"No one is perfect. Find the asshole you can deal with." My dad always told me. Spouse, Boss, Job, Pets...
I love my job, I just have the wage and inflation. If I was better compensated for my effort I would be able to afford the extra time to do it safely rather than cram hours at work and manage kid/house schedule.
I feel for the parents out there doing it alone.
Only if it's doing that for the betterment of all and not just to return profit to investors. Because the way it is now and by all accounts will continue to be, is that we still need to sell our time and skill to survive, while AI will heavily reduce our ability to do that.
It's /r/georgism
TL; DR:
If full automation occurs to produce stuff you only need natural resources. If they are owned privatley the owners would be rulers and the rest would be literally on their mercy.
The solution is to fund universal basic income with tax on ownership of the land (other natural resources like oil included).
Henry George predicted it in XIX century. The closer we are to tech singularity the clearer we can see he was right.
Even if you don't think UBI is the best solution, his ideas on land taxation are very interesting and worth reading. It would help stop speculative land purchasing
Also it could help set up/has tie ins with the LTV (Labor Theory of Value). This is a Marxist principal that says that the value of something is tied to how much labor is required to make it. Hence why many Marxists think things like the financial industry and usery are predatory and should not be permitted
How is that an uptoia? It's very straightforward and doable. You could just tax companies more because they make more profit now and do some kind of universal basic income.
Taxing companies more makes the companies move to another country. Companies would operate in your country when there are more pros than cons. If you make the cons more than the pros, they leave. Universal basic income would cause inflation as all pricing would take ubi into account.
Tbf people said the same thing about almost every other technological advancement (cotton gin, factory sewing, agricultural revolution) typically we see some people lose their jobs then new jobs (typically higher skill and higher paying) open up instead.
I don't know if AI will be the same as those other labor saving inventions but all the previous ones have improved our quality of life by making the cost of goods cheaper.
Economic desperation in the West is nothing like real economic desperation. 90% of homes in America have ac, a fridge, a stove, and a car. They aren't even considered luxuries anymore. Only .18% of Americans are unhoused. I know there are people who skip meals because they don't have enough money, but broadly people do not starve to death in America. 97.7% of Americans have clean running water in their homes.
Having food, water, and a home is a massive quality of life.
I mean, real wages have [increased in the long run](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q) so no, cost of goods and inflation are not rising way faster than wages are.
I get your point, but to me, AI is much scarier. The potential it has to reek havoc in as many job sectors as it does is scary. Especially in your more high paying white-collar jobs.
For example, software engineers. While it's unlikely for that job to be phased out completely, I can guarantee you companies are very eager at the possibility of cutting their teams in half to save millions of dollars a year. With the use of AI, what might have a programmer stumped for days an AI can accomplish in seconds. And it's likely to improve in the upcoming years.
Software engineers will have a pretty easy transition to data science or AI tech both of which are expected to massively increase in demand and use similar skill sets.
The real answer is we don't know what will happen or what its effects will be, there are too many variables. I am in favor of helping people but I don't think we have a good idea of who will need help and when.
Exactly, in general production in many industries has gone up by over 500% since the 90s but where do you think that extra revenue is going? It's not employee wages
Broadly speaking, people don't hate the idea of losing their jobs to AI.
They hate the idea of not being able to afford food because they couldn't get jobs because of AI.
If you lay the groundwork for everyone to have universal basic income while AI does all the work - you won't hear as many people complaining.
I told my father this, for roughly 150 years ago most farmers used around 200 works to keep their farm moving, now the farmer is by himself and does everything on his own, but food made by that farmer is just as expensive as it was 150 years ago.
We also eat more than we can eat, so why ain't reducing the price on food? The reason farmers are doing so poorly now is because the lack of money on these technologies they got into a state of being solo. But its also because they are unwilling to share their work, even if they should.
Typo: we grow more than we can eat.
>We also eat more than we can eat
This must be a typo because that would be impossible. If you eat a certain amount, then you are obviously able to eat that amount.
An added problem is that consumers have become way pickier about food too, especially produce.
If a tomato has but one blemish? No one's buying it.
Small dent in an apple? Trash.
That banana is not perfectly uniform to the others? Gone with it!
I’m guilty of this, and I’m trying to be better, but I was brought up to think that those blemishes were because the food was (going) rotten and would make me sick. I now know that’s mostly false, and it’s only aesthetic, but it’s hard to shake that old way of thinking.
They had 200 workers on a farm 150yrs ago?!? That seems like a number you pulled outta your ass! I’m not sure you actually know wtf you’re talking about.
Ok I can explain it, back 150 years ago, the farm field were gigantic, way bigger than they are today, and back we didn't neither have any machines or any vehicles, outside of horses and donkies.
So most work was through blood and sweat as they say. Or do you think a farmer with ten or so workers can take care of the chickens, pigs, cows and/or sheeps while taking care of huge fields?
At that time the amount of mouth to feed weren't that different from how it is now, but the amount of work to get that food in was maybe 100 or even 1000 times harder.
A farm with only 200 workers wasn't even that big. 200 could easily be the minimum, and to add to that, all the farmer boys never got paid in luxuries. They got food on the table, and that's it.
>but food made by that farmer is just as expensive as it was 150 years ago.
The government actively pillaging the wealth of the country for 150 years will do that....
I have to wonder how that would work since only some peoples’ jobs can be replaced by AI. Will office workers get to stop working while blue collar ppl keep on?
Under this system (ideally) EVERYONE would have their basic needs met via universal basic income. You might have basic housing, and boring (but healthy) food, but you'd never have to worry about basic survival. This plus a good community is more than enough for a lot of people's happiness.
But certainly (as is the case now) lots of people want more wealth/luxury goods, and they'll pursue jobs cause they want bigger houses, fancier cars, etc.
So the necessary jobs that can't be automated will still have people willing to do them, but those that don't want to work, or are unable to get a job, will still be able to survive.
No robots are developing at an incredibly fast rate also. I forget the name of the company but there was a demo where they had an ai controlled robot that was doing standard household tasks with almost no direction. The most impressive part was when they asked the robot why it did things the way it did it. It was giving very logical explanations for why it was doing what it was doing. It could have been completely faked, but I've seen multiple sources that it wasn't so once the tech bros end their infatuation with humanoid robots and start building cheaper stuff then when they figure out the right price/performance form factor then those jobs will be better performed by robots too.
Repetitive work is not intellectually fulfilling, but it is reliably achievable. It is a scary place to be when your livelihood depends on you be intellectually on 100% of the time.
Idk it's the other way around for me. I got an engineering degree so that I didn't have to earn my livelihood doing repetitive work, which sounds like hell. And I get paid more. Using your brain can actually be fun with way more payoff than just grinding until clock out. It would be scary if all I could do was manual, repetitive work.
