‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

To grieve, or not to grieve?

167 points · 156 comments · stabbles

  1. zaptheimpaler · · focus · HN ↗
    Most of these idealistic pieces about AI seem to come from senior, established or wealthy people who aren't very exposed to the labor market. In that view, the question of AI and its transformation is almost philosophical like this piece.

    It's more a question of survival if you're labor though. It's very transformative tech but it's coming at a time when the scales are heavily tilted in favor of capital over labor, the government is the most corrupt its ever been and AI is going to make that much more extreme. It doesn't matter how amazing the technology is if all the benefits are going to accrue to the same few people who already have everything and destroy everyone else's bargaining power.

    1. simianwords · · focus · HN ↗
      Most people who oppose AI don’t oppose it because it’s so good it can replace us. They oppose it because, in their own words, they think it’s hype and it doesn’t work. The first step is to collectively agree that yes, AI is powerful and it can replace us at work. Then we can speak about how to protect livelihood. How does one even have a discussion when the other side doesn’t even believe in the capabilities of AI?

      Edit: not sure why I'm being downvoted because there are replies literally taking the exact position that I'm saying is more prevalent.

      1. zaptheimpaler · · focus · HN ↗
        I think this is how society and politics works, there are a lot of people at different levels of understanding and different opinions all having parallel conversations. We don't need to have these conversations in serial order.

        I can see the capital machine is sprinting at full force to create AI products for and replace labor in every industry, so the people who think it's hype now will soon see AI enter their workplace and understand its true capability. Even many reputed programmers said AI was overhyped say 6 months ago and one after another have changed their minds. I feel like there's also a large element of people saying its bad publicly BECAUSE they actually do understand its capabilities and fear being replaced, but they would rather say its bad to try to slow its adoption or as a kind of defense.

        The understanding of AI's capabilities will diffuse naturally over time, although of course its worthwhile working on informing people there as well. Bill Gates recent interview with Ezra Klein was sort of on the same topic, where he says no one outside the industry understands its capabilities and that's why he's trying to use his platform to inform people about it.

        As a matter of coalition building, all we have to do is agree that AI is being rolled out recklessly without any consideration for the consequences and apply pressure accordingly.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.