←back to thread

Interview with gwern

(www.dwarkeshpatel.com)
308 points synthmeat | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.201s | source
Show context
camillomiller ◴[] No.42134738[source]
I really don’t understand why we give credit to this pile of wishful thinking about the AI corporation with just one visionary at the top.

First: actual visionary CEOs are a niche of a niche. Second: that is not how most companies work. The existence of the workforce is as important as what the company produces Third: who will buy or rent those services or products in a society where the most common economy driver (salaried work) is suddenly wiped out?

I am really bothered by these systematic thinkers whose main assumption is that the system can just be changed and morphed willy nilly as if you could completely disregard all of the societal implications.

We are surrounded by “thinkers” who are actually just glorified siloed-thinking engineers high on their own supply.

replies(2): >>42134777 #>>42135214 #
whiplash451 ◴[] No.42134777[source]
Someone probably said the exact same thing when the first cars appeared.

Where is the data showing that more jobs get destroyed than created by technological disruption?

replies(5): >>42134904 #>>42134910 #>>42135136 #>>42135276 #>>42135440 #
1. camillomiller ◴[] No.42134910[source]
Didn’t say that. If you posit that the future of the corporation is having a visionary CEO with a few minion middle managers and a swath of AI employees, then tell me, what do you do with the thousands of lost and no longer existing salaried jobs? Or are you saying that the future is a multitude of corporations of one? We can play with this travesties of intellectual discourse as long as you like, but we’re really one step removed from some stoners’ basement banter