[gsleblanc]

Yes. I think Anthropic's success with claude code + cowork and the way it's shredding through white-collar work is basically cementing the thesis of Geoffrey Hinton's latest paper (https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12559-026-105...). I highly recommend reading it in full, but briefly:

1. Copernican Revolution -> We aren't the center of the universe

2. The Darwinian Revolution -> We aren't the pinnacle of life

3. The Freudian Revolution -> We aren't even in control of our own minds

4. The "Intuitive AI" Revolution -> We aren't the only form of intelligence

I think even a month ago I would've read this article and scoffed, but having used Claude Code almost exclusively at work for the last couple months it seems pretty undeniable that in-context-learning and a good enough harness is all you need to displace most "thinking" jobs that require just a bachelors. The hundreds of billions of dollars pouring into data center build-out basically hinges on this thesis, and frankly I trust the judgements of the billionaires financing these deals better than LLM-naysayers on hackernews (not to mention the non-public info they have access to). You don't need to reach superintelligence to still deeply, deeply affect society, and I think Anthropic was the first to build products that are actually good enough and, critically, hands-off enough to do just this. Every day it's clearer and clearer to me that "I was born into a poor family but am relatively intelligent and good at learning things, therefore I can find success" is exactly what will ultimately be eliminated as the outcome of this unless we get the government to step in and regulate.

I could go on and on, but the main point I'm trying to make is that you should definitely examine unease you feel about Anthropic, consider framing that unease in the context of Hinton's argument, and ask yourself what the implications may be.

[vilius]

> "I was born into a poor family but am relatively intelligent and good at learning things, therefore I can find success"

Nicely put, unconsciously this was my mindset in my 20s. In my 30s, I started questioning myself how come so many stupid people achieve great success. There must be more to success than just being relatively intelligent (just look into politicians - forgive generalization).

Once a nagging thought, now I find some comfort in it.

[sumedh]

> cementing the thesis of Geoffrey Hinton's

Didnt he say there wont be any need for radiologists?

[hn_throwaway_99]

> The hundreds of billions of dollars pouring into data center build-out basically hinges on this thesis, and frankly I trust the judgements of the billionaires financing these deals better than LLM-naysayers on hackernews (not to mention the non-public info they have access to).

I actually think both perspectives can be true. If you look at (IMO) the most rational takes of "LLM-naysayers on hackernews", it's not that LLMs are useless, but it's that they're still just tools, and while they can do a lot of high-level "rearranging of past experience" that looks an awful lot like intelligence, human intelligence is still required for lots of higher level thinking tasks, and there look to be limits to the "just scale" approach.

The problem is there are still tons of jobs that actually don't require much high-level, human-only thinking where it's easy to see a clear path where AI obliterates all those jobs pretty quickly. Automating those jobs will still be probably one of the largest wealth transfers in history from labor to capital.

[delis-thumbs-7e]

> The problem is there are still tons of jobs that actually don't require much high-level, human-only thinking where it's easy to see a clear path where AI obliterates all those jobs pretty quickly.

I heard this million times, but never examples of those jobs, at least ones that haven’t been decimated by automation already years ago. There was very little need for elevator attendants and data entrist already in 2023. Company I work for has robot doing the lifting in an automated warehouse, but there still guys there doing so many various things changing day by day that they are virtually indispensable for the whole corporation.

Another this is that of you destroy say 25-50% of all workforce with no replacement you destroy consumer demand and cause a massive Depression. I would fuckin invent new jobs where I Amodei.

[hn_throwaway_99]

> I heard this million times, but never examples of those jobs

Then you haven't been listening. The Bureau of Labor Statistics already listed 18 roles that are heavily susceptible to AI and have already begun to see impacts from AI. This was on the HN front page a few days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48162354

Plus, this doesn't even include obvious candidates that are ripe for disruption in the near future, like driving (millions of Americans drive for a living), radiologists, etc.

[delis-thumbs-7e]

I have actually. The examples in that paywalled article seem to be various clerks and translators, ie. jobs that have been automated away for 20-30 years now. Your examples of of drivers and radiologists have been touted for years now and hiring of radiologists is actually up [1], similar to truck drivers [2].

Everybody* says there is massive job displacement either now or coming, but if you actually look at the data, there is little to no displacement. Theoretically there may he in the future, but seems that the technology just is not ready.

*Who are somehow invested in AI boom [1] https://www.bls.gov/ooh/healthcare/radiologic-technologists.... [2] https://www.bls.gov/ooh/transportation-and-material-moving/h...