[cbtacy]

1) AI is Software. Marc was just a little off on market timing, and the eating starts for real right now.

2) I worked for a large private equity company on contract for a bit. The team I worked on was doing analysis about what the likely impact of AI, robotics, and automation on true unemployment in the US was likely to be as of 2030. Largely due to the impact on food service, retail, agriculture, customer support, and entry level corporate jobs the conclusion was that we'll see true unemployment in the 40% range at that time.

[sokoloff]

If there’s a way to ensure I get paid, I’m willing to wager a lot of money that US unemployment will be less than 40% in Dec 2030.

[mywittyname]

Unemployment in the 40% range is beyond total societal collapse. The unemployment rate in Ukraine is 11% and they are currently being invaded. Sudan's unemployment rate was still under 20% while they were in a civil war.

So the OP is probably using "unemployment rate" incorrectly. But if they are in fact using the International Labor Organization's definition, then this is probably a self-correcting problem. Society will collapse and those working on the research an implementation of AI and robotics will find themselves on the streets begging for scraps (or getting hacked up by machete-welding gangs), instead of working on building robots to displace workers long before they achieve success.

Don't underestimate what a strong leader can achieve with an army of starving people willing to do practically anything to feed their families.

[pcthrowaway]

This is a hard bet to take because we also don't know what other changes will take effect by then.

Perhaps the government reclassifies full-time employment to mean 24 hours/week. Now everyone can stay employed full-time, but the same number of human hours of work are getting done.

In any event, I don't think this will happen by 2030, but by 2040, absolutely.

[bee_rider]

Our economy would have to be truly ridiculous if having robots do 40% of the work was a bad thing. I mean, that means we have almost twice as many people available to do the stuff that couldn’t get automated! The most obvious solution would just be for everyone to work a little bit more than half as hard as they used to.

[JohnFen]

And they'll get paid half as much.

[whatever1]

Whoever makes an economical prediction more than 6 months into the future is BSing.

I can build for you an analysis that forecasts <1% unemployment due to the huge growth of new companies that will need sales reps.

[arbitrary_name]

There is a very limited segment of the population that are suited for being sales reps. Where do the rest go?

[not_a_shill]

How did you factor in legislation changes to hit that 40% number?

There's about 0% chance we hit 40% without that happening. So it would make no sense to not account for it. Meaning that 40% is after changes?

[chrisco255]

I'll take the way under on that bet. Despite "software eating the world" there are currently protests in France about raising the retirement age. And we don't have enough workers in many industries (unemployment is at 3.5% in US). We're also facing a demographic cliff as baby boomers retire, so any automation we can get is desirable, in my opinion. But as the article mentions, robotics are far, far from replacing service industry jobs.

[jamilton]

What do you mean by true unemployment?