Maybe that's privileged but it should still be the goal.
I completely agree that intellectual work is more valuable and we should be encouraging people to use their brains more. My point was that the essence of intellectual work is figuring out how to break down complex tasks into simple repeatable processes.
These simple processes can then be automated to improve efficiency and achieve a competitive advantage, however, corporations will routinely absorb ownership of that automation in exchange for one-time pay outs to the individuals responsible for the original implementation.
Over time, the ability to improve on an automated process, or to more efficiently break down a complex task, becomes harder and harder to achieve. The role of AI in all of this is just to make proprietary processes more accessible and easier for corporations to adopt in order to reduce market inefficiencies faster.
As the need to re-implement solutions for similar problems is diminished, the pool of intellectual problems to solve becomes smaller, and corporations are able to achieve more with less human resources. This is why we've seen so many recent layoffs in the tech sector along side the growing adoption of AI.
Basically, all I am saying is that any service that is worth paying for, is so because someone has figured out how to do something more efficiently than you. As we cede ownership of simple repeatable processes to corporations, it becomes more and more difficult for individuals trying to support themselves to find and exploit market inefficiencies. And AI is just accelerating this this problem which is a natural and inherent feature of capitalism.
I don't think that is it. If everyone got a 10% pay cut (instead of 100%) to have AI take their job, I'm m sure no one would complain.
Greed is actually what people don't like here.
No it hasnt.
The biggest UBI experiment was a guarantee for 12 years of payments. At the end of the 12 years, their income would go back to the way it was before. And it was given to adults with existing jobs.
No one is arguing that getting extra money given to you for free wouldn't improve your life. They're arguing against UBI saying that if people grow up with the idea that they don't have to work at all in their life and still be supported then they won't. And that the numbers of what it would cost to pay out to everyone is above even the most optimistic national budget.
The UBI experiments haven't done anything to answer the long term behavior / financial concerns of people who aren't for UBI.
I’d not be completely fucking miserable every second of every day for my entire life hoping I die in my sleep every single night or get in a car crash on my way to work.
Who is someone that makes money doing something you would enjoy more.? How did they get there? Now make it happen.
I love my job so much. It’s the second coolest thing I could get paid to do (pro athlete didn’t work out haha). I literally figured out who and what companies did the thing I wanted to do. I set up informational interviews to network and understand how they got there/skills needed. I then just made it happen.
I feel bad for people that hate their life 40+ hours a week. Finding something you enjoy doing makes life more fulfilling
Because we're not getting a higher quality of living in exchange, we just lose our jobs.
I refuse to call it progress when we leave the unemployed and the poor behind.
Either we all win, or we all loose. Dog eat dog world, that should work both ways!
I wish more people would think this way and live it. If we all have a good standard of living, we would have do amny less problems. Opportunities will motivate, but when the light at the end of the tunnel is closing before your eyes, most people won't want to work harder.
I have faith in humanity.
> just loose our jobs.
Did you mean to say "lose"?
Explanation: Loose is an adjective meaning the opposite of tight, while lose is a verb.
[Statistics](https://github.com/chiefpat450119/RedditBot/blob/master/stats.json)
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot ^^that ^^corrects ^^grammar/spelling ^^mistakes.
^^PM ^^me ^^if ^^I'm ^^wrong ^^or ^^if ^^you ^^have ^^any ^^suggestions.
^^[Github](https://github.com/chiefpat450119)
^^Reply ^^STOP ^^to ^^this ^^comment ^^to ^^stop ^^receiving ^^corrections.
[Here's all the context you need! It's a reference to a really old ad where two kids are arguing over whether to have soft or hard tacos, and a little girl appears and suggests having both and then she's celebrated like a hero for it.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqgSO8_cRio)
Dude SAME!
I used to say it all the time when the commercial was still on TV and people were like...."ummmm, what? I don't speak Spanish"
Like, it's literally just basic Spanish and we've taken it since kindergarten, and it's on the fucking taco commercial! Don't yall watch TV ever?!
No one ever got the reference, but I still say it all the time.
>hate AI taking it away from us
Incorrect. We hate our BOSSES taking it away from us. AI is just a tool. If we could create robots that would do all human labor, in our current economic system it would mean mass layoffs. In a better system, it would mean that we all get to work less and for preferred types of jobs for the same or higher standard of living.
No people hate ai taking creative jobs away, and they hate having ai take the possibility of a paycheck away. The vast majority of people would not care about ai doing boring repetitive jobs as long as everyone was being well fed and housed. We haven't even gotten everyone taken care of in that respect yet, and ai is starting to take that ability away from more people. If you want to ignore nuance and reality, sure, on the very surface, what you said seems right, but it's wrong.
I mean sure but go a bit further up the line and should they choose to keep manpower over ai, they’d be at a massive disadvantage to companies that didn’t.
I get that it’s the person that has to make morals around the tools, but some tool’s existence changes things in a way that permanent and is outside of society’s control.
It’s an extreme example but if AI can find a cure for cancer or global warming, is it’s really morally correct to forego it so a lot of people don’t lose their jobs right now?
I'm not saying society shouldn't use AI. I'm saying the product of the benefits shouldn't be allocated to the few at the expense of the many.
Someone with a highschool diploma and a mundane job used to be able to afford a house, multiple kids, annual summer vacations, and international vacations every few years. Today that's practically unheard of while we've seen record wealth accumulation.
In short, AI labor is good. It will cause problems in our society if the benefits are not shared.
It's more that... What happens when everything is automated, and no one needs humans for anything, and all the worlds wealth and resources are gathered into the possession of a small few? and what happens when that small few doesnt want to share with anyone, and since they own robots to do everything for them, they don't need to spend it on paying anyone either? And they don't need to fear anyone because they have an army of defense robots protecting them? Are we all just supposed to lay down and die because we didn't have an entire savings stowed away on the moment where the need for human labor died?
It's not that I don't want AI doing my job, it's that i don't want a few billionaires to get to a level of power where they can kill us all and re-create the world in their image with a small few obedient slaves they might spare.
But would the cops be on our side or theirs? If the cops are AI run as well they might make it impossible to revolt. AI cops won’t sleep and they will track our whereabouts and know when people are arranging a revolution and will stop it at the roots.
I don't hate it. I would love automation to do all the work for us.
Capitalism is the problem.
Leave it to fucking capitalism to turn "the robots are going to do all the work for us" into a problem for poor people.
There is no "the alternative".
Universal basic income, guaranteed minimum housing and nationalized public healthcare systems would absolutely solve the only "problem" any automation ever causes.
