[flustercan]

> I think it can disrupt only knowledge jobs

What happens when a huge chunk of knowledge workers lose their job? Who is going to buy houses, roofs, cars, cabinets, furniture, amazon packages, etc. from all the the blue-collar workers?

What happens when all those former knowledge workers start flooding the job markets for cashiers and factory workers, or applying en masse to the limited spots in nursing schools or trade programs?

If GPTs take away knowledge work at any rate above "glacially slow" we will quickly see a collapse that affects every corner of the global economy.

At that point we just have to hope for a real revolution in terms of what it means to own the means of production.

[throw234234234]

- The people that are left and the people that it doesn't happen straight away on: i.e. the people who still have something "scarce". That's what capitialism and/or any system that rations resources based on price/supply/demand does. This includes people in things slower to automate (i.e. think trades, licensed work, etc) and other economic resources (landowners, capital owners, general ownership of assets). Inequality will widen and those people winning will buy the houses, cars, etc. The businesses pitching to the poor/middle classes might disappear. Even if you are disrupted eventually being slower to disrupt gives you relatively more command of income/rent/etc than the ones disrupted before you giving you a chance to transition that income into capital/land/real assets which will remain scarce. Time is money. AI is a real asset holder's dream.

- Unskilled work will become even more diminished: A lot of people in power are counting on this to solve things like aging population care, etc. Move from coding software to doing the hard work in a nursing home for example is a deflationary force and makes the older generations (who typically have more wealth) even more wealthier as the effect would be deflationary overall and amplify their wealth. The industries that will benefit (at the expense of ones that don't) will be the ones that can appeal to the winners - resources will be redirected at them.

- Uneven disruption rates: I disagree that the AU disruption force will be even - I think the academic types will be disrupted much more than the average person. My personal opinion is that anything in the digital world can be disrupted much quicker than the physical realm for a number of reasons (cost of change/failure, energy, rules of physics limitations, etc). This means that as a society there will be no revolution (i.e. it was your fault for doing that; why should the rest of society bear the cost? be adaptable...). This has massive implications for what society values long term and the type of people valued in the new world as well socially, in personal relationships, etc.

i.e. Software dev's/ML researchers/any other white collar job/etc in the long run have shot themselves in the foot IMO. The best they can hope for is that LLM's do have a limit to progres, that there is an element of risk to the job that still requires some employment, and time is given to adjust. I hope I'm wrong since I would be affected too. No one will feel sorry for them - after all other professions know better than to do this to themselves on average and they have also caused a lot of disruption themselves (taste of their own medicine as they say).