https://youtube.com/watch?v=MYB0SVTGRj4
I was recommended this video and decided to watch it during the lunch break because the concept seemed interesting and I'm not the most well-versed in economics. What I got instead was a video that made me irrationally angry (still finished it out of spite though). The comments are even more clueless, I recommend you read some of them if discussions on /r/fluentinfinance are too high brow and intelligent for you.
@nuclearshill I think you liked people sperging out over macroeconomics
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Progressing automation of jobs is very interesting.
I remember at school having some dudes (no idea who they were) leading a discussion on workers being replaced by robots. One argument that they brought up, and pops up frequently in general, is that new jobs are still created due to automatization. Thing is a lot of the new jobs associated with AI requires more specialization that workers that lost their menial job will never possess.
Not to mention workforce reduction is the end goal of automatization, there inevitably will be less jobs.
I wonder how it all will develop in the coming years. Universal basic income is a concept people float around, but it seems like a problem solver that solves one problem and creates twenty others.
Anyway, shit video didin't watch.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Except there won't be. Most (read: almost all) jobs died to technological advances over the last centuries but more than enough new jobs sprang up to replace them.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
When entire production, administration and distribution can be automated (I'm not talking necessarily in the near future), I'm not sure what new jobs will replace the old. There always will be human-only jobs, but they certainly will not be as numerous as they are now and in the past.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
People 50 years ago could never have predicted that there will be jobs that are just hacking away at a keyboard connected to a box, yet that's most jobs nowadays.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
White Collar Jobs like accounting are ironically at more risk of automation than a janitor or a plumber. Robots are great in closed controlled environments like factories but they're still very limited performing any other sort of job.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Yea I was about to mention that in response to OP. AI is developing, sure, but modern robotics just suck
. Currently it is mostly computer people that are at threat of being replaced due to AI. If your work involves doing stuff in the real world, like physical labour or manipulating material goods then you should be good for now.
The best example of this I can think is artists, who for being the most vocal about AI taking away their jobs aren't actually at a threat of extinction- it is only digital "artists" who are. If you paint on canvas or sculpt or perform live music or even do something like photography then you won't be as easily replaced.
Then there's also the question of reliability since both AI and robots are prone to modes of failure that people aren't, but that's another discussion
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Speaking on AI "art" one thing I'm afraid of is the rise of AI writers. I can totally see people asking AI to write customizable slop which is bad for us bookworms as it will discourage potential writecels. Though it is arguable that most of the novels worth reading were already written by the turn of the century lol.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Also, good luck maintaining infrastructure, power plants and the electric grid running with ChatGPT only.
Then they'll say "but we'll eventually get robots
", and how power intensive will those robots be? OpenAI wants to build nuclear reactors to keep GPT running, you're not going to get a Terminator like robot with a mini nuclear reactor, that would be prohibitively expensive, why even bother when bio-robots (humans) can do it for a fraction of energy cost.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I don't even remember who you are
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
If that's how it is I have to r*pe you so you never forget again...
Know that I don't want to do this, but our friendship depends on if I do.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
True, I'm still more in the mindset of physical machines stealing jobs, but obviously AI is the real work stealer coming up.
It's still the same issue, when accountant jobs go extinct, I wonder what will happen to people who would normally work those jobs.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
They'll sign stuff up and validate the AI results. I can see governments forcing companies to do that for bureaucratic reasons.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Remember when they still had to hire a coal shoveler for their electric trains?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
There isn't a limited number of jobs, period, just a limited number of jobs we have the resources to focus on right now. Every category of labor that gets automated just frees up more human capital to be put on the next most pressing need we didn't even consider until now.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context