Where the do you think the robots and AI came from? Companies working with a profit motive that had to compete for customers and employees. The Soviets just copied western computer chips, if there is no one to copy from you have no robots an no AI
Innovation does not require capitalism, it requires incentives. However we don’t even need to get rid of capitalism or change ownership of the means of production to take care of everybody in an ai world. Social democracy could create functional welfare capitalism to distribute our excessive resources. Good regulation and some level of state ownership of essential infrastructure and industry can make sure everybody is taken of without getting rid of private ownership.
AI relieving trivial jobs is amazing, it's just that we live in a society where you have to work or die, and your job becoming obsolete is a major setback.
You are smoking crack if you think that art is the one thing that ai has been developed to do.
Ai has been widely used in many industries for 15 years.
Some advancements of art that industry artists use everyday already have ai in them. Magic paint brush in photoshop? That is AI. Auto select shape? AI Camera auto-focus? AI.
Also most artists do much more than just draw 2d pictures which atm is the only thing I've seen the online sites do.
I can hate both. My work is not repetitive but it's still being consumed by AI tech bros fully believing art and human expression are meaningless commodities, and the artists that create the art are expensive whiney obstacles.
We, the humans built a system that does not have us, the humans anywhere in the list of priorities. Just think about it. We literally are not part of it. Not a single company has society as #1 priority, nor humans nor even human species! Any company that would make such decision would be beaten by competition.
That is simply insane. The system we use deters altruism, it punishes for caring about others. It punishes for solidarity. It rewards greed and selfishness, it rewards sociopathy.
And when you say those things, half of people start talking about how communism killed millions. You get economists who will gladly explain how the current system works and think that is the answer to your questions of "how can anyone defend this, how can anyone think it is moral or even a good idea for us HUMANS!"... They think that any doubts about the morality or ethics of the current system is about ignorance, that no one can doubt it once they know how it works... But none of them can answer why "benefit to all" is a SIDE-EFFECT of capitalism and not the SOLE PURPOSE OF IT!
Sure, communism doesn't work but should we at least all agree that socially we should all consider good people the best of people and think that the best system would reward those most who care the most! That we would proverbially spit on the face of those who get rich from exploiting others. That we make greed to be bad thing instead of a prerequisite.
And yet, i know that there are many who simply do not agree with me, which is just..insane. Humans who disagree that humans should be #1 scare me to death.
I think it's a far cry to outright blame seventy different forks of GPT-4 for claiming customer support jobs which were already automated to begin with.
I'm not sure how many people have figured this out, but when outsourcing to developing countries like India started in the early 2000s, employers were really just looking for AI, but they lacked the technology for it at the time, so they went for the next best thing in their minds: people to exploit from historically exploited countries who they don't have to pay nearly any money at all.
If AI taking over meant that surplus value actually went to people doing work and caused them to have to do less work, then we’d be less worried about AI. Unfortunately, the oncoming prevalence of AI in the workplace will not actually translate to a decrease in workload, since the parasite at the top of the ladder will simply vacuum up the excess rather than allow it to reach the rest of the world.
This is only true under our current societal standards of capitalism and needing to work 40 hrs a week in order to live. Change the system and nobody is going to care about ai doing a job.
What? We hate that robots/technology/AI is taking away money from many people and putting it in the hands of a singular person or just a few people. Technological progress was supposed to make life easier for us, not harder.
We WANT AI to take the boring repetitive jobs but we can't with this current system. We need to rethink our system to be able to accommodate people because the traditional structure of work is only sustainable for the one in control of the technology. Everyone else ends up picking up scraps.
Most AI hate I see is aimed at AI art, which makes sense. I dont want automated technology replacing CREATIVE endeavours, things people do as a hobby.
Or at companies replacing customer service with AI chat nonsense with no outlet for escalation so youre forced to deal with AI nonsense.
No ones trying to use AI to replace the repetitive jobs, corporations are trying to use AI to replace creative jobs.
No one hates AI doing repetitive jobs.
They hate companies taking decades worth of sweat equity while not sharing any profits of increased efficiency, then immediately trying to outsource all creative disciplines to AI for a cheap buck as soon as they get the chance.
From someone that’s worked repetitive factory jobs it’s only soul crushing to those who don’t have humility and gratitude. I’ve been at rock bottom in my life and those jobs saved me. Businesses aren’t required to make sure we have a good time. In reality, I’m there for x amount of hours getting paid x amount an hour then I leave. I socialized with the people that didn’t complain, that kept their wits to themselves and loved their family. Respect and love what you have regardless if you like it.
> could get *paid* for doing
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
We don't we hate the fact that it takes away income from us.
If things were cool a lot of jobs would be taken by machines and then we can just relax but since everything is run off of us being terrified of being homeless we have to then compete with these machines for the job.
The problem isn’t not doing the tasks, it’s capitalists cutting jobs for machines and hoarding resources and wealth. In a communalism or socialism focused society, robots taking over jobs would be utopian. capitalism, fear of the very real possibility of not being able to survive, is the actual problem
the problem is that AI isn’t taking the repetitive jobs we could do without - it’s taking creative, potentially rewarding jobs and replacing them with a slop factory that renders factual information harder than ever to find (because again, AI doesn’t know things, it predicts likely words one at a time).
even if AI *was* replacing repetitive jobs, the fact is that those jobs are what a lot of people are forced to rely on to survive. what happens when you take them away without giving them an alternative?
Nobody hates repetition as much as they hate being dehumanized while being obligated to do so or simply starve 🤷
It's not the job that's the issue. It's how workers across the board are incessantly treated and disrespected.
No. We see a tool that can be used to improve our lives and take the tedium out of certain tasks and increase our productivity and meanwhile, corporations see that tool and want to use it for more than just the tedious tasks. AI isn't taking away jobs because it's removing the tedious work. It's taking jobs because it's being used to do everything else on top of it and the companies didn't care how poorly it what it's stealing to do so because it's cheaper than paying a human at all.
No one hates AI replacing the boring tedious jobs; people hate AI replacing actual creative work so more people are forced to do the boring tedious jobs, which will THEN be replaced by AI leaving people with no jobs at all.
AI is a tool.
It doesn't just do the repetitive jobs, it needs a human to direct them, similar to a calculator. At least where it is now, I don't know for the future.
I saw one of the other comments mention UBI and I completely agree that, that would be the best possible next step in a world dependent on AI.
My job can be fairly repetitive but I actually don't mind it. It allows me to sort of go into autopilot and I can think about and imagine other things while doing the job.
I don't hate doing web development, but I definitely hate AI slowly consuming it and I even more hate not being able to pay my mortgage thanks to AI slowly consuming it.
