4 ms·

The difference is that one of those things actually happened, and the other one is your hypothetical extremist/exaggerated/worst possible case of what might hap

The difference is that one of those things actually happened, and the other one is your hypothetical extremist/exaggerated/worst possible case of what might happen this time.

estearum 1mo ago
the wise man bowed his head solemnly and spoke: "theres actually zero reason to think about events that haven't happened yet. you imbecile. you fucking moron"
- alsetmusic 1mo ago
  I don't think they said that at all. I'm pretty sure they were saying that the thing to think about / discuss is the thing that happened, rather than the hypothetical.
  - estearum 1mo ago
    My own initial comment literally addressed the uncertainty. Here: > You can argue about whether the obsolescence is real or not, but if it is [emphasis in source], the plight of the printers is totally incomparable. "It hasn't happened yet" is a non-sequitur at best, but obviously the goal of such a "contribution" is to chill discussion. The same "contribution" can be made to any conversation about any possible future events. So long as everyone already knows they're talking about the future, it is not helpful in any way.
  - freejazz 1mo ago
    The entire premise of this article is a hypothetical
zero-sharp 1mo ago
The parent is making a point about the rate/scale at which technology replaced workers. If you think the hypothetical is too extreme, then what would a more realistic version be? Are you uncertain about the rate of disruption?
mbesto 1mo ago
The entire premise of the article is that we're being promised that an entire workforce is going to be eliminated overnight. The people who are promising this, do not care about what happens to the working class. This is clearly causing anxiety. The comparison is useful. Printers had decades to pivot and hence the anxiety didn't exist like it does today. Today's capital allocated wants this to happen within a decade.
- senordevnyc 1mo ago
  Who are you talking about? Who has promised that the entire workforce is going to be eliminated overnight?
  - foco_tubi 1mo ago
    a workforce, not the workforce
    - RobertRies 1mo ago
      And here is a selection of quotes: -Sam Altman “whole classes of jobs going away” -Mustafa Suleyman "So white-collar work, where you're sitting down at a computer, either being a lawyer or an accountant or a project manager or a marketing person — most of those tasks will be fully automated by an AI within the next 12 to 18 months." -Jim Farley “Artificial intelligence is going to replace literally half of all white-collar workers.” -Dario Amodei predicted that AI could eliminate up to 50% of entry-level white-collar jobs within five years -Arindam Paul has said that 40-50 percent of white-collar jobs in India could cease to exist because of AI, and an Anthropic researcher had predicted that AI would be able to automate any white-collar job by 2028.
      - senordevnyc 1mo ago
        [flagged]
        foco_tubi 1mo ago

The difference is that one of those things actually happened, and the other one is your hypothetical extremist/exaggerated/worst possible case of what might happen this time.

estearum 1mo ago

the wise man bowed his head solemnly and spoke: "theres actually zero reason to think about events that haven't happened yet. you imbecile. you fucking moron"

alsetmusic 1mo ago
I don't think they said that at all. I'm pretty sure they were saying that the thing to think about / discuss is the thing that happened, rather than the hypothetical.
- estearum 1mo ago
  My own initial comment literally addressed the uncertainty. Here: > You can argue about whether the obsolescence is real or not, but if it is [emphasis in source], the plight of the printers is totally incomparable. "It hasn't happened yet" is a non-sequitur at best, but obviously the goal of such a "contribution" is to chill discussion. The same "contribution" can be made to any conversation about any possible future events. So long as everyone already knows they're talking about the future, it is not helpful in any way.
- freejazz 1mo ago
  The entire premise of this article is a hypothetical

zero-sharp 1mo ago

The parent is making a point about the rate/scale at which technology replaced workers. If you think the hypothetical is too extreme, then what would a more realistic version be? Are you uncertain about the rate of disruption?

mbesto 1mo ago

The entire premise of the article is that we're being promised that an entire workforce is going to be eliminated overnight. The people who are promising this, do not care about what happens to the working class. This is clearly causing anxiety. The comparison is useful. Printers had decades to pivot and hence the anxiety didn't exist like it does today. Today's capital allocated wants this to happen within a decade.

senordevnyc 1mo ago
Who are you talking about? Who has promised that the entire workforce is going to be eliminated overnight?
- foco_tubi 1mo ago
  a workforce, not the workforce
  - RobertRies 1mo ago
    And here is a selection of quotes: -Sam Altman “whole classes of jobs going away” -Mustafa Suleyman "So white-collar work, where you're sitting down at a computer, either being a lawyer or an accountant or a project manager or a marketing person — most of those tasks will be fully automated by an AI within the next 12 to 18 months." -Jim Farley “Artificial intelligence is going to replace literally half of all white-collar workers.” -Dario Amodei predicted that AI could eliminate up to 50% of entry-level white-collar jobs within five years -Arindam Paul has said that 40-50 percent of white-collar jobs in India could cease to exist because of AI, and an Anthropic researcher had predicted that AI would be able to automate any white-collar job by 2028.
    - senordevnyc 1mo ago
      [flagged]
      - foco_tubi 1mo ago