[derektank]

>We have certainity it will be used to harm most people in the short term

How will it harm most people in the short term, exactly?

[Grombobulous]

Taking jobs away, obviously.

And the only reason no longer working is a bad thing is that nobody trusts our government to create a universal welfare system.

[derektank]

It seems very unlikely to me that most people will lose either their current job in the short term, or their ability to find work at all in the medium term.

It does seem like something to worry about for a small percentage of people in the short term (just as the China shock hurt a number of manufacturing workers in the 90s/00s) and maybe a majority of people when AGI exists, but who knows when that will be.

[Grombobulous]

Sure, though I think you can understand how most laypeople don’t really feel like the risks are worth the reward.

The people at the top are guaranteed to benefit. The people at the bottom probably figure they have a very low chance of benefiting.

[watwut]

The expression "becoming obsolete permanent underclass" CEO crave so much pretty much explains it.

If they succeed in their stated goals, most will be permanently unemployed, with no political power and the government will be a.) fascist b.) feudal.

[derektank]

I’m simply not seeing the certainty you’re seeing. There are lots of risks associated with power concentration, but I’m not seeing evidence of that yet. What I am seeing are open weights models, and even just competition between closed weight model providers alone, turn these systems into commodity products. Additionally I am not seeing any kind of massive labor demand destruction, even though we’re nearly 6 months into the middle of a global energy supply shock. Maybe your fears are realized eventually but I do not think (a) they are certain or (b) they will happen in the near term.