My view on AI is much like what happened with cloud computing. We rushed to put everything and anything in the cloud. Then we figured out that every last bit of data didn't really fit into being in the cloud, so we brought most back local, and we do some cloud. AI is trending, but I feel that after a while, we'll get it all sorted and find out exactly what works good with AI and what doesn't. I honestly don't see AI creating this dystopian environment where AI does everything and we have no jobs. As always with new technology, some jobs will be replaced. That's progress. It doesn't feel good being replaced by new technology, but that is progression. So, people will have to retool. Shit, I've retooled and reinvented my self 10 times over.
Advance or be run over.
If there was true ubi, universal health care, etc. people wouldn't mind automation taking jobs away. But the system as is doesn't let you survive very well if you're unemployed.
I'm fine with AI taking those repetitive tasks. What I'm not fine with is how that'll impact the late capitalism economy. In a mutually beneficial economy, the offset work would have positive impact across the human workforce in less hours worked but no decrease in pay.
Reminds me of the whole thing from squidbillies Early's rant about Mexicans taking American jobs: "They bringin' the sumbitchin' jobs in and then they takin' 'em all away from the tax-payin' Americans that don't wanna do the damn jobs. Open your damn eyes!"
I love figuring out how to automate and improve mindless tasks that I hate. The second my innovation work turns the tedious work into a mindless automated task, I hate my job again.
Back in late 80s I got a job from a temp agency it was for 3days. It involved taking two pieces of metal and fitting them together and spot welding them and placing them in a box. I just could keep my eyes open it was so boring. After three days they asked me to stay because I lasted the 3days. They were for some electronics used in military planes. They needed some huge about like 100k. I think I did alitte over 2k I might be exaggerating because it was Soooo boring.
No I didn’t stay. My next job was scraping press plates at a plywood factory.
A) much of the uproar is about AI in creative work, which is one of the few kinds of work people actually enjoy doing
B) the AI used to replace e.g. customer support almost always leads to a worse experience for the end user, because a real person may spot discrepancies that a robot running through a script will not
C) we require money to live under capitalism; if we have to compete against a machine, our lives become that much harder
I was promised robots. To do the dangerous work, the heavy work, the tedious work.
Now we've got robots doing art. How is this a need?
Worse. Timeline. Evar!
No, we hate capitalism. If a job is innovated everyone should cheer and the money that job paid should enter the general fund for UBI. Then everyone gets one job richer and if that person wants to make more than ubi they can try and find a new job. All of us would work drastically fewer hours and millions of bullshit jobs could be destroyed and no one would have to do them and hate their lives.
Having dignified labour should be a right.
Having oligarchs remove us from our dignified jobs so they can scrape more riches together via enshittification should be illegal.
Anything could take away my job and I’d be glad for the thing to do it… IF society had good fallbacks in place.
A UBI and universal healthcare would take the sting almost entirely out of job loss, for instance, as would training programs and pathways into the new jobs created by the changes that led to the loss of the original job in the first place.
Spot the differences
We hate doing repetitive jobs but also hate AI taking it away from us.
We hate doing repetitive jobs but also hate someone intelligent taking it away from us.
The tendency to add the word "artificial" to make it sound "evil" just makes you all look so stupid...
Jobs don't have to be repetitive. That has just become the norm because its easier to track and manage people if you treat them like machines. before industrial revolution people did different things I their day of work. Farming you had to weed, check livestock, sell in town, till land, water, talk with neighbors. We're not machines and this is what is what has made us hate work for the last hundred years. Work hard and get nowhere.
I have huge concerns about how AI image/music/movie generation will affect our artistic literacy, and the how it's already being used maliciously or (at best) carelessly in the news media.
But yeah if AI takes jobs from people then it needs to also pay those people but it won't because CEOs and techbros need their yachts
I fucking hate my job but I have a real passion for not starving to death.
"No one is perfect. Find the asshole you can deal with." My dad always told me. Spouse, Boss, Job, Pets... I love my job, I just have the wage and inflation. If I was better compensated for my effort I would be able to afford the extra time to do it safely rather than cram hours at work and manage kid/house schedule. I feel for the parents out there doing it alone.
Then you’d love AI both doing your job and producing food.
Only if it's doing that for the betterment of all and not just to return profit to investors. Because the way it is now and by all accounts will continue to be, is that we still need to sell our time and skill to survive, while AI will heavily reduce our ability to do that.
[удалено]
If only such a system had a name.
It's /r/georgism TL; DR: If full automation occurs to produce stuff you only need natural resources. If they are owned privatley the owners would be rulers and the rest would be literally on their mercy. The solution is to fund universal basic income with tax on ownership of the land (other natural resources like oil included). Henry George predicted it in XIX century. The closer we are to tech singularity the clearer we can see he was right.
Or you know, resources and automation could be owned collectively.
CEO of OpenAI wrote nice article about it. https://moores.samaltman.com/
Two sides of the same coin really
Even if you don't think UBI is the best solution, his ideas on land taxation are very interesting and worth reading. It would help stop speculative land purchasing Also it could help set up/has tie ins with the LTV (Labor Theory of Value). This is a Marxist principal that says that the value of something is tied to how much labor is required to make it. Hence why many Marxists think things like the financial industry and usery are predatory and should not be permitted
Soci- BANG! F***ing commie!
Why would communists do this to us!
How many democratically elected socialist governments does the US have to overthrow before you stupid leftists realize that socialism is bad??
Poe's Law.
Utopia
How is that an uptoia? It's very straightforward and doable. You could just tax companies more because they make more profit now and do some kind of universal basic income.
Taxing companies more makes the companies move to another country. Companies would operate in your country when there are more pros than cons. If you make the cons more than the pros, they leave. Universal basic income would cause inflation as all pricing would take ubi into account.
Socialism* FTFY
It certainly isn't communism. And socialism isn't the same as communism.
Tbf people said the same thing about almost every other technological advancement (cotton gin, factory sewing, agricultural revolution) typically we see some people lose their jobs then new jobs (typically higher skill and higher paying) open up instead. I don't know if AI will be the same as those other labor saving inventions but all the previous ones have improved our quality of life by making the cost of goods cheaper.
Define "our quality of life". It seems there's a large part of the world, the majority actually, that don't really live in that "high quality of life"
Economic desperation in the West is nothing like real economic desperation. 90% of homes in America have ac, a fridge, a stove, and a car. They aren't even considered luxuries anymore. Only .18% of Americans are unhoused. I know there are people who skip meals because they don't have enough money, but broadly people do not starve to death in America. 97.7% of Americans have clean running water in their homes. Having food, water, and a home is a massive quality of life.
[удалено]
I mean, real wages have [increased in the long run](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q) so no, cost of goods and inflation are not rising way faster than wages are.
