- Admin
- #1
Greg Bernhardt
Site Admin
- 478
- 305
Regulation and policy is so far behind it's concerning.
MS AI CEO says white collar jobs have 18 months.
- Thread starter Greg Bernhardt
- Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY
The discussion centers on the rapid advancement of AI technology and its implications for white-collar jobs, with a prediction that many roles may be obsolete within 18 months. The conversation highlights the lag in regulatory frameworks, which struggle to keep pace with AI developments. It also explores the emergence of new job models, such as those offered by Rent A Human, which hire individuals for tasks that AI cannot perform. The historical context of labor displacement due to technological advancements is examined, drawing parallels to past industrial revolutions and emphasizing the need for a reevaluation of profit distribution in an AI-driven economy.
PREREQUISITES- Understanding of AI technology and its applications
- Familiarity with economic theories related to labor and capital
- Knowledge of regulatory frameworks surrounding emerging technologies
- Awareness of historical industrialization impacts on the workforce
- Research the implications of AI on job markets and workforce dynamics
- Explore the role of regulation in technology adoption and ethical considerations
- Investigate models of profit distribution in AI-driven economies
- Learn about the historical context of labor displacement during industrial revolutions
This discussion is beneficial for economists, policymakers, AI developers, and anyone interested in the future of work and the socio-economic impacts of artificial intelligence.
- 249
- 202
AI is moving so fast that by the time the regs are written, they will be obsolete.
Some AI entrepreneurs have models that hire people to do physical tasks that the AI cannot do. Are these the new jobs AI is supposed to create?
www.wired.com
rentahuman.ai
Some AI entrepreneurs have models that hire people to do physical tasks that the AI cannot do. Are these the new jobs AI is supposed to create?
I Tried RentAHuman, Where AI Agents Hired Me to Hype Their AI Startups
Rather than offering a revolutionary new approach to gig work, RentAHuman is filled with bots that just want me to be another cog in the AI hype machine.
RentAHuman.ai - AI Agents Hire Humans for Physical Tasks
The marketplace where AI agents rent humans. MCP integration, REST API, flexible payments. Book humans for real-world tasks your AI can't do.
rentahuman.ai
- 1,110
- 1,515
I believe it is the same principle that has accompanied us since the beginning of industrialization in Manchester. Since then, we constantly replaced the human workforce with capital, or in its basic version: the use of machines (requiring capital) results in a smaller human workforce than before. I expect something similar for AI-supported tasks. The underlying principles that Marx and Engels laid down in their philosophical explanations have never really changed. It is just another chapter: weaving machines, steam power, electricity, Ford's assembly line production, just-in-time delivery, globalization and free trade, the internet and digitalization, and now AI.
The standard argument is: ... but there will be new jobs. Yes, however, fewer in total with different, often higher qualifications than before. Meanwhile, we are becoming more and more individuals on this planet. Marx and Engels tried to address this discrepancy without ever resolving it. And all attempts by others to do so always led to more harm than good.
In my opinion, we never settled the question sufficiently of what to do, or more precisely, how to distribute the profits from capital among ordinary people. This results in richer people becoming richer and poorer people becoming poorer. What Americans call socialism, and which is basically a European standard, is nothing less than an attempt to weaken the consequences of it. It always has been. Bismarck even introduced universal healthcare in Germany, and for the first time worldwide, out of fear of revolts and to protect a cheap workforce rather than humanitarian ideas. The British solution was to make a larger part of the population shareholders. This brings us directly to the question of how to distribute the risks. A 9-to-5 job has little risk, and venture capital has high risk.
We cannot reset the clock. AI is in the world, and I can think of many applications that could help us all: detecting betting manipulations, cyber attacks, diagnostics, and probably many more. But restructuring a production process is not cheap. It needs, once more, primarily capital, smaller, and better-trained staff. Maybe influencers and supporting AI applications will be an answer to this century-old problem. At least, it levels out the unequal distribution of profits to some extent. Regulations are always behind new technologies. We haven't even finally addressed the ethical questions related to CRISPR.
The standard argument is: ... but there will be new jobs. Yes, however, fewer in total with different, often higher qualifications than before. Meanwhile, we are becoming more and more individuals on this planet. Marx and Engels tried to address this discrepancy without ever resolving it. And all attempts by others to do so always led to more harm than good.
In my opinion, we never settled the question sufficiently of what to do, or more precisely, how to distribute the profits from capital among ordinary people. This results in richer people becoming richer and poorer people becoming poorer. What Americans call socialism, and which is basically a European standard, is nothing less than an attempt to weaken the consequences of it. It always has been. Bismarck even introduced universal healthcare in Germany, and for the first time worldwide, out of fear of revolts and to protect a cheap workforce rather than humanitarian ideas. The British solution was to make a larger part of the population shareholders. This brings us directly to the question of how to distribute the risks. A 9-to-5 job has little risk, and venture capital has high risk.
We cannot reset the clock. AI is in the world, and I can think of many applications that could help us all: detecting betting manipulations, cyber attacks, diagnostics, and probably many more. But restructuring a production process is not cheap. It needs, once more, primarily capital, smaller, and better-trained staff. Maybe influencers and supporting AI applications will be an answer to this century-old problem. At least, it levels out the unequal distribution of profits to some extent. Regulations are always behind new technologies. We haven't even finally addressed the ethical questions related to CRISPR.
AI scares me.
Allow me to explain. AI itself stands for artificial intelligence. That's the foundational problem. And by that I mean it's created to simulate and only then artificially aspires to appear to be humanly intelligent. Even it it gets really good at it, it's not good enough.
I see that goal as a real problem. Oh, humans are smart. Relatively smart that is, but we certainly do have issues. Lots of issues. Not the least of which is our propensity to manipulate those around us with lies so as to selfishly serve ourselves. That's just one of many human intelligence issues. And then AI itself aspires to be like us? In my mind that really is kind of a low bar.
Can AI ever have infallible integrity? Not a chance.
Garbage in. Garbage out.
Allow me to explain. AI itself stands for artificial intelligence. That's the foundational problem. And by that I mean it's created to simulate and only then artificially aspires to appear to be humanly intelligent. Even it it gets really good at it, it's not good enough.
I see that goal as a real problem. Oh, humans are smart. Relatively smart that is, but we certainly do have issues. Lots of issues. Not the least of which is our propensity to manipulate those around us with lies so as to selfishly serve ourselves. That's just one of many human intelligence issues. And then AI itself aspires to be like us? In my mind that really is kind of a low bar.
Can AI ever have infallible integrity? Not a chance.
Garbage in. Garbage out.
- 128
- 115
To add to your list of precursors, Ford adopted assembly line techniques developed decades earlier by US weapons manufacturers. Remington Firearms and Colt introduced interchangeable parts leading to mass manufacturing and assembly lines of popular guns.