[kaliqt]

It posits that the tools at their disposal will be far more powerful and wide reaching than just Gmail or even modern social networks.

The good ol' AGI and then ASI singularity everyone likes to talk about. To be fair, it is possible.

[jofzar]

I don't believe "true" agi/asi will happen, but I totally believe if a company theoretically invented they would immediately shut all API's and then go for software market dominance in every category.

[ben_w]

While I've said in another comment on this thread that comparative advantage is flawed, I still think the opening moves, the very initial phase, would be as per comparative advantage, not everything all at once.

Until supply grows to saturate demand in whatever market, comparative advantage points to the fastest way to make more money, that money then gets used to construct more servers and data centres, which gets used to saturate supply for the next most profitable market, etc. until there's none left.

I wouldn't say "never" for AI that can economically substitute all human labour. I think that meaning of AGI/ASI is slightly easier than the "AI which learns from as few examples as humans do" meaning, which I also think is possible eventually but don't know how far away it is.

[vaughands]

It's vogue on HN to sometimes criticize critically so I want to try and be as constructive as possible:

I work for one of these companies. I also have pay bills to pay. I'd like to understand what a real, good alternative is.

Frontier labs such as Google DeepMind are not just going to shutter their doors because 10% of the peons dropped their jobs. I believe, at least, that we should be demanding political accountability and safeguards for society. I only get to live once: if I am to spend it for social change, I best maximize by expected return.

And quitting a job in a capitalist society probably has negative return overall.

[duskdozer]

>Frontier labs such as Google DeepMind are not just going to shutter their doors because 10% of the peons dropped their jobs.

What about 20%? 50%? 90%? 100%?

[johnnyanmac]

I also argue it depends on which 10%. 20% of all key talent may stall the project for years, so it would be a similar form of collective bargaining. But those at the top tend to be more complicit.

[johnnyanmac]

As is it, nothing is "real". But I'll offer options

1. Unionize

2. Work to form a general strike. Even an industry wide strike would be highly effective

3. Work your civic duties to push for stronger labor rights in the United States. It can include anywhere from 4 day work weeks to raising minimum wage to preventing abuse of the H1b Visa. There's dozens of initiatives to push for.

4. Similarly work to properly regulate Ai before the genie is out the bottle.

5. In the abscense of the ability to do 1-4 for whatever reason, research efforts out there and use capitalism to support them financially. Anonymously if need be.

Quittog your job without. Collective bargaining is a drop of water on a clear sunny day. You need to make it rain, and we can only do that together. Or have enough money to lobby he government to do your bidding. Too bad people at that level only seem to resort to authoritarian efforts.

[phtrivier]

> I believe, at least, that we should be demanding political accountability and safeguards for society.

You can't help but swing between "AGI is going to save us, praise the tech lords" and "AGI is going to kill us, tech lords have mercy" if you believe there is no counterpower to the tech lords.

"You, alone, leaving your job" is not a great way to counteract the tech lords (although at least it makes a point and show other people there is a problem.)

But there is the option to use your counterpowers (you know, legislators and all that ?) The tech lords are actively trying to avoid that (see the hilarious Musk vs Breton feud.)

It would be better if your system did not give money to power to choose lawmakers.

Maybe AI will make USA realize the definition of corruption and proper election funding laws.

But, if you don't want to join the underclass, maybe, just maybe, consider not picking tech lords as kings next time.

[wickedsight]

> I'd like to understand what a real, good alternative is.

The "real, good" part all depends on your expectations of life.

There's a real shortage in trades people and I'd love to see ChatGPT fix a leaky pipe, build a house or make a chair. So switching to the trades/manual labor, while financially tough at the beginning might be a good long term choice. But this requires much more physical work than most of us on HN are used to.

Moving away from capitalist society into a cheap tiny off grid house in a rural area and leading a much more basic life is also an option. You don't need 100k to survive, but you do need it in populated areas. (Also, I'm European and therefore not dependent on employment for health care, so I'm ignoring that part.)

There are many choices we can make that remove our dependence on big tech. But big tech is hella convenient and so is having expendable income, so it's a tough choice to make.

[mlrtime]

>And quitting a job in a capitalist society.

What other modern society has existed and prosperous where you could quit a job and have positive return?