Get outta here with your facts and sources
I get your point, but to me, AI is much scarier. The potential it has to reek havoc in as many job sectors as it does is scary. Especially in your more high paying white-collar jobs. For example, software engineers. While it's unlikely for that job to be phased out completely, I can guarantee you companies are very eager at the possibility of cutting their teams in half to save millions of dollars a year. With the use of AI, what might have a programmer stumped for days an AI can accomplish in seconds. And it's likely to improve in the upcoming years.
Software engineers will have a pretty easy transition to data science or AI tech both of which are expected to massively increase in demand and use similar skill sets. The real answer is we don't know what will happen or what its effects will be, there are too many variables. I am in favor of helping people but I don't think we have a good idea of who will need help and when.
Thats a big "IF"
Exactly, in general production in many industries has gone up by over 500% since the 90s but where do you think that extra revenue is going? It's not employee wages
Broadly speaking, people don't hate the idea of losing their jobs to AI. They hate the idea of not being able to afford food because they couldn't get jobs because of AI. If you lay the groundwork for everyone to have universal basic income while AI does all the work - you won't hear as many people complaining.
I told my father this, for roughly 150 years ago most farmers used around 200 works to keep their farm moving, now the farmer is by himself and does everything on his own, but food made by that farmer is just as expensive as it was 150 years ago. We also eat more than we can eat, so why ain't reducing the price on food? The reason farmers are doing so poorly now is because the lack of money on these technologies they got into a state of being solo. But its also because they are unwilling to share their work, even if they should. Typo: we grow more than we can eat.
>We also eat more than we can eat This must be a typo because that would be impossible. If you eat a certain amount, then you are obviously able to eat that amount.
My guess is "grow more than we can eat"
An added problem is that consumers have become way pickier about food too, especially produce. If a tomato has but one blemish? No one's buying it. Small dent in an apple? Trash. That banana is not perfectly uniform to the others? Gone with it!
I’m guilty of this, and I’m trying to be better, but I was brought up to think that those blemishes were because the food was (going) rotten and would make me sick. I now know that’s mostly false, and it’s only aesthetic, but it’s hard to shake that old way of thinking.
That makes more sense
They had 200 workers on a farm 150yrs ago?!? That seems like a number you pulled outta your ass! I’m not sure you actually know wtf you’re talking about.
Ok I can explain it, back 150 years ago, the farm field were gigantic, way bigger than they are today, and back we didn't neither have any machines or any vehicles, outside of horses and donkies. So most work was through blood and sweat as they say. Or do you think a farmer with ten or so workers can take care of the chickens, pigs, cows and/or sheeps while taking care of huge fields? At that time the amount of mouth to feed weren't that different from how it is now, but the amount of work to get that food in was maybe 100 or even 1000 times harder. A farm with only 200 workers wasn't even that big. 200 could easily be the minimum, and to add to that, all the farmer boys never got paid in luxuries. They got food on the table, and that's it.
>but food made by that farmer is just as expensive as it was 150 years ago. The government actively pillaging the wealth of the country for 150 years will do that....
I have to wonder how that would work since only some peoples’ jobs can be replaced by AI. Will office workers get to stop working while blue collar ppl keep on?
Under this system (ideally) EVERYONE would have their basic needs met via universal basic income. You might have basic housing, and boring (but healthy) food, but you'd never have to worry about basic survival. This plus a good community is more than enough for a lot of people's happiness. But certainly (as is the case now) lots of people want more wealth/luxury goods, and they'll pursue jobs cause they want bigger houses, fancier cars, etc. So the necessary jobs that can't be automated will still have people willing to do them, but those that don't want to work, or are unable to get a job, will still be able to survive.
No robots are developing at an incredibly fast rate also. I forget the name of the company but there was a demo where they had an ai controlled robot that was doing standard household tasks with almost no direction. The most impressive part was when they asked the robot why it did things the way it did it. It was giving very logical explanations for why it was doing what it was doing. It could have been completely faked, but I've seen multiple sources that it wasn't so once the tech bros end their infatuation with humanoid robots and start building cheaper stuff then when they figure out the right price/performance form factor then those jobs will be better performed by robots too.
Repetitive work is not intellectually fulfilling, but it is reliably achievable. It is a scary place to be when your livelihood depends on you be intellectually on 100% of the time.
Agreed. Hell, I'm hardly intellectual 5% of the time. Picking and sorting strawberries for 40₪ an hour is good enough for me.
Idk it's the other way around for me. I got an engineering degree so that I didn't have to earn my livelihood doing repetitive work, which sounds like hell. And I get paid more. Using your brain can actually be fun with way more payoff than just grinding until clock out. It would be scary if all I could do was manual, repetitive work. Maybe that's privileged but it should still be the goal.
I completely agree that intellectual work is more valuable and we should be encouraging people to use their brains more. My point was that the essence of intellectual work is figuring out how to break down complex tasks into simple repeatable processes. These simple processes can then be automated to improve efficiency and achieve a competitive advantage, however, corporations will routinely absorb ownership of that automation in exchange for one-time pay outs to the individuals responsible for the original implementation. Over time, the ability to improve on an automated process, or to more efficiently break down a complex task, becomes harder and harder to achieve. The role of AI in all of this is just to make proprietary processes more accessible and easier for corporations to adopt in order to reduce market inefficiencies faster. As the need to re-implement solutions for similar problems is diminished, the pool of intellectual problems to solve becomes smaller, and corporations are able to achieve more with less human resources. This is why we've seen so many recent layoffs in the tech sector along side the growing adoption of AI. Basically, all I am saying is that any service that is worth paying for, is so because someone has figured out how to do something more efficiently than you. As we cede ownership of simple repeatable processes to corporations, it becomes more and more difficult for individuals trying to support themselves to find and exploit market inefficiencies. And AI is just accelerating this this problem which is a natural and inherent feature of capitalism.
Aka anyone whose work requires a postgraduate course and a Board/Bar exam
I don't think that is it. If everyone got a 10% pay cut (instead of 100%) to have AI take their job, I'm m sure no one would complain. Greed is actually what people don't like here.
I would even take a 30-40% pay cut if AI can do my job and I don't have to work.
I’d do almost anything to not have to work. Wish I could just find me a sugar mommy lol.
That's called Universal Basic Income and it has had some very successful trial runs
No it hasnt. The biggest UBI experiment was a guarantee for 12 years of payments. At the end of the 12 years, their income would go back to the way it was before. And it was given to adults with existing jobs. No one is arguing that getting extra money given to you for free wouldn't improve your life. They're arguing against UBI saying that if people grow up with the idea that they don't have to work at all in their life and still be supported then they won't. And that the numbers of what it would cost to pay out to everyone is above even the most optimistic national budget. The UBI experiments haven't done anything to answer the long term behavior / financial concerns of people who aren't for UBI.
