7 ms·

> Like, what's the point, if the next AI can do it in 5 seconds? Live a life doing whatever makes you happy. Post-work society is an inevitability if we don't

> Like, what's the point, if the next AI can do it in 5 seconds? Live a life doing whatever makes you happy. Post-work society is an inevitability if we don't destroy our planet.

lackoftactics 15d ago
Gary Economics wants to have a word with you. It would be fun to get to post-work society, but hard to imagine atm. TPTB won't let it happen
- XCSme 15d ago
  But how this transition will even happen? Soon we will have some machines that can replace 50% of jobs, and this will happen basically overnight...
  - neta1337 15d ago
    It won't happen though
  - unclad5968 15d ago
    The steam engine replaced a lot of jobs. Tractors replaced a lot of jobs. Calculators replaced a lot of jobs. Computer used to be a job description before it was a personal device. There will be new jobs.
    - XCSme 15d ago
      Isn't the point of AGI that it can basically do any job?
    - sumedh 15d ago
      Entire towns got decimated when their jobs went away, such people fill their lives in drugs and vote for politicians who promise to bring back jobs.
      - mf2hd 15d ago
        So its either work or drugs? No wonder people choose drugs then.
    - tripledry 15d ago
      If we truly would get robots with AGI doing anything a human can do but cheaper|better|reliable, it's not comparable at all to history IMO. It's not "a lot of jobs", it's "all jobs".
    - wartywhoa23 15d ago
      And for those who don't get to find a job, there'll be a convenient WWIII to utilize themselves, just like there was WWI after the steam engine replaced a lot of jobs and WWII after tractors replaced even more. WWI: -20 000 000 extra mouths to feed WWII: -80 000 000 extra mouths to feed WWIII: you extrapolate
  - mike_hearn 15d ago
    It won't happen overnight. Social change is constrained by integration speed. The average enterprise has many tasks that could be automated by models for several years already, yet they remain stubbornly unautomated. The reasons are primarily social: • Lots of people aren't aware of what the models can do. • They also aren't paying attention, and getting their attention is hard. • Their impression of AI was formed by cheap low quality AI like free ChatGPT as of two years ago, Google AI overviews or Microsoft Copilot. So they think it sucks. • A LOT of executives got burned by early pilots that overpromised then failed. Enterprise IT is a wasteland of dead AI pilots. • Their IT systems are difficult to connect to models because they lack proper APIs or auth systems. Note the huge emphasis on fast computer use in the Astra announcement. A lot of work can only be done by clicking things. • Executives don't want to let employees go, but aren't sure they can find new work for them either. The last point is worth dwelling on. HN is full of socialists who imagine corporate executives as cigar smoking top hat wearers who chuckle all the way to the bank. The reality is more mundane: most executives don't want to lay people off and will fight hard to avoid doing so. The average person in a position to make an AI project work either isn't incentivized with stock - this is often the case outside the US even for quite high ranking execs - or they are but don't believe laying people off will raise the share price enough to be worth the pain. Also, executives often measure their success and self-worth by how many people report to them. Laying off half their department, even if it gets them a monetary bonus, would lead directly to a loss of social status as they can no longer say they manage 1,000 people but only 200, which matters if their social circle are all managers too (and for their wives, girlfriends, etc). Layoffs suck and people HATE doing them, which is why companies often resort to forced percentage based layoffs to get managers to do it. If the incentives aren't there, the average executive will just sit on obvious AI deployment opportunities and/or deliberately sabotage them because getting rid of people is just all downside for them with no upside. So institutions have enormous inertia. Model capabilities will run far ahead of what is actually used in reality, and this will continue for decades. It does mean that startups have a better chance than ever of outcompeting much larger incumbents though, as not hiring is far easier than firing.
    - kingleopold 15d ago
      Great point and writing. We have real world data point now which is waymo and how many drivers are still driving taxi in USA. All others are 10-100x time more complex than this, it takes literally decades
- azan_ 15d ago
  Come on, Gary is compulsive liar with zero credibility and really shitty takes. He’s entertaining though.
  - lackoftactics 15d ago
    Good take, I think his view is a bit simplistic. Also he also have a huge ego "I am the best economist in UK!"
- calmoo 15d ago
  Gary is not a voice worth listening to. A narcissist, fraud and has terrible epistemics.
cautiouscat 15d ago
> Post-work society is an inevitability if we don't destroy our planet. Is it?
- gavinray 15d ago
  Walk current technological progress down the road. I can't see a future in which almost every system (both physical and virtual) are not automated and optimized by autonomous entities. What do you do when everyone is out of a job? If you don't want pitchforks and riots in the streets, you give everyone UBI and housing so society doesn't collapse.
  - exe34 15d ago
    Or you build bunkers and build robots to keep the riffraff out. Shock collars on the guards' necks.
    - exe34 15d ago
      For those who are as yet unaware that boot polish can be purchased cheaply in tins. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/sep/04/super-rich-prepper-bunkers-apocalypse-survival-richest-rushkoff https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/sep/04/super-rich-prep... > The billionaires considered using special combination locks on the food supply that only they knew. Or making guards wear disciplinary collars of some kind in return for their survival. Or maybe building robots to serve as guards and workers – if that technology could be developed “in time”.
  - tokioyoyo 15d ago
    > If you don't want pitchforks and riots in the streets, you give everyone UBI and housing so society doesn't collapse. As much as I’d love UBI to happen, in current geopolitiks it’s a no-go. People are not happy with having what the others have.
  - tripleee 15d ago
    Autonomous police drones will likely be able to handle the pitchforkers and rioters
madhatter999 15d ago
I think you're assuming work's only function is getting things done. Work also is a crowd control tool.
- echoangle 15d ago
  Is it realistic to keep people working jobs that don’t get anything done in the long term? I know most people will say that’s already happening, but imagine a society where basically every job is just a bullshit job made to keep you occupied, do you think people will continue working in a society like that?
  - madhatter999 15d ago
    Like you foresaw, I'll say this is the reality for most people. I think that just like now, those who want to do meaningful work will seek opportunities to do so. If we had something like a Maslow’s hierarchy of needs but for work, I think meaningfulness would be the top of the pyramid. For most people in the world, not going hungry or affording housing are reasons enough to do work. Getting to do work you find meaningful is truly a privilege.
  - globular-toast 15d ago
    Yes, it's realistic. We're at least a couple of generations into this experiment now. Millions of people travel to and from an office to sit on a chair, doing nothing, all day, every day. This in turns keeps a whole bunch of people employed servicing their cars, preparing their food, sweeping the floor behind them etc. None of these people question whether their jobs are really necessary for the few things we really need: food, shelter, warmth, health etc. A couple of generations ago most women were employed in the least bullshit job of all: running a household. But now they're all wage slaves too. So yeah, it does work.
- akoboldfrying 15d ago
  If work is needed for "crowd control", why aren't popular holiday destinations crime hotspots?
throwatdem12311 15d ago
> Post-work society is an inevitability Ah yes because these AI companies are just gonna give away the models for free that I use with my free computer and free smartphone while I eat with my free food in my free apartment.
- intrasight 15d ago
  "AI companies" Think about what that means. Also think it through. There will be no "non-AI companies". Will the AI choose to give you those freebies? It will if you behave.
winrid 15d ago
How do you imagine a post work society where people can have inequality? I don't want to be equal. I want to do more.
wartywhoa23 15d ago
This Kool-Aid supply never runs out.
andriy_koval 14d ago
> Post-work society is an inevitability if we don't destroy our planet. we should be more concerned by post-wages society Work will always exist regardless how useful it is

