The AI Backlash Could Get Ugly

bcjdjsndon

> They want to replace workers A simple question none of the ai-doomsayers can answer... who buys anything when nobody has a job cos robots do everything?

thomascgalvin

People like Altman and Musk are saying that Universal Basic Income will be necessary once AI has fully automated away most jobs, but at the same time they aggressively fight against any kind of tax policy that would allow UBI to function. I am convinced that their talk of UBI is just handwaving; they're trying to convince us that there will be a solution to the destruction of the economy as we know it, so that we'll just let them do whatever they want. It isn't the backlash against AI that will get ugly, it will be the backlash against the ten people who suddenly own the entire world's money supply

otikik

My main problem is this: - If (big If) AI actually replaces workers, then we have a problem, because lots of folk lost their jobs - If AI doesn't replace workers, then we have a recession, because a lot of the US economy now sits on top of corporations betting on it. And this will tank the economy and lots of folk will lose their jobs It feels that the only path forward is a narrow one where AI removes some jobs , but not too many, but still enough so that the (immense, disproportionate) hype that was put on it does not come with a vengeance and the house of cards falls.

cjs_ac

> Already, as many as a quarter of Americans seem accepting of violence as a tool for achieving political change. I'm surprised it's only a quarter: violence as a tool for achieving political change is the entire point of the right to bear arms. EDIT: I'm not arguing for or against political violence, just noting an apparent inconsistency between Americans' views and one of the documents that they talk about as though it's holy writ.

sleepyguy

http://archive.today/8PRnh

dlev_pika

Let’s hope so

aspenmartin

Ignoring CEO predictions, can anyone point to any major revolutionary technology that had a net negative impact on quality of life and employment statistics? AI is an incredibly powerful technological shift in our way of life but where is the net employment hit taking place? Unemployment numbers remain stable. Revolutions like this do create widening inequality while also increasing long run productivity. Yes inequality rises but what you should care about is your quality of life and that will also improve over time. There will be suffering during transition and there will be many that don’t fare well but…this happens during every major revolution—electricity the internet etc. so why do people treat AI like it’s a uniquely damaging phenomenon?

simianwords

1. If AI is like other technologies, there will be job displacement and temporary upheaval after which new jobs will be created and prosperity increases - this is by far the only good way to increase prosperity 2. If AI is so good that it is a proper superset of humans and can do all jobs humans can do, this is a huge deal and we don’t even have the vocabulary to express what would happen I don’t foresee a third option.

thrill

Plenty of people certainly seem to have desires to make it ugly.

spwa4

> Steve Bannon and Bernie Sanders don’t agree on much ... Actually they kinda do. Anyone else notice that both extremes have the same policies? (well, Bernie Sanders isn't half as extreme as the other guy of course, but I also don't know anyone better to represent the left. But he's not extreme left by any stretch of the imagination) But both extreme left and extreme right want very radical actions taken in support of the same goals (like housing, crime, ...), while the center fights them (what the US laughingly calls 2 parties). Only the exact actions differ, and even there, only somewhat. But both (almost all) democrats and (almost all) republicans, for example, defend property rights going so far as NIMBYism.

JKCalhoun

I find the backlash kind of saddening. As an engineer, as most of you are, I am as blown away by the achievement that is the LLM in a way not too dissimilar to how I feel about the Apollo Moon program. And furthermore, I have found it wildly useful for me (if used within contexts that play to its strengths). But I think that kind of gets to the point perhaps of the schism. I like the tech and like using it. I enjoy "testing" its capabilities—finding its boundaries… In absolutely no way am I scheming on how I might leverage it to shut down whole industries. I use it, for personal use, not unlike I used the first personal computer as a tool—dare I say, "A bicycle for my mind…" The people hating AI (and I'm looking at my entire family, ha ha), I think hate AI as it is wielded as a tool by corporations. They hate Musk, Bezos, the whole lot of them—and, perhaps rightly so, they lump AI in with all that lot. Perhaps my diplomatic stance then is that AI may turn out to be empowering for the individual, might be used in a way crippling to society.