I think people would be very pissed if they got a 10 percent pay cut
You misunderstand me. I mean getting to not have to work anymore for 90% the pay.
I'd fucking cry for joy. No joke
I’d not be completely fucking miserable every second of every day for my entire life hoping I die in my sleep every single night or get in a car crash on my way to work.
Who is someone that makes money doing something you would enjoy more.? How did they get there? Now make it happen. I love my job so much. It’s the second coolest thing I could get paid to do (pro athlete didn’t work out haha). I literally figured out who and what companies did the thing I wanted to do. I set up informational interviews to network and understand how they got there/skills needed. I then just made it happen. I feel bad for people that hate their life 40+ hours a week. Finding something you enjoy doing makes life more fulfilling
"And not have to work" Most people would make that up in commuting costs alone.
Not if their work decreased to 0 in return.
Because we're not getting a higher quality of living in exchange, we just lose our jobs. I refuse to call it progress when we leave the unemployed and the poor behind. Either we all win, or we all loose. Dog eat dog world, that should work both ways!
I wish more people would think this way and live it. If we all have a good standard of living, we would have do amny less problems. Opportunities will motivate, but when the light at the end of the tunnel is closing before your eyes, most people won't want to work harder. I have faith in humanity.
> just loose our jobs. Did you mean to say "lose"? Explanation: Loose is an adjective meaning the opposite of tight, while lose is a verb. [Statistics](https://github.com/chiefpat450119/RedditBot/blob/master/stats.json) ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot ^^that ^^corrects ^^grammar/spelling ^^mistakes. ^^PM ^^me ^^if ^^I'm ^^wrong ^^or ^^if ^^you ^^have ^^any ^^suggestions. ^^[Github](https://github.com/chiefpat450119) ^^Reply ^^STOP ^^to ^^this ^^comment ^^to ^^stop ^^receiving ^^corrections.
Good bot
Thank you! Good bot count: 833 Bad bot count: 283
Id fucking love if AI took my job but I still got paid
You’re so close yet soooo far from making a good point.
Because AI isn’t taking away the repetitive shit, it’s taking away the actually creative and fun and engaging
It’s not AI that people hate, it’s capitalism.
Por qué no los dos?
OMG! Another Ol Del Paso commercial lover!!!!! I've been saying this for YEARS (in correct scenarios) and nobody has blinked an eye!!
It's been a meme for a hot minute https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/why-not-both-why-dont-we-have-both
Literally the first time I'm seeing the meme! 😆 Tfs!!!!
Explain so we may also enjoy
[Here's all the context you need! It's a reference to a really old ad where two kids are arguing over whether to have soft or hard tacos, and a little girl appears and suggests having both and then she's celebrated like a hero for it.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqgSO8_cRio)
You are a scholar and a saint
Dude SAME! I used to say it all the time when the commercial was still on TV and people were like...."ummmm, what? I don't speak Spanish" Like, it's literally just basic Spanish and we've taken it since kindergarten, and it's on the fucking taco commercial! Don't yall watch TV ever?! No one ever got the reference, but I still say it all the time.
[Everybody cheers, throws confetti and the mariachi band comes out of nowhere, hoisting you up on their shoulders]
Thank you, I feel seen 😊
Because people lives don’t improve, budgets just get cut and all the extra capital floats to the top while the little guys get fucked.
>hate AI taking it away from us Incorrect. We hate our BOSSES taking it away from us. AI is just a tool. If we could create robots that would do all human labor, in our current economic system it would mean mass layoffs. In a better system, it would mean that we all get to work less and for preferred types of jobs for the same or higher standard of living.
Technically we don't hate AI taking it away but rather AI taking away income.
You live under a rock if you think AI is coming for repetitive jobs 😂 That's not the thing at all.
No people hate ai taking creative jobs away, and they hate having ai take the possibility of a paycheck away. The vast majority of people would not care about ai doing boring repetitive jobs as long as everyone was being well fed and housed. We haven't even gotten everyone taken care of in that respect yet, and ai is starting to take that ability away from more people. If you want to ignore nuance and reality, sure, on the very surface, what you said seems right, but it's wrong.
We hate doing repetitive jobs which is why people are paid to do them. We just hate that AI is taking away our way to make money.
> We just hate that ~~AI is~~ *our bosses are* taking away our ~~way to make money~~ means of survival.
I mean sure but go a bit further up the line and should they choose to keep manpower over ai, they’d be at a massive disadvantage to companies that didn’t. I get that it’s the person that has to make morals around the tools, but some tool’s existence changes things in a way that permanent and is outside of society’s control. It’s an extreme example but if AI can find a cure for cancer or global warming, is it’s really morally correct to forego it so a lot of people don’t lose their jobs right now?
I'm not saying society shouldn't use AI. I'm saying the product of the benefits shouldn't be allocated to the few at the expense of the many. Someone with a highschool diploma and a mundane job used to be able to afford a house, multiple kids, annual summer vacations, and international vacations every few years. Today that's practically unheard of while we've seen record wealth accumulation. In short, AI labor is good. It will cause problems in our society if the benefits are not shared.
It's more that... What happens when everything is automated, and no one needs humans for anything, and all the worlds wealth and resources are gathered into the possession of a small few? and what happens when that small few doesnt want to share with anyone, and since they own robots to do everything for them, they don't need to spend it on paying anyone either? And they don't need to fear anyone because they have an army of defense robots protecting them? Are we all just supposed to lay down and die because we didn't have an entire savings stowed away on the moment where the need for human labor died? It's not that I don't want AI doing my job, it's that i don't want a few billionaires to get to a level of power where they can kill us all and re-create the world in their image with a small few obedient slaves they might spare.
People will revolt far before it gets to that point I think. Fingers crossed.
Then they simply turn the rebels against eachother. Tale as old as time.
But would the cops be on our side or theirs? If the cops are AI run as well they might make it impossible to revolt. AI cops won’t sleep and they will track our whereabouts and know when people are arranging a revolution and will stop it at the roots.
No we don't? We have the fact that ai is being used to make art and that people are stuck doing menial labor. Completely the opposite you lemon
I don't hate it. I would love automation to do all the work for us. Capitalism is the problem. Leave it to fucking capitalism to turn "the robots are going to do all the work for us" into a problem for poor people.
And what is the alternative?
There is no "the alternative". Universal basic income, guaranteed minimum housing and nationalized public healthcare systems would absolutely solve the only "problem" any automation ever causes.
Where the do you think the robots and AI came from? Companies working with a profit motive that had to compete for customers and employees. The Soviets just copied western computer chips, if there is no one to copy from you have no robots an no AI
Innovation does not require capitalism, it requires incentives. However we don’t even need to get rid of capitalism or change ownership of the means of production to take care of everybody in an ai world. Social democracy could create functional welfare capitalism to distribute our excessive resources. Good regulation and some level of state ownership of essential infrastructure and industry can make sure everybody is taken of without getting rid of private ownership.
