. AI could easily just benefit everyone, as has been the case for every prior technological advancement in human history
Re: Ex-Google Exec Says "The Idea That AI Will Create New Jobs Is 100% Crap"
#90Historically, jobs lost to technology are eventually replaced with other jobs, though not necessarily for the displaced workers.
There's always the chance that "this time it's different". What's left after machines can think better than people? Dexterous manual work that mechanical arms can't perform?
The ideal situation would be that we reap the benefits of technological abundance and work less.