We should invent solutions for problems that we have, instead of wildly trying to apply this tech to everything we can think of. We are skipping the benefit/cost considerations.
Is AI not a solution for our problems? I can imagine a declining population, a younger generation, that does not want to reproduce, neither working off the available work. We need a solution for that.
So we need systems, that learns human knowledge, refines it, makes it better and takes over all of the work.
And for programmers: is sitting not the new cig smoking and drinking alcohol for early death?
How does AI help in solving the issues you brought over in your post?
> a declining population, a younger generation, that does not want to reproduce, neither working off the available work. We need a solution for that.
And what do you reckon is the reason for that? "Kids these days are lazy and only want to have fun", or something to that extent?
Or is that because the cost of living has skyrocketed, the future is uncertain and people are afraid of the planet becoming more and more inhospitable for humans in the following decades or even years?
Maybe people do not want to work despite the job availability because those jobs offer piss poor conditions and no security? If not for all these reasons, why would people act so differently than in the past?
Once you put your precious A"I" in the equation, what do you get out of it? Even less job security, more leverage for bad employers to threaten workers with the magic wand of "you'll get substituted", and arguably way shittier quality of products all around (cases in point: A"I" customer service that fails to be satisfactory in resolving customer issues or become a huge nuisance to deal with, or A"I" "art" in articles and blogs that' so easy to spot that you could arguably be better off with no illustrations at all).
> So we need systems, that learns human knowledge, refines it, makes it better and takes over all of the work.
First off, who is "we"? And secondly, once it "takes over all of the work" (whatever that means), what are people going to do? Do you really think we'll get some utopian fantasy like UBI?
> And for programmers: is sitting not the new cig smoking and drinking alcohol for early death?
How tf does that have anything to do with A"I" helping? If I use Copilot to "help" me out in programming I'll still have to sit, will I not?
> I can imagine a declining population, a younger generation, that does not want to reproduce, neither working off the available work.
Luckily the future does not depend on what you can or can't imagine. And no, even if that imagination were accurate, AI would not be the solution for any of those problems. We know the root causes, we know the effects, having a bunch of companies boil the oceans to have AI generate mediocre copy and uninspired illustrations does not help with anything other than making those companies richer and displacing even more workers and shutting down even more career paths.
Young people don't want to have kids or work because all the aspirational goals previous generations had have become unattainable for them, we're counting down the years until the climate catastrophe becomes impossible to ignore even in wealthier countries and there is literally nothing the masses can do because politicians across the world have shown a complete disregard for human life in the face of a global pandemic that had a death toll in the millions before we simply stopped counting.
> So we need systems, that learns human knowledge, refines it, makes it better and takes over all of the work.
And how would that benefit anyone but those who own those systems and charge for its use? How would that benefit the "younger generation"? To the contrary this would seem like it would do what automation always does: drive down wages and reduce workforces while harming workers' ability to bargain for better working conditions.
As tech workers we should take the time to understand that the "Luddites" were not actually opposed to technological advancement but to the consequences of it in a system that always rewards the business but not the worker for an increase in productivity. You don't need to withdraw into a cabin in the woods to realize that the way we have set up the systems that govern us technological progress will always only accelerate the wealth drain to the rich, never reverse it.
And that doesn't even get into how most AI startups are completely unsustainable (as growth-oriented startups tend to be) or how the proliferation of underpriced AI has contributed to the destruction of knowledge via search engine spam, "content generation" and social media bots.
If you want to create fully automated gay luxury space communism, be my guest, but you'll also need to work on the "communism" part if you want to make the "fully automated" part not result in the opposite direction.
What about education for all, better healthcare and a solution to hunger. Or discriminations? I’m not seeing anything trying to solve that in the AI space right now. It’s all about replacing workers and artists.
parpfish|1 year ago
infecto|1 year ago
okr|1 year ago
So we need systems, that learns human knowledge, refines it, makes it better and takes over all of the work.
And for programmers: is sitting not the new cig smoking and drinking alcohol for early death?
bru3s|1 year ago
> a declining population, a younger generation, that does not want to reproduce, neither working off the available work. We need a solution for that.
And what do you reckon is the reason for that? "Kids these days are lazy and only want to have fun", or something to that extent? Or is that because the cost of living has skyrocketed, the future is uncertain and people are afraid of the planet becoming more and more inhospitable for humans in the following decades or even years?
Maybe people do not want to work despite the job availability because those jobs offer piss poor conditions and no security? If not for all these reasons, why would people act so differently than in the past?
Once you put your precious A"I" in the equation, what do you get out of it? Even less job security, more leverage for bad employers to threaten workers with the magic wand of "you'll get substituted", and arguably way shittier quality of products all around (cases in point: A"I" customer service that fails to be satisfactory in resolving customer issues or become a huge nuisance to deal with, or A"I" "art" in articles and blogs that' so easy to spot that you could arguably be better off with no illustrations at all).
> So we need systems, that learns human knowledge, refines it, makes it better and takes over all of the work. First off, who is "we"? And secondly, once it "takes over all of the work" (whatever that means), what are people going to do? Do you really think we'll get some utopian fantasy like UBI?
> And for programmers: is sitting not the new cig smoking and drinking alcohol for early death? How tf does that have anything to do with A"I" helping? If I use Copilot to "help" me out in programming I'll still have to sit, will I not?
hnbad|1 year ago
Luckily the future does not depend on what you can or can't imagine. And no, even if that imagination were accurate, AI would not be the solution for any of those problems. We know the root causes, we know the effects, having a bunch of companies boil the oceans to have AI generate mediocre copy and uninspired illustrations does not help with anything other than making those companies richer and displacing even more workers and shutting down even more career paths.
Young people don't want to have kids or work because all the aspirational goals previous generations had have become unattainable for them, we're counting down the years until the climate catastrophe becomes impossible to ignore even in wealthier countries and there is literally nothing the masses can do because politicians across the world have shown a complete disregard for human life in the face of a global pandemic that had a death toll in the millions before we simply stopped counting.
> So we need systems, that learns human knowledge, refines it, makes it better and takes over all of the work.
And how would that benefit anyone but those who own those systems and charge for its use? How would that benefit the "younger generation"? To the contrary this would seem like it would do what automation always does: drive down wages and reduce workforces while harming workers' ability to bargain for better working conditions.
As tech workers we should take the time to understand that the "Luddites" were not actually opposed to technological advancement but to the consequences of it in a system that always rewards the business but not the worker for an increase in productivity. You don't need to withdraw into a cabin in the woods to realize that the way we have set up the systems that govern us technological progress will always only accelerate the wealth drain to the rich, never reverse it.
And that doesn't even get into how most AI startups are completely unsustainable (as growth-oriented startups tend to be) or how the proliferation of underpriced AI has contributed to the destruction of knowledge via search engine spam, "content generation" and social media bots.
If you want to create fully automated gay luxury space communism, be my guest, but you'll also need to work on the "communism" part if you want to make the "fully automated" part not result in the opposite direction.
skydhash|1 year ago