|
|
|
|
|
|
by asdff
812 days ago
|
|
|
On the other hand, offshoring of manufacturing and the emergence of computers should have reduced the workforce but we saw the opposite happen. There might not be truck drivers in the future but maybe those people will just be working different jobs, like how I am not a blacksmith making horseshoes today. |
|
|
As technology becomes more intelligent, the human comparative advantage shrinks. But what is likely to happen? Don’t look to the past. Look at the fundamentals of the system dynamics.
Consider an analogy. The differential equation that governs blackbody radiation depends on the difference between the object and the environment. Similarly, a person’s earning capability is proportional to the difference between their capability and the next best option. As the next best option gets better and better, the human differential advantage craters.
Max Tegmark uses the metaphor of a rising ocean to signify the ever greater capabilities of intelligent machines.
AI isn’t just coming for low-skilled jobs. It isn’t just supplementing knowledge work. AI will take more and more intellectually demanding jobs. This arguably doesn’t even require AGI. This just requires industry deploying capable AI’s that can do enough tasks to replace humans one industry at a time.
So people that have an ownership stake in these AIs will do fine.
My take: The others should demand a universal basic income. How do we find ways to allow people to live good lives? People that weren’t lucky enough to be born into the right places in society don’t deserve to be displaced by AI.
If you read the AI literature, I’m not alone in what I’ve said above.
Granted, I’m also not offering particular time frames and not covering all future scenarios. But what I’m saying is more considered than the usual default ‘reasoning’ you hear people say.