> Like, what's the point, if the next AI can do it in 5 seconds? Live a life doing whatever makes you happy. Post-work society is an inevitability if we don't destroy our planet.

lackoftactics 15d ago

Gary Economics wants to have a word with you. It would be fun to get to post-work society, but hard to imagine atm. TPTB won't let it happen

XCSme 15d ago
But how this transition will even happen? Soon we will have some machines that can replace 50% of jobs, and this will happen basically overnight...
- neta1337 15d ago
  It won't happen though
- unclad5968 15d ago
  The steam engine replaced a lot of jobs. Tractors replaced a lot of jobs. Calculators replaced a lot of jobs. Computer used to be a job description before it was a personal device. There will be new jobs.
  - XCSme 15d ago
    Isn't the point of AGI that it can basically do any job?
  - sumedh 15d ago
    Entire towns got decimated when their jobs went away, such people fill their lives in drugs and vote for politicians who promise to bring back jobs.
    - mf2hd 15d ago
      So its either work or drugs? No wonder people choose drugs then.
  - tripledry 15d ago
    If we truly would get robots with AGI doing anything a human can do but cheaper|better|reliable, it's not comparable at all to history IMO. It's not "a lot of jobs", it's "all jobs".
  - wartywhoa23 15d ago
    And for those who don't get to find a job, there'll be a convenient WWIII to utilize themselves, just like there was WWI after the steam engine replaced a lot of jobs and WWII after tractors replaced even more. WWI: -20 000 000 extra mouths to feed WWII: -80 000 000 extra mouths to feed WWIII: you extrapolate
- mike_hearn 15d ago
  It won't happen overnight. Social change is constrained by integration speed. The average enterprise has many tasks that could be automated by models for several years already, yet they remain stubbornly unautomated. The reasons are primarily social: • Lots of people aren't aware of what the models can do. • They also aren't paying attention, and getting their attention is hard. • Their impression of AI was formed by cheap low quality AI like free ChatGPT as of two years ago, Google AI overviews or Microsoft Copilot. So they think it sucks. • A LOT of executives got burned by early pilots that overpromised then failed. Enterprise IT is a wasteland of dead AI pilots. • Their IT systems are difficult to connect to models because they lack proper APIs or auth systems. Note the huge emphasis on fast computer use in the Astra announcement. A lot of work can only be done by clicking things. • Executives don't want to let employees go, but aren't sure they can find new work for them either. The last point is worth dwelling on. HN is full of socialists who imagine corporate executives as cigar smoking top hat wearers who chuckle all the way to the bank. The reality is more mundane: most executives don't want to lay people off and will fight hard to avoid doing so. The average person in a position to make an AI project work either isn't incentivized with stock - this is often the case outside the US even for quite high ranking execs - or they are but don't believe laying people off will raise the share price enough to be worth the pain. Also, executives often measure their success and self-worth by how many people report to them. Laying off half their department, even if it gets them a monetary bonus, would lead directly to a loss of social status as they can no longer say they manage 1,000 people but only 200, which matters if their social circle are all managers too (and for their wives, girlfriends, etc). Layoffs suck and people HATE doing them, which is why companies often resort to forced percentage based layoffs to get managers to do it. If the incentives aren't there, the average executive will just sit on obvious AI deployment opportunities and/or deliberately sabotage them because getting rid of people is just all downside for them with no upside. So institutions have enormous inertia. Model capabilities will run far ahead of what is actually used in reality, and this will continue for decades. It does mean that startups have a better chance than ever of outcompeting much larger incumbents though, as not hiring is far easier than firing.
  - kingleopold 15d ago
    Great point and writing. We have real world data point now which is waymo and how many drivers are still driving taxi in USA. All others are 10-100x time more complex than this, it takes literally decades
azan_ 15d ago
Come on, Gary is compulsive liar with zero credibility and really shitty takes. He’s entertaining though.
- lackoftactics 15d ago
  Good take, I think his view is a bit simplistic. Also he also have a huge ego "I am the best economist in UK!"
calmoo 15d ago
Gary is not a voice worth listening to. A narcissist, fraud and has terrible epistemics.

