If you appeal to the past then yeah new jobs will open up when others are automated. But what's different about today is that the AGI has automated the one thing that's unique to humans: our intelligence. New jobs will open up but I don't think it'll be the same rate as the jobs eliminated. But I hope I'm wrong.
We already have throes of destruction of property by underemployed on a huge scale with the police largely standing back and keeping themselves safe so they can go home at the end of the day.
They are libertarians you expect them to be against progress ?! I have no idea where everybody will go but capitalism has always created new opportunities
"AI frees up humans to do other things" yeah, like AI art, or AI music, or perhaps do a little AI writing. AI coding,. maybe I'll use AI to make a video game then AI can play it for me.
@@roosterball69 I’m worried that demolishing the barrier to entry for everything will leave us with significantly less ways to distinguish ourselves and leave us with nothing else to do. No adversity = no accomplishment. Just a life of distracting ourselves with an endless deluge of “content”.
"This doesn't mean that it won't be a good thing for humanity as a whole, but it will probably enable and highlight who among us suffer most from sloth and lack of purpose." I don't think so, seems like it's invigorated those with a lack purpose, because now they get to watch those who have a strong sense of purpose and worked hard to realize their creative ambitions get thrown into flux and the fruits of their labor be devalued. the ideas surrounding this tech are really permeating with all of the utopian naivety of a marxist revolution and similarly nested within are all the resentments.
@@CJ-eo2xz not really. Repetitive/ mundane tasks don't have to be physical tasks. Even higher level tasks can be done with AI. There's a lot of people that will not really have any productive value to the market. Much of our freedom is only granted to us because we have value to the masters we serve. When we no longer have that value, how do you think we'll be treated?
Sorry, I was not just referring to physical tasks. I defaulted to the field I work in where a lot of Robotic Process Automation is taking away jobs. I am very pessimistic about all our future because the second we do not have any actual leverage, most of the time provided by a job we do, we will have zero value for the ones that control the world.
The people most at risk for replacement by AI, are not qualified for upward available jobs. What happened to the Executive Assistants being replaced by software? Did they go to work at Amazon distribution facilities? If one television writer can use AI to outproduce 10 writers, do we end up with 100% more television shows or more likely do we end up with a little more content and 7 fewer writers? And what do the 7 do for work?
Jobs are an offer extended voluntarily from one human to another. No one is entitled to them. There's not a fixed pie of "jobs" out there that one can claim must be distributed in some fair fashion.
First of all jobs are NOT an offer extended voluntarily. It all comes down to our relation with production. Slavery / feudalism/ capitalism modes of production deal with it differently. Slavery and feudalism did not produce surplus out of industrialization. You need to understand what surplus labor is and how the profit motive changes the dynamic in labor. So simple statements like the one you claim is nothing but an empty Burger (a-social claim). And just for your reference. Things are MORE or LESS voluntary. Never speak in the absolute
@@paranadasimple7087 In some societies a job may be forced upon you, ie. slavery. However, OP likely was trying to say that voluntarily jobs (like the ones in modern societies) should not be required to be offered, to any person, by the government.
@@andrewlinn7863 yes and that has consequences. Does capitalism lead to full employment? It doesn't... what do we do with folks that can't get a job and need to have ends meet?
The more tech advances, the more we have to do. We have to check ourselves out at the grocery store, book our own reservations, do our own banking, fill out more forms, waste more time online, and now do our own payroll. Life is not getting easier. 😡
@@kovy689 the android app just makes it "easier" for you to do it yourself instead of outsource it to someone whose more productive at scale. the "app" revolution is pretty dead.
@@kovy689 hahahaha they're going to have to come up with a new word for those type of robots when they actually come out. but even in that case I think my point is valid since you need user input atill
Im all for automation but can we just accept already that this time is different ? I mean, how come they don't see that? They automate existing tasks which supposedly just leads to "new jobs" but what stops us automating those jobs too ? Just how much "new job" we can conjure up before we run out of things we could do better than the machines ? AI progress already demonstrated a great deal of adaptability not like the vast majority of human workers which shows right the opposite of that. We like to get good at one thing, spend a lot of time properly mastering it, both the individual and societal momentum is large at keeping things how they are, you can't convince ppl to change career every two years, but you can most definatelly figure out how to automate a newly appearing task type in that time. Saying everything is going to be fine we just "getting enhanced" is missing the point, we will be the weakest point to leave out instead of trying to augment. Our current socio-economic value is built on our productive capacities, what effect it has if most ppl has this value go to zero ? (caviat being If AI keep growing with the current rate and has no "hardcap" which we just don't yet know about)
@@roosterball69 I didn't say it will be bad I specifically said it will be different. I think I was clear on that, because every automation before made thing simpler and easier for the workers, this will make workers obsolate. I told you why, because anything else that comes up after the current jobs are automated away WILL BE JUST AS susceptible to further automation as things were before Your accountant job is automated away ? No prob here is this new job, you just have to study it for 2 years and by the time you get your degree in it it is also automated as It also had nothing that could not be done by a sufficiently advanced pattern recognition system. At this point the question is, is there anything that cannot be possibly automated or made more efficient by automating it ? Maybe there are, I just can't think of one. Some of them obviously will be harder, or more expensive, some of them maybe held back because its something that ppl like to do themselves (like bringing up their children) but I see nothing that would be plain impossible for a machine, but humans could do it.
Very well said. The reason everything isn't automated away is because it being cost prohibitive. When you lower the cost exponentially of automation, it will overwhelm all industries. The cost/benefit analysis at medium/small companies it will make sense. If a company could replace 40 workers with 3 robots 24/7 for 500k they wouldn't? You think that is air your breathing?
@@roosterball69 Once you can't tell the difference between the music writen by AI vs music written by human it won't matter. Same with food. Its a weak argument anyway cause not everybody is a talented musician or chef, arguing that those jobs will remain in our hands only provide solice for the very few very talented.
@@roosterball69 "And my point is only weak if you see it narrowly by specific examples and not by the trend - my point is that society will be displaced away from manual and repetitive" I mean, that would be nice ofc it just doesn't seems like this coming. Matter in fact it seems so far we manage to automate first the "creative endeavors" while we are somewhat behind on robotics so repetitive manual labour still can be a thing. There was no way to predict how electricity would displace society, and the result was almost every job that existed before was transformed or replaced. Well, there was the steam engine before with similar objectives and before that were the slaves. Right now we automate (to an extend) the intellectual work though. More over we estabilish the methods to automate everything we could ever do or hoped to do in the future. " In this case people will direct AI towards productive and creative means, people will cook and serve each other, people will act as companions and hosts and other social occupations, people will be streamers, RU-vidrs, artists, musicians, writers, dancers, athletes, professionals and instructors in any hobby or passion, etc." Again, glossing over the fact that not everyone can be a musician, artist, writer streamer. Matter in fact these are for the most part based on popularity, a writer is not a writer if nobody knows his books a musician is not a musician if nobody goes to her concerts, these are occupation for the talented very few, may gets a little wider but that's it, nowhere near for the whole population. Not to mention that these skills are especially difficult to monetise in the current socio-economic situation, thus if we want these to dominate the "job market" step one is deconstructing neoliberal capitalism in it's current form. "I cannot tell you exactly what the world will look like, but it will probably mean short work weeks and many jobs will be the above or similar" Ppl in the 50s saw the steady incrase of productivity and they thought we would work a whole lot less by now. It didn't work that way, because even though the productivity kept rising the owner class just pocketed the surplus value, which is partially the reason for the insane wealth inequality we face today. I wouldn't bank on them suddenly giving up on extra profit so their workers can have more freetime, rather like everything will be just strech to the absolute limit and then some before it collapse. Everything is accelerated by profit motive and the expectation of exponential growth (matter in fact the AI developement itself is in haste because of competition) that is why it's irrelevant in which way you or me want to this to happen, it will be all about chasing the money to the very limit. Now, wheter we have anything left after that is a tough question, but Im not a bit optimistic about the future. (and yea, it could have been an utopia you described, I just don't belive we are going in that direction)
@@roosterball69 "I think people in the 50s did a great job eating up almost every gain we have since made through loose fiscal policy and forever wars." That too that's why I was careful and said the reason "partially". But we don't really work less and one has to wonder why ? Also your life expectancy mostly correlated with excatly where you live and your living conditions (acces to healthcare etc.)
I find this convincing, but i cant share it with most of my friends: they are scared about ai, and need someone in THEIR tribe to calm them down. But there are already people who might as well work full time with making the public worry irrationally about AI, and creave any sort of control or regulation Most people sont appreciate productivity or standard of living; they just see some people being rich and some people being poor despite working hard, and look for redistribution. Productivity as a word is often a dog whistle to them that you are against redistribution or their particular ideas, and a distraction.
@@classiclibertarian labor participation rate is the lowest its ever been minus the pandemic. www.bls.gov/charts/employment-situation/civilian-labor-force-participation-rate.htm
Was this script written by AI? A few days ago I had a moment that kind of shook me. I was stopped at a red light in a major West Coast city, and saw a grungy, scrawny little guy scrounging through a garbage can at a bus stop, looking for food. (He already had at least a Chinese take-out container.) Behind him on the side of the bus stop was a bright white, clinical, sterile-looking advertisement for a tech company with the line "AI your people will love" printed across it. The whole scene looked like a glimpse of our dystopian future.
Flo is naive and apparently thinks all the people who lose their livelihoods to A.I. are going to step into jobs making "high value things that only humans can do". Like what? It's easy to say that, but difficult to provide even one example. Also he forgets that the more people doing high value things, the less value it has. Seriously, this guy runs a business?! These tech gurus are always going on about the unlimited good that will come from the thing that will make them rich. Remember how Mark Zuckerberg was always on message about how Facebook would connect everyone and give everyone a voice, and here we are trying to keep our country from imploding. It's enabled anyone to be their own media company. Haters attract haters and become movements. Liars and misanthropes don't have editors or resumes, if you even know their identities. A.I. will bring great things but it will also be destructive in ways we can't anticipate, especially to those who are just hanging on. You'll never hear that from these carnival barkers.
Total jobs go up because one person has three gig jobs to replace one full time job. Technological innovation is inherently deflationary despite all of the handwaving otherwise.
The failure to understand the breadth and depth is astounding. Till date every major change we went through was invention of tools which could do jobs better. These tools were not intelligent. Prime example is job loss by computers. You still needed people to code it because computers were still a tool. This is why the job replacement done by computers is not comparable to what AI/AGI is gonna do. It’s not a tool. It automates the basic human capability to think and do things that needs intelligence. The jobs that goes away will never be replaced. FFS reason..
They never said what will happen to the people who have lost their jobs. These libertarian / free market people treat people like pawns and it is really not commendable. So they are just all going to work at McDonald's? The market can't just absorb many unqualified people (especially if they are older and not tech savvy).
@@sebholding I'm an experienced Middle manager and I have a degree in IT. Every single job they can automate, they will. And they can automate almost all jobs you can do with a computer. Especially using AI.
@@Rensune yes but the same thing will happen with jobs out of the office as education will increasingly rely on digital IA tools and vehicules and robots will become autonomous
@@sebholding No, it won't. At least, not for a century or two. It's going to be a lot harder to build proper hardware to replace a plumber, or an electrician, or even a cop. Basically, hands-on jobs are fairly safe for at least the next 50 years. Entry-Mid level jobs, not really.
The jobs that AT can't do as it progresses will be increasingly higher-skilled and fewer positions, closing the workforce to increasingly more people, and effectively closing off entry.
It will replaces accountants and software engineers who don't do embedded programming in about 5 years. Those are some "high skill" and paying jobs. Its already here for accounts, quickbooks is creating a new dashboard that handles realtime investing, tax revisions, financial reporting analysis into one spot and for less than a 10th of the price of traditionally employed.
@@phoenixrising4995 so human accountants and engineers will need to do accounting and engineering jobs that are more complex and specialized, which there are less of, until AI takes those, and humans take even more complex and even more specialized jobs. It will happen in _all_ fields, where there will only be enough positions for 50% of the population, then 25%, then 12.5%, then 6.25%, then 3.125%, then "the 1%" and then "the .0001%" will refer to people who are employed, like the _only_ three human surgeons being neurosurgeons for hyper-specific surgeries, and two will lose their job in the next couple of months, _one_ human accountant that audits the software, _one_ human engineer that checks computer-made designs, _four_ human psychiatrists that only handle ultra-complex mental health cases and two will lose their jobs next month, and all the politicians that will only be replaced when they die because government has control if the "voting" algorithms that -determine- count everybody's votes.
Yup. By 2070 - every form of manual labor will be replaced by AI. But by 2370 - the technology for 3d printers will have advanced to the point where no one needs to buy consumer goods anymore. All you need is one family member who can put together a 3d printer - that turns dirt into carbons - and turns carbons into "wood" planks, concrete, tee-shirts, cups, bed frames etc. It's going to be a new Dark Ages - but eventually, our great grandchildren will live like the Jetsons.
@LibertarianTV Because everyone will lose their job to automated mega farms, self building houses, Ai generated STIM work, etc etc, and the world's stock exchanges and currencys will bucket. It will take a world of 9 billion - and make 8.99 billion people starve to death - or die in a never-ending series of economic collapses and coup detats. It will turn the world into nature reserves, country clubs, and plantation style group houses - in which the only available jobs are sex work, child care, and the military.
@N. R. Davis yes - which I'm sure will pay well when 98% of the country has no job. And can't afford to do any maintenance on a septic tank - or even live in a city that's functional enough to have running water or maintain the sewers. You think someone will pay you $130/hr when there are 200,000,000 surfs who would happily plunge a clog for a hot meal and a shower at a motel? The toilet = a hole in the ground or behind a tree in the woods.
The difference between this Ai revolution and the Industrial Revolution, is that the machines from the Industrial Revolution didn’t perpetually self create new better machines.
This is one of those issues that I think we libertarians are going to defeat ourselves on. You can't have a free market capitalist society if there are not enough well paying jobs to maintain a middle class. If you crowd out the artists, low level programmers, and basically the 70% of the workforce that will be effected by AI, those people will turn to government to provide what a job cannot. We need controls to prevent the middle class from being replaced by AI. I'm not against Artificial Intelligence but we can't just race forward like this was the printing press or we will find that we killed the middle class faster than the socialists could.
you mistake the value of "having a job" with actually producing value at the best cost. We all profit from more productivity, as in free trade. You might think you are libertarian but could brush up on economic theory and free markets
@@peggychristensen419 You didn't address the issue at all. I'm trying not to be rude but basically telling me to read a book and not answering the question sounds like you don't have an answer. People who don't have money from jobs will not benefit from increased productivity. Those people will turn to whoever promises them money so they can feed themselves and their families. If huge numbers of people are put out of work those people will turn to the socialists if we don't have a better answer.
If the "paid to do nothing" lockdowns and overdose statistics demonstrate anything, the "other things" people will do are drugs. Lots and lots of drugs.
AI taking over will make physical human interaction more valuable and important, but at the same time we still need something to insure our value in the market, and if it's not labor then what?
AI apps like any other application are easy to get into but mastering them is a whole other topic. Just know that in a year or less you'll be seeing " for Dummies" I've been using Midjourney and Leonardo AI for months now and the level of complexity to master them to get precisely what you want is already there.
There are imagine generation AIs that create images from analyzing people literally neuron activation to predict what they are thinking of. What happens when it becomes good enough to replace text entirely?
@@butter_nut1817 Technology rarely pairs up with the theoretical hype, and there is a whole lotta hype being stirred up. Its all new and amazing until the next tech trend supplants it. The money will then funnel away to the next big thing when the clicks start to die down.
Yes it will different, the mechanization of yesteryear isn't the automation of tomorrow. The labor participation rate is the lowest its ever been already.
In free market there are place for human and place for robots just like place for poor peopleand place for smart people, free to do what's best for you. In gov control market, robot obey much more than human and prefered until it's mandate for robot only to keep the sheeple SAFE... and force the sheeple to pay for the robots.
The halting problem’s still very much a thing. Unless somehow we somehow find an efficient solution to NP-Complete problems (which a lot of AI stuff mechanisms derive to) chances are the vast majority of jobs should be safe.
The halting problem and the whole P!=NP mess applies to humans exactly the same as it does to computers, unless you buy into Penrose's quantum consciousness quackery. Otherwise there is no magic at work in human consciousness. We are just another type of neural network: biological in origin and pre-trained by evolution. With GPTs AI neural networks have finally caught up with us, and will very soon race past in the majority of cognitive domains. Anyone who doesn't want to bury their heads in the sand needs to accept that the mega-smart-brain ecological niche no longer belongs to us. If we want to survive we need to find something of value to offer to the new big brains, or otherwise accept going the way of the Neanderthals (extinct except for those who managed to assimilate into the superior successor species).
That's all that matters is how cheap can things be done while keeping most of the quality. If I can pay $40 for something that gets 80% the way there, instead of paying a US worker $400 for the job that is a no brainer, even if I have to hire a cheap laborer to touch up the last 20%. Its still cheaper than the US worker.
