4 ms·

Lmao I love their video with the idea that people will be able to do their hobbies while ai does their job. Surely Alibaba is leading by example here by reduci

by jofzar 2mo ago

Lmao I love their video with the idea that people will be able to do their hobbies while ai does their job. Surely Alibaba is leading by example here by reducing work hours per week while keeping pay the same right? Right?

mlmonkey 2mo ago
That's the thing. Wny are companies like OpenAI/Anthropic/Alibaba/Kimi/Deepseek still hiring SWEs if their models have become so good?
- Mythorian 2mo ago
  I mean its pretty obvious right? This models are not flawless and sometimes reach stupid conclusions so there needs to be some one who watches it. Thought i must say u are right. Every one of them pretends that this new model is gonna finally take ur jobs lol
- wmf 2mo ago
  There's infinite work to be done, so higher productivity makes people worth more. (Obviously this doesn't apply if AI can do everything but we're not there yet.)
- BetterThanSober 2mo ago
  The models are good even by skeptics standard, it's just that evangelists are overselling the capabilities. If you understand the limits of LLMs not using them as a business is shooting yourself in the foot. However, they are not at the point where they can effectively train themselves, nor did they are capable of researching their own method of learning. SWEs in mid-corps on my country are right now relegated to reviews and sanity check, basically babysitting the LLMs and making sure they're not spouting nonsense. If you think about it, that's basically QA and can also be delegated to another AI. If Bun's rust rewrite that they tout as fully LLM-led can pass the test of time in a year or so I think that's it. I believe all that is now constrained by compute and capital, not tech.
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
- cute_boi 2mo ago
  The world never runs out of problem. There is so much work to do.
- rrix2 2mo ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox
  - mathisfun123 2mo ago
    Otherwise known as the "no shit Sherlock" principle
  - zeratax 1mo ago
    i dont see how that answers the question? why not answer more demand with even more ai agents?
- vitorgrs 2mo ago
  OpenAI can't even build Codex app (not cli) for Linux... I thought code was solved?! Ironically it's Electron BS, so actually, Sol could probably build itself...
SyneRyder 2mo ago
> I love their video with the idea that people will be able to do their hobbies while ai does their job... Are you not already experiencing this? I think this is fairly common for people using AI now, though the time may not always go into hobbies or sports. It's common for me to setup Claude with an hour+ task while I catch up on housework, or while I'm getting ready in the morning. In the last couple of weeks I've unfortunately had multiple family illnesses - it has been helpful to have Claude keep up with much of my product development programming work while I visit my mother in hospital and check on my father's recovery. I'm able to give more time to family without worrying that business progress isn't keeping up. The overnight Claude sessions while I'm asleep have been particularly helpful.
- jofzar 2mo ago
  No I haven't had time to spend my afternoon rock climbing while ai generates documentation. It's infinite work, I just did more work while codex was doing it's thing in the background.
- weikju 2mo ago
  We are in the golden period where this IS possible. Once it becomes the norm to "do something else while your agent works", we'll be asked to do more WORK while the agent works, rather than do hobbies/housework/nap/etc.
aurareturn 2mo ago
Lmao I love their video with the idea that people will be able to do their hobbies while ai does their job. Anecdotally, I'm even more busy with AI than before AI. I'm expected to do a lot more even if doing one thing is faster. Before AI: I have 10 tasks that take 1 hour each to do. After AI: I have 100 tasks that take 10 minutes each to do. Same amount of time spent working, maybe even more stressful, just more productive.
- DoctorOetker 2mo ago
  So you were working 10 x 1 hour = 10 hours before. And then you were doing 100 x 10 minutes = 100 / 6 hours = ~16 hours & 40 minutes.
  - aurareturn 2mo ago
    My brain didn't work there.
aianus 2mo ago
The percentage of the population that needs to work will continue to go down because of aging and automation although you might not see it as a reduction of hours for a given individual employed person. Already 38% of Americans aged 16 or older do not work and are not looking for work and yet are not dying from hunger or exposure. This would have seemed like a utopian dream to someone from the 1800s.
- HDBaseT 2mo ago
  Source? Being 16, 17 and 18 and not working is expected, given they are still at school. A good percentage of people aged 18 to 24 are studying full time. This stat seems a bit misleading and doesn't support the "you can live and not work argument". How many of those people are retired? How many of those are under 18? How many of those simply cannot work? How many of those live at home or are on food stamp?
  - konart 2mo ago
    >is expected ... these days. 100 years ago you'd have a job at 12 in many cases, 14-16 if you were more lucky. I'm not even talking about peasants from previous centuries.
- suslik 2mo ago
  But how is that possible? How can one survive without income barring homelessness, begging, prostitution, and other not so utopian options?
  - T-A 1mo ago
    government, where two thirds of spending comprises transfer payments that help households bridge the gap between their spending, retirement, and health care needs and their wages and salaries [1] The market comment linked in the paragraph above that one features a toy model of the US economy which illustrates this (section "Equilibrium in output and income"). [2] [1] https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc260219/ https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc260219/ [2] https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc260104/ https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc260104/

by jofzar 2mo ago

mlmonkey 2mo ago

That's the thing. Wny are companies like OpenAI/Anthropic/Alibaba/Kimi/Deepseek still hiring SWEs if their models have become so good?