cautiouscat 15d ago

> Post-work society is an inevitability if we don't destroy our planet. Is it?

gavinray 15d ago
Walk current technological progress down the road. I can't see a future in which almost every system (both physical and virtual) are not automated and optimized by autonomous entities. What do you do when everyone is out of a job? If you don't want pitchforks and riots in the streets, you give everyone UBI and housing so society doesn't collapse.
- exe34 15d ago
  Or you build bunkers and build robots to keep the riffraff out. Shock collars on the guards' necks.
  - exe34 15d ago
    For those who are as yet unaware that boot polish can be purchased cheaply in tins. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/sep/04/super-rich-prepper-bunkers-apocalypse-survival-richest-rushkoff https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/sep/04/super-rich-prep... > The billionaires considered using special combination locks on the food supply that only they knew. Or making guards wear disciplinary collars of some kind in return for their survival. Or maybe building robots to serve as guards and workers – if that technology could be developed “in time”.
- tokioyoyo 15d ago
  > If you don't want pitchforks and riots in the streets, you give everyone UBI and housing so society doesn't collapse. As much as I’d love UBI to happen, in current geopolitiks it’s a no-go. People are not happy with having what the others have.
- tripleee 15d ago
  Autonomous police drones will likely be able to handle the pitchforkers and rioters

madhatter999 15d ago

I think you're assuming work's only function is getting things done. Work also is a crowd control tool.

echoangle 15d ago
Is it realistic to keep people working jobs that don’t get anything done in the long term? I know most people will say that’s already happening, but imagine a society where basically every job is just a bullshit job made to keep you occupied, do you think people will continue working in a society like that?
- madhatter999 15d ago
  Like you foresaw, I'll say this is the reality for most people. I think that just like now, those who want to do meaningful work will seek opportunities to do so. If we had something like a Maslow’s hierarchy of needs but for work, I think meaningfulness would be the top of the pyramid. For most people in the world, not going hungry or affording housing are reasons enough to do work. Getting to do work you find meaningful is truly a privilege.
- globular-toast 15d ago
  Yes, it's realistic. We're at least a couple of generations into this experiment now. Millions of people travel to and from an office to sit on a chair, doing nothing, all day, every day. This in turns keeps a whole bunch of people employed servicing their cars, preparing their food, sweeping the floor behind them etc. None of these people question whether their jobs are really necessary for the few things we really need: food, shelter, warmth, health etc. A couple of generations ago most women were employed in the least bullshit job of all: running a household. But now they're all wage slaves too. So yeah, it does work.
akoboldfrying 15d ago
If work is needed for "crowd control", why aren't popular holiday destinations crime hotspots?

throwatdem12311 15d ago

> Post-work society is an inevitability Ah yes because these AI companies are just gonna give away the models for free that I use with my free computer and free smartphone while I eat with my free food in my free apartment.

intrasight 15d ago
"AI companies" Think about what that means. Also think it through. There will be no "non-AI companies". Will the AI choose to give you those freebies? It will if you behave.

winrid 15d ago

How do you imagine a post work society where people can have inequality? I don't want to be equal. I want to do more.

wartywhoa23 15d ago

This Kool-Aid supply never runs out.

andriy_koval 14d ago

> Post-work society is an inevitability if we don't destroy our planet. we should be more concerned by post-wages society Work will always exist regardless how useful it is