And you/we will be replaced by an AI that will solve the business problem (the day they get so good to actually do that, which might happen or not but... who knows?)
After all, you can go and be a goat herder right now, and yet you are presumably not doing this.
Nothing is stopping you being a goat herder - the place that is paying you for solving business problems will continue just fine if you leave, after all. Your presence there is not required.
- first the place that is paying me to solve problems will NOT be just fine when I suddenly leave
- second I need UBI or some AI-enabled utopia to be ushered in to live comfortably as goat herder
- third I do have a concrete plan to get out, but it will take me a couple of years to realise
Yes they will!
No one, not even the chief officers or the shareholders of a company are irreplaceable. Well, maybe you're the only tech guy in a 5-company outfit?
They'll replace you just fine.
> - second I need UBI or some AI-enabled utopia to be ushered in to live comfortably as goat herder
Well, that's not really relevant to your assertion, is it?
>>> I really really hope an AI will do this work and solve all the “business problems” so I can go and be a goat herder
After all, UBI as an outcome is not dependent on AI solving all the business problems you currently solve.
IOW, whether UBI comes to pass or not is completely independent of "AI takes our jobs".
AI utopia is not needed for UBI that is true - but it will be much easier to become reality if “all the jobs” are taken.
Aside from all the snark - I think that the fundamental societal problem is that there will always be some shitty jobs that no one wants to do and there needs to be some system to force some people to do these jobs - call it capitalism, communism, or marriage. There is no way around this basic fact of the human condition
Point is: if that problem is solvable without me, that's the win condition for everyone. Then I go herd goats (and have this nifty tool that helps me spec out an optimal goat fence while I'm at it).
The problem is solvable without you. I don't even need to know what the problem actually is, because the odds of you being one of the handful of the people in the world who are so critical that the world notices their passing is so low, I have a better chance of winning a lottery jackpot than of you being some critical piece of some solution.
Solving the problem - no matter what problem it is - is extremely dependent on you and every single human being (or animal for that matter) is a critical piece of their environment and circumstances.
I have buy-in from a former co-worker with whom I remained in touch over the years, so there will be at least two of us working the fields.
There aare probably 2 ways to see te future of LLMs / AI: they are either going to have the capabilities to replace all white collar work, or they are not.
If you think they are going to replace us, then yo ucan either surrender or fight back, and personally I read all these anti-AI posts as fighting back, to help people realize we might be digging our own grave.
If, OTOH, you see AI as a force-multiplier tool that's never going to completely replace a human developer then yes, probably the smartest thing to do is to learn how to master this new tool, but at the same time keep in mind the side effects it might bring, like atrophy.
We've always been in the business of replacing humans in the 3-D's space (dirty, dangerous, dull... And to be clear. data manipulation for its own sake is dull). If we make AI that replaces 90% of what I do at my desk every day... We did it. We realized the dream from the old Tom Swift novels where he comes up with an idea for an invention and hands the idea off to his computer to extrapolate it, or the ship's computer in Star Trek acting like a perfect engineering and analytical assistant to take fuzzy asks from humans and turn them into useful output.
They aren't going to willingly spread the wealth.