Mythorian 2mo ago
I mean its pretty obvious right? This models are not flawless and sometimes reach stupid conclusions so there needs to be some one who watches it. Thought i must say u are right. Every one of them pretends that this new model is gonna finally take ur jobs lol
wmf 2mo ago
There's infinite work to be done, so higher productivity makes people worth more. (Obviously this doesn't apply if AI can do everything but we're not there yet.)
BetterThanSober 2mo ago
The models are good even by skeptics standard, it's just that evangelists are overselling the capabilities. If you understand the limits of LLMs not using them as a business is shooting yourself in the foot. However, they are not at the point where they can effectively train themselves, nor did they are capable of researching their own method of learning. SWEs in mid-corps on my country are right now relegated to reviews and sanity check, basically babysitting the LLMs and making sure they're not spouting nonsense. If you think about it, that's basically QA and can also be delegated to another AI. If Bun's rust rewrite that they tout as fully LLM-led can pass the test of time in a year or so I think that's it. I believe all that is now constrained by compute and capital, not tech.
deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]
cute_boi 2mo ago
The world never runs out of problem. There is so much work to do.
rrix2 2mo ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox
- mathisfun123 2mo ago
  Otherwise known as the "no shit Sherlock" principle
- zeratax 1mo ago
  i dont see how that answers the question? why not answer more demand with even more ai agents?
vitorgrs 2mo ago
OpenAI can't even build Codex app (not cli) for Linux... I thought code was solved?! Ironically it's Electron BS, so actually, Sol could probably build itself...

SyneRyder 2mo ago

> I love their video with the idea that people will be able to do their hobbies while ai does their job... Are you not already experiencing this? I think this is fairly common for people using AI now, though the time may not always go into hobbies or sports. It's common for me to setup Claude with an hour+ task while I catch up on housework, or while I'm getting ready in the morning. In the last couple of weeks I've unfortunately had multiple family illnesses - it has been helpful to have Claude keep up with much of my product development programming work while I visit my mother in hospital and check on my father's recovery. I'm able to give more time to family without worrying that business progress isn't keeping up. The overnight Claude sessions while I'm asleep have been particularly helpful.

jofzar 2mo ago
No I haven't had time to spend my afternoon rock climbing while ai generates documentation. It's infinite work, I just did more work while codex was doing it's thing in the background.
weikju 2mo ago
We are in the golden period where this IS possible. Once it becomes the norm to "do something else while your agent works", we'll be asked to do more WORK while the agent works, rather than do hobbies/housework/nap/etc.

aurareturn 2mo ago

Lmao I love their video with the idea that people will be able to do their hobbies while ai does their job. Anecdotally, I'm even more busy with AI than before AI. I'm expected to do a lot more even if doing one thing is faster. Before AI: I have 10 tasks that take 1 hour each to do. After AI: I have 100 tasks that take 10 minutes each to do. Same amount of time spent working, maybe even more stressful, just more productive.

DoctorOetker 2mo ago
So you were working 10 x 1 hour = 10 hours before. And then you were doing 100 x 10 minutes = 100 / 6 hours = ~16 hours & 40 minutes.
- aurareturn 2mo ago
  My brain didn't work there.

aianus 2mo ago

The percentage of the population that needs to work will continue to go down because of aging and automation although you might not see it as a reduction of hours for a given individual employed person. Already 38% of Americans aged 16 or older do not work and are not looking for work and yet are not dying from hunger or exposure. This would have seemed like a utopian dream to someone from the 1800s.

HDBaseT 2mo ago
Source? Being 16, 17 and 18 and not working is expected, given they are still at school. A good percentage of people aged 18 to 24 are studying full time. This stat seems a bit misleading and doesn't support the "you can live and not work argument". How many of those people are retired? How many of those are under 18? How many of those simply cannot work? How many of those live at home or are on food stamp?
- konart 2mo ago
  >is expected ... these days. 100 years ago you'd have a job at 12 in many cases, 14-16 if you were more lucky. I'm not even talking about peasants from previous centuries.
suslik 2mo ago
But how is that possible? How can one survive without income barring homelessness, begging, prostitution, and other not so utopian options?
- T-A 1mo ago
  government, where two thirds of spending comprises transfer payments that help households bridge the gap between their spending, retirement, and health care needs and their wages and salaries [1] The market comment linked in the paragraph above that one features a toy model of the US economy which illustrates this (section "Equilibrium in output and income"). [2] [1] https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc260219/ https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc260219/ [2] https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc260104/ https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc260104/