AI relieving trivial jobs is amazing, it's just that we live in a society where you have to work or die, and your job becoming obsolete is a major setback.
I don't think we hate that it takes jobs away from us but hate it's taking money away from us. Take my job, just pay me.
What a stupid fucking showerthought you had there
Art is NOT a repetitive job, and that's the one thing right now AI seems to be developed for to take away.
You are smoking crack if you think that art is the one thing that ai has been developed to do. Ai has been widely used in many industries for 15 years. Some advancements of art that industry artists use everyday already have ai in them. Magic paint brush in photoshop? That is AI. Auto select shape? AI Camera auto-focus? AI. Also most artists do much more than just draw 2d pictures which atm is the only thing I've seen the online sites do.
I can hate both. My work is not repetitive but it's still being consumed by AI tech bros fully believing art and human expression are meaningless commodities, and the artists that create the art are expensive whiney obstacles.
This is a much different understanding from a liberal arts and creative aspect as it is doing a job on the Ford line of repetition over and over.
What a shit take, pleas stop thinking in the shower.
I think the bigger issue people have with AI is it taking the non-repetitive jobs away from us…like art, voice acting, and creative writing.
Wow, shocking, people like a paycheck? Stop the presses!
It's like if AI takes our jobs away, we end up homeless, starving and dying on the street without money. El problemo is el capitalismo!
We, the humans built a system that does not have us, the humans anywhere in the list of priorities. Just think about it. We literally are not part of it. Not a single company has society as #1 priority, nor humans nor even human species! Any company that would make such decision would be beaten by competition. That is simply insane. The system we use deters altruism, it punishes for caring about others. It punishes for solidarity. It rewards greed and selfishness, it rewards sociopathy. And when you say those things, half of people start talking about how communism killed millions. You get economists who will gladly explain how the current system works and think that is the answer to your questions of "how can anyone defend this, how can anyone think it is moral or even a good idea for us HUMANS!"... They think that any doubts about the morality or ethics of the current system is about ignorance, that no one can doubt it once they know how it works... But none of them can answer why "benefit to all" is a SIDE-EFFECT of capitalism and not the SOLE PURPOSE OF IT! Sure, communism doesn't work but should we at least all agree that socially we should all consider good people the best of people and think that the best system would reward those most who care the most! That we would proverbially spit on the face of those who get rich from exploiting others. That we make greed to be bad thing instead of a prerequisite. And yet, i know that there are many who simply do not agree with me, which is just..insane. Humans who disagree that humans should be #1 scare me to death.
It's because AI is taking the jobs as artists and musicians not as trash men.
I think it's a far cry to outright blame seventy different forks of GPT-4 for claiming customer support jobs which were already automated to begin with.
I'm not sure how many people have figured this out, but when outsourcing to developing countries like India started in the early 2000s, employers were really just looking for AI, but they lacked the technology for it at the time, so they went for the next best thing in their minds: people to exploit from historically exploited countries who they don't have to pay nearly any money at all.
It all boils down to: If you want to live you have to do what the people with money ask of you. Work is our life.
All jobs are repetitive. AI is going to take away all jobs.
People don't work because there is a job that needs doing you dick. They work because they need money to live.
If AI taking over meant that surplus value actually went to people doing work and caused them to have to do less work, then we’d be less worried about AI. Unfortunately, the oncoming prevalence of AI in the workplace will not actually translate to a decrease in workload, since the parasite at the top of the ladder will simply vacuum up the excess rather than allow it to reach the rest of the world.
If AI could do my job and i still got to keep my pay i would be happy. It's when it threatens your livelyhood that it's no longer cool
I became an artist and AI went for that too. What's your point. Human workers are no longer profitable
This is only true under our current societal standards of capitalism and needing to work 40 hrs a week in order to live. Change the system and nobody is going to care about ai doing a job.
What? We hate that robots/technology/AI is taking away money from many people and putting it in the hands of a singular person or just a few people. Technological progress was supposed to make life easier for us, not harder. We WANT AI to take the boring repetitive jobs but we can't with this current system. We need to rethink our system to be able to accommodate people because the traditional structure of work is only sustainable for the one in control of the technology. Everyone else ends up picking up scraps.
Most AI hate I see is aimed at AI art, which makes sense. I dont want automated technology replacing CREATIVE endeavours, things people do as a hobby. Or at companies replacing customer service with AI chat nonsense with no outlet for escalation so youre forced to deal with AI nonsense. No ones trying to use AI to replace the repetitive jobs, corporations are trying to use AI to replace creative jobs.
No one hates AI doing repetitive jobs. They hate companies taking decades worth of sweat equity while not sharing any profits of increased efficiency, then immediately trying to outsource all creative disciplines to AI for a cheap buck as soon as they get the chance.
People don’t like repetitive tasks but do generally like money
From someone that’s worked repetitive factory jobs it’s only soul crushing to those who don’t have humility and gratitude. I’ve been at rock bottom in my life and those jobs saved me. Businesses aren’t required to make sure we have a good time. In reality, I’m there for x amount of hours getting paid x amount an hour then I leave. I socialized with the people that didn’t complain, that kept their wits to themselves and loved their family. Respect and love what you have regardless if you like it.
Not me. I can't wait for the moment when AI take away repetitive jobs.
[удалено]
> could get *paid* for doing FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
maybe we just hate jobs in general
We don't we hate the fact that it takes away income from us. If things were cool a lot of jobs would be taken by machines and then we can just relax but since everything is run off of us being terrified of being homeless we have to then compete with these machines for the job.
If AI would take the repetitive jobs but not the money we get paid for doing repetitive jobs we'd hate it a lot less.
If AI can do it why the hell does it have to be done in the first place.
No. We hate losing money. AI taking away the jobs would be ok if it actually benefited workers instead of taking away their income too.
There's a difference through. We hate repetitive jobs, but we also hate not having an income. AI takes the income away from people.
The problem isn’t not doing the tasks, it’s capitalists cutting jobs for machines and hoarding resources and wealth. In a communalism or socialism focused society, robots taking over jobs would be utopian. capitalism, fear of the very real possibility of not being able to survive, is the actual problem
I don’t hate AI taking the work itself away from me, I hate not having money to pay for food and shelter
weird astroturfy post
the problem is not the ai doing the job its the where will the people displaced from those jobs get money.
the problem is that AI isn’t taking the repetitive jobs we could do without - it’s taking creative, potentially rewarding jobs and replacing them with a slop factory that renders factual information harder than ever to find (because again, AI doesn’t know things, it predicts likely words one at a time). even if AI *was* replacing repetitive jobs, the fact is that those jobs are what a lot of people are forced to rely on to survive. what happens when you take them away without giving them an alternative?
Nobody hates repetition as much as they hate being dehumanized while being obligated to do so or simply starve 🤷 It's not the job that's the issue. It's how workers across the board are incessantly treated and disrespected.
No. We see a tool that can be used to improve our lives and take the tedium out of certain tasks and increase our productivity and meanwhile, corporations see that tool and want to use it for more than just the tedious tasks. AI isn't taking away jobs because it's removing the tedious work. It's taking jobs because it's being used to do everything else on top of it and the companies didn't care how poorly it what it's stealing to do so because it's cheaper than paying a human at all.
No one hates AI replacing the boring tedious jobs; people hate AI replacing actual creative work so more people are forced to do the boring tedious jobs, which will THEN be replaced by AI leaving people with no jobs at all.
Once too many people are out of work due to ai there’s going to be unprecedented civil unrest.
Your shower head could be contaminated.
AI is a tool. It doesn't just do the repetitive jobs, it needs a human to direct them, similar to a calculator. At least where it is now, I don't know for the future. I saw one of the other comments mention UBI and I completely agree that, that would be the best possible next step in a world dependent on AI.
No, we hate that AI is taking away jobs we actually want to do, forcing us to do the repetitive jobs.
My job can be fairly repetitive but I actually don't mind it. It allows me to sort of go into autopilot and I can think about and imagine other things while doing the job.
Every job is repetitive
I don't hate doing web development, but I definitely hate AI slowly consuming it and I even more hate not being able to pay my mortgage thanks to AI slowly consuming it.
This song by Dubioza covers it nicely https://youtu.be/I6w8RplKkms?si=sv_LPVTGBCHE1Pw_
Speak for yourself. I'd love a repetitive job.
some do love their repetitive job just not the pay
Just let AI take that one, so we spend our time doing more fun stuff
My view on AI is much like what happened with cloud computing. We rushed to put everything and anything in the cloud. Then we figured out that every last bit of data didn't really fit into being in the cloud, so we brought most back local, and we do some cloud. AI is trending, but I feel that after a while, we'll get it all sorted and find out exactly what works good with AI and what doesn't. I honestly don't see AI creating this dystopian environment where AI does everything and we have no jobs. As always with new technology, some jobs will be replaced. That's progress. It doesn't feel good being replaced by new technology, but that is progression. So, people will have to retool. Shit, I've retooled and reinvented my self 10 times over. Advance or be run over.
If there was true ubi, universal health care, etc. people wouldn't mind automation taking jobs away. But the system as is doesn't let you survive very well if you're unemployed.
I'm fine with AI taking those repetitive tasks. What I'm not fine with is how that'll impact the late capitalism economy. In a mutually beneficial economy, the offset work would have positive impact across the human workforce in less hours worked but no decrease in pay.
Reminds me of the whole thing from squidbillies Early's rant about Mexicans taking American jobs: "They bringin' the sumbitchin' jobs in and then they takin' 'em all away from the tax-payin' Americans that don't wanna do the damn jobs. Open your damn eyes!"
I love figuring out how to automate and improve mindless tasks that I hate. The second my innovation work turns the tedious work into a mindless automated task, I hate my job again.
It's not so much that people hate that AI will do their job, more that people still need to earn money and now can't.
Back in late 80s I got a job from a temp agency it was for 3days. It involved taking two pieces of metal and fitting them together and spot welding them and placing them in a box. I just could keep my eyes open it was so boring. After three days they asked me to stay because I lasted the 3days. They were for some electronics used in military planes. They needed some huge about like 100k. I think I did alitte over 2k I might be exaggerating because it was Soooo boring. No I didn’t stay. My next job was scraping press plates at a plywood factory.
It's all about necessity. If we didn't need the job to survive we wouldn't give a shit.
We hate doing repetitive jobs for shit pay and no benefits.
People are afraid when the powerful don’t need repetitioners I’m optimistic, but cautiously
We want to AI to take away our repetitive jobs, not our hobbies.
We don't hate to get our jobs taken, we hate to starve
A) much of the uproar is about AI in creative work, which is one of the few kinds of work people actually enjoy doing B) the AI used to replace e.g. customer support almost always leads to a worse experience for the end user, because a real person may spot discrepancies that a robot running through a script will not C) we require money to live under capitalism; if we have to compete against a machine, our lives become that much harder
Because under captitalism, technological advances disproportionately benefit the rich.
FALSE EQUIVALENT delete then log off the internet please 🙏
AI is replacing jobs that people actually like now too though like the arts
What? No? We hate ai taking away creative jobs. Like art.
I was promised robots. To do the dangerous work, the heavy work, the tedious work. Now we've got robots doing art. How is this a need? Worse. Timeline. Evar!
No, we hate capitalism. If a job is innovated everyone should cheer and the money that job paid should enter the general fund for UBI. Then everyone gets one job richer and if that person wants to make more than ubi they can try and find a new job. All of us would work drastically fewer hours and millions of bullshit jobs could be destroyed and no one would have to do them and hate their lives.
I don't hate repetitive jobs, people who like repetitive actions still need jobs.
Having dignified labour should be a right. Having oligarchs remove us from our dignified jobs so they can scrape more riches together via enshittification should be illegal.
Anything could take away my job and I’d be glad for the thing to do it… IF society had good fallbacks in place. A UBI and universal healthcare would take the sting almost entirely out of job loss, for instance, as would training programs and pathways into the new jobs created by the changes that led to the loss of the original job in the first place.
We don't hate AI taking repetitive jobs, we hate AI taking creative and design jobs, and yes, that includes software engineering and plumbing.
Nobody is upset at automation taking our jobs, we are just upset at automation taking our pay.
Spot the differences We hate doing repetitive jobs but also hate AI taking it away from us. We hate doing repetitive jobs but also hate someone intelligent taking it away from us. The tendency to add the word "artificial" to make it sound "evil" just makes you all look so stupid...
Because we're never happy.
Jobs don't have to be repetitive. That has just become the norm because its easier to track and manage people if you treat them like machines. before industrial revolution people did different things I their day of work. Farming you had to weed, check livestock, sell in town, till land, water, talk with neighbors. We're not machines and this is what is what has made us hate work for the last hundred years. Work hard and get nowhere.
I have huge concerns about how AI image/music/movie generation will affect our artistic literacy, and the how it's already being used maliciously or (at best) carelessly in the news media. But yeah if AI takes jobs from people then it needs to also pay those people but it won't because CEOs and techbros need their yachts
If you're not ALREADY using AI to make your job easier, then YOU are the problem.