Comment by zer00eyz | Hacker News Reader

Comment by zer00eyz | Hacker News Reader

> But within 20 years, 99% of the workforce in the military, the government, and the private sector will be AIs.

I haven't seen this much hype and hopium since the dot com boom. The whole open AI -> Anthropic saga just reeks of the same evolution of Viant/Scient.

