Thoughts on AI and Jobs

jqpabc123

Any technology that reduces the need for jobs should be celebrated, in my view. Sounds like someone who is gainfully employed. Try the alternative for a while and let us know how it goes. Reality has a persistent ability to clarify your thinking.

estearum

Like every single productivity improvement before it, the bulk of the gains of AI will be piled into land rents, which then gets diffused into the cost of everything that happens upon land (which is everything). Then we'll just remark "wow, we still need to keep working because the cost of living has really gone up!" and somehow not realize that the only thing in our economy where its inputs have not increased in price -- ever -- is the land beneath our feet. There are no input costs! Yet somehow the prices keep rising. Suspicious. The more immediately unique thing about AI as far as employment is that through all previous innovations, the substrate of adaptation in our economy has still been the human brain. That problem-solving capacity gets encoded into different industries, processes, and products, but fundamentally the thing that keeps humans relevant is that their brains are the things doing the problem-solving, and they get to capture varying amounts of value for playing that role. AI, at the limit, probably eliminates this role. AFAICT there's no reason that AI cannot itself become the "substrate of adaptation," and completely remove humans from the adaptation-machine that is a modern economy, at which point they (humans) will have no valid claim to that value creation.

01284a7e

In Praise of Idleness by Bertrand Russell: https://ia801002.us.archive.org/27/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.4...

mark_l_watson

I am retired, so maybe I don’t get a say in this, but as a human who enjoys life in nature and hanging with family and friends, and also in periods of free time constantly exploring technology to understand the tools I use to the best of my abilities: I find using minimal-capability local models or cheap commercial models like deepseek v4 flash to be the most satisfying because I am a major partner in solving problems or simply trying to better understand the world. I do like access to very strong models a few times a week. A friend’s son and a young tech friend in town have very different views than I do because they are struggling in a tough job market and want a competitive advantage. I am grateful that I am not in that position.

_fw

I’d love for AI to take my job and free me from the burdensome toil of creating shareholder value. Not sure it will feed my kids, put a roof over my head and look after me as I age and my body fails me though. As mentioned below, it’s easy to feel safe and secure when one has the means, independent of their livelihood.

nutjob2

If a job or task can be automated, it should be automated. That process increases productivity which is good for the economy and society. The mistake people make is thinking AI is going to lay waste to almost all employment. It may change many jobs and eliminate some but see above. If you live in a (functioning) democracy the notion is politically improbable. That's not to say there are not people who will vote against their own interests, again and again, even after being screwed each time. The point is that being politically aware, savvy and organized is an important part of surviving. This was always the case, but recent events make this starkly obvious. On top of that AI projections are currently a form of mass hysteria or greedy fantasy, depending on if you see yourself as labor or capital. Both utterly unhinged from reality.

bozdemir

I don’t think anyone can predict 1 year later. It is all in the hands of few select people. After today’s news -fable being suspended- I am not sure what to think of future jobs. I can only guess that human connection will be more important in the future.

pyrale

> I have sympathy for people worried about losing their livelihoods. But at the same time I struggle to sympathise with the idea that jobs themselves are something sacred we should be fighting for. I can agree with the author's point, but they seem oblivious to the fact that people lamenting the loss of their job is usually the politically correct way for them to lament the loss of their paycheck.

relte

A few-paragraph post of no worth. "Oh, work is undemocratic, how odd we devote so much time to it!" - do you realise what work is? That it is at the foundation of human civilisation? Most things you see around you every day are the result of someone's work. And of course you don't present even the slightest idea how else the world might work.

forgetfreeman

"I struggle to sympathise with the idea that jobs themselves are something sacred we should be fighting for." I struggle to take what is ultimately an unintentional display of the author's privilege seriously. There is no political will to reverse course on 70-odd years of redbaiting that would be a required first step toward any of the changes to resource distribution that would be required to avoid the economy collapsing when jobs start getting scarce. Shoulda coulda woulda oughta, whatever, Big Money threatens capital flight whenever a modest adjustment to simple taxation is suggested. There is no future in which they willingly submit to the kind of redistribution that would be required to finance a society where work is optional.

strangescript

The fundamental flaw in all these style arguments against core employment is people's personal desire to have a straight forward path for survival that doesn't involve a lot of strategic thought. Its hard for highly intelligent people to understand that others simply DGAF. They just want their paycheck and they don't want to think about it deeply. Thought leaders have existed since the dawn of human history. There were always scuffles at the top, but there were plenty of people that just went about their business, filling their roles and doing their jobs for the tribe.

markovblanket

"new roles might emerge where AI is no good" - doesn't this imply that the AI is simply dumb, which leads to contradiction that it is in fact artificial intelligence? nobody will use artificial dumbness, except on X to satire, i suspect...

phyzix5761

There's meaning in the pain. I retired last year and for the first six months I felt lost and empty inside, like there was no meaning or purpose to my life. It wasn't until I started doing volunteer work that I found meaning again but for a while it was rough. I don't know if its an evolutionary side effect but humans need structure and goals in life which work provides.

LastTrain

The whole “guiding hand” of our government is done through the lense of job creation. Tax incentives. Protectionist trade policies. War. IP law. It all imperfectly comes down to job creation, because jobs are fucking important and necessary. Beware people who now come along and say “oh jobs aren’t that great” because they are warming you to accept a certain reality. That is to say, this essay is not just complete rubbish, it is dangerous rubbish.

Driver4732

There's so much wrong with this post. Yes, LLMs are useful when used ethically. But when it's controlled by greedy and corrupt people, it's going to be used as a weapon to further widen the class divide between the wealthy and poor. The main reason why it has received so much investment is because greedy CEOs dream of AI as being the ultimate people replacer. All of them are short-sighted individuals only concerned with quick wins on the stock market and do not give any thought to what that would do to regular folks. If no one has a job due to AI who will buy their products and services? The parasitic nature of LLMs takes the work of people and regurgitates an output without compensating the original creators. Without an incentive (i.e., paycheck) for people to work (e.g., code, write articles, answer forum questions, etc.), how will LLM technology continue to thrive in the future? LLMs cannot solve novel problems. That is a unique human ability that AI cannot replace now. Yes, LLM tech should be celebrated. But when wielded and overhyped by greedy people there are good reasons to be skeptical 'AI Denialists.'

alkyon

This blog post offers no new insights. Let's imagine that half of the jobs or more are lost. It would create a shock for the economy as a whole, incomparable with anything that happened before. It's a snake eating its own tail paradox. It means massive bankruptcies across all sectors and some governments defaulting on their debts. We can forget about UBI in these circumstances. Yes, OpenAI and Anthropic will pay more taxes but the economy as a whole will be uprooted.

cultofmetatron

all this talk of "protecting people's jobs" no, we need to get rid of as many jobs as possible. whats missing is talk of a universal basic income. AI is going to get rid of a lot of jobs but people still need to eat and have a place to live. its really created a need for us to explore a system beyond the lessai fair capitalism the US has been creating over the years. tax AI and use it for building subsidized housing and food. made education free so that we can learn skills AI can't do.