340
submitted 7 months ago by boem@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 25 points 7 months ago

"Workforce" doesn't produce innovation, either. It does the labor. AI is great at doing the labor. It excels in mindless, repetitive tasks. AI won't be replacing the innovators, it will be replacing the desk jockeys that do nothing but update spreadsheets or write code. What I predict we'll see is the floor dropping out of technical schools that teach the things that AI will be replacing. We are looking at the last generation of code monkeys. People joke about how bad AI is at writing code, but give it the same length of time as a graduate program and see where it is. Hell, ChatGPT has only been around since June of 2020 and that was the beta (just 13 years after the first iPhone, and look how far smartphones have come). There won't be a huge demand for workforce in 5 years, there will be a huge portion of the population that suddenly won't have a job. It won't be like the agricultural or industrial revolution where it takes time to make it's way around the world, or where this is some demand for artisanal goods. No one wants artisanal spreadsheets, and we are too global now to not outsource our work to the lowest bidder with the highest thread count. It will happen nearly overnight, and if the world's governments aren't prepared, we'll see an unemployment crisis like never before. We're still in "Fuck around." "Find out" is just around the corner, though.

[-] ozmot@lemmy.world 41 points 7 months ago

Even mindless and repetitive tasks require instances of problem solving far beyond what a.i is capable of. In order to replace 41% of the work force you’ll need a.g.i and we don’t know if thats even possible.

[-] muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee 3 points 7 months ago

Its not replacing people outright its meaning each person is capable of doing more work each thus we only need 41% the people to achieve the same task. It will crash the job market. Global productivity and production will improve then ai will be updated repeat. Its just a matter of if we can scale industry to match the total production capacity of people with ai assistance fast enough to keep up. Both these things are currently exponential but the lag may cause a huge unemployment crisis in the meantime.

[-] localme@lemm.ee 4 points 7 months ago

In this potential scenario, instead of axing 41% of people from the workforce, we should all get 41% of our lives back. Productivity and pay stay the same while the benefits go to the people instead of the corporations for a change. I know that’s not how it ever works, but we can keep pushing the discussion in that direction.

[-] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago

You and I know damn well that a revolution is the only way that's gonna happen, and there aren't any on the horizon.

[-] muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee -2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

What do u replace it with after a revolution? Communism doesnt work capitalism is flawed democracy is flawed but seems to at least promote our freedoms. I think we defiantly need a fluid democracy before we can start thinking about how we solve the economic problems (well other than raising minimum wage that's a no brainer) without undermining exponential growth.

[-] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 months ago

Capitalism isn't just flawed, it's broken. For every prosperous nation like the UK or Germany, there's half a dozen Haitis and Panamas.

By "communism", I presume you mean Marxist-Leninist state socialism, which indeed fails miserably. However, it isn't the only alternative to capitalism. Historically, there have been several communes during the Spanish and Russian civil wars that worked fine and didn't have a central leader, let alone a dictatorship. Although they died because of military blunders, this model is currently being followed more or less in Chiapas by the Zapatistas.

In these places, workers' councils ruled. Direct face-to-face democracy by neighbours were how most things were done. I recon that this is a fairly nice arrangement.

Democracy's flaws come from subversion by the wealthy and the fact that republics don't let people really participate, but rather choose people who participate in their place.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2024
340 points (93.4% liked)

Technology

59366 readers
1840 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS