8 ms·

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 13d 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 13d ago
  It won't happen though
- unclad5968 13d 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 13d ago
    Isn't the point of AGI that it can basically do any job?
  - sumedh 13d 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 12d ago
      So its either work or drugs? No wonder people choose drugs then.
  - tripledry 13d 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 12d 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 12d 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 12d 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_ 13d ago
Come on, Gary is compulsive liar with zero credibility and really shitty takes. He’s entertaining though.
- lackoftactics 13d 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 13d ago
Gary is not a voice worth listening to. A narcissist, fraud and has terrible epistemics.

XCSme 13d 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 13d ago
It won't happen though
unclad5968 13d 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 13d ago
  Isn't the point of AGI that it can basically do any job?
- sumedh 13d 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 12d ago
    So its either work or drugs? No wonder people choose drugs then.
- tripledry 13d 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 12d 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 12d 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 12d 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_ 13d ago

Come on, Gary is compulsive liar with zero credibility and really shitty takes. He’s entertaining though.

lackoftactics 13d 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 13d ago

Gary is not a voice worth listening to. A narcissist, fraud and has terrible epistemics.