←back to thread

277 points itzlambda | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.206s | source
Show context
blactuary ◴[] No.44609030[source]
Actually no I do not have to keep up
replies(2): >>44609066 #>>44609070 #
paul7986 ◴[] No.44609066[source]
Indeed just get out of tech and make a new living! Tech jobs are declining and will continue then fall off a cliff with one doing the job ten use to. Followed by other white collar and blue collar (AMazons warehouse robots) jobs.

Happily canceled my GPT Plus this week; personally not gonna feed that beast any longer! As well it can not generate maps (create road trip travel maps showing distance between locations to share with friends, a creek tubing map route & etc) at all like Gemini can for free.

replies(2): >>44609270 #>>44609281 #
dingnuts ◴[] No.44609281[source]
That's right, there are no carpenters or lumberjacks anymore because power tools were invented
replies(3): >>44609384 #>>44609393 #>>44609909 #
ninetyninenine ◴[] No.44609384[source]
Obviously AI is different. While LLMs are more of a power tool now, the future trendline points towards something that (possibly) replaces us. That's the entire concern right? I mean everyone knows this.

Is this not obvious?

Why do people hide behind this ridiculous analogy: "That's right, there are no carpenters or lumberjacks anymore because power tools were invented"

???

I mean sure the analogy is catchy and makes surface level sense, but can your brain do some analysis outside the context of an analogy??? It makes no sense that all of AI can be completely characterized by an analogy that isn't even accurate yet people delusionally just regurgitate the analogy most fitting with the fantasy reality they prefer.

replies(2): >>44609791 #>>44614274 #
1. jononor ◴[] No.44614274[source]
What exactly do you mean by replace? Replace in particular roles (causing the humans to shift into new roles), or replace as in nothing useful left for humans to do? Those are two very different trajectories.

So far in the industrial revolution we have been experiencing the first. Waves of automation that displaces workers in one role, and then new roles open up for humans (often involving the machines). I believe that for the foreseeable future human + AI tools (symbiosis) will be a much stronger than AI alone. Of course it will tend towards more and more AI per human over time. The same way modern manufacturing is "machine tending", where a few workers might supervise a factory that outputs what would have taken thousands of workers in the past. If the thing being produced is has unrealized demand, then we would expect that being able to do it more effectively would just mean more production, possibly to the extent that the same or even more humans are needed to produce it. So the real questions are - which things does humanity have a lot more demand for (2-1000x) - and can be made more effective with AI in the loop / on the team. And the flip side, which things are we near max demand for, and can also be made more effective with AI. Jobs in those areas are going to be decimated, move away as quickly as possible.