[jmathai]

Both things can be true.

AI can help you in the near term and harm you in the long term.

I think the more people use AI the more their view shifts from the former to the latter.

[TurdF3rguson]

I've been thinking the opposite. It sucks to be in the generation of workers that are displaced by AI. It's going to be great to be in the generation where work just isn't something that humans are expected to do.

[Aerroon]

That's what the whole UBI thing was about though. People did see this coming and wanted to preempt it. I'm not sure whether it would've worked, but people did try to come up with solutions for this transition period.

[TurdF3rguson]

There's still plenty of time to figure it out. You're making it sound like it's already too late.

[recursivecaveat]

I really wouldn't want to be in the post-mass-employment era as part of the class with no economic or military power, totally dependent on handouts.

[TurdF3rguson]

Yes because you think of it as a handout. But the generation born into it will think of it as entitlements.

[moron4hire]

We are never going to live in a society that doesn't expect people to work. There may not be enough work for half the population, but people will still be expected to work to live. We already live in a society that could feed every last poor person and we still choose not to, cuz "but muh tax dollars!"

[TurdF3rguson]

I mean, assuming we don't hit some limit with AI, we're going to get to the point where the best way humans can affect productivity is to just get out of the way.

[chrisjj]

> Both things can be true.

Sure but that has nothing to do with long/short term.

Everything to do with have/have not.

Let's read again.

> 76% of AI experts said AI would benefit them personally, while only 24% of the U.S. public said the same.

Think 76% of financial experts said higher tax on low earners would benefit them, whilst only 24% of the public said the same.