[shinycode]

Well it’s a good point that proves at least two things. First in the industrial world machine have not yet replaced man after decades. Still a force multiplier.

The second point is the one who control « what » produces value wins it all. In France we had amazing industries and some were deported offshore. Maybe some genius thought that only the brain mattered. Now countries have to rely on other countries to build or make products evolve and those countries can make their own products now and can charge us whatever they want (I’m simplifying) because we don’t know how to build things anymore, tools and craftsmanship is gone and not learned anymore. I feel the article pin points exactly the main idea behind AI : who will have control and who will be able to decide that the API price can be x100 ? If no one knows how to code, that is very dangerous and what happened in the industrial world shows it’s dangerous. Companies have an endgame of power and as a developer deciding to not learn or delegate my know how makes me at mercy in the end

[MonkeyClub]

> machine have not yet replaced man after decades

When I look at fields like car manufacturing, which is mostly robotic, it seems that nowadays humans are force multipliers for machines rather than the other way around.

[shinycode]

Yeah but there isn’t one self operating supply chain that makes cars. We make more cars of ship them faster.

The day machines 100% replaced humans throughout the industries it will be an other problem because capitalism is built upon the premise that man is paid because he brings value. Once that’s over and you don’t have money the things you’ll consume less are the nice to have so whole countries might be in trouble. So either we all be able to bring other kinds of values, either the system will have to change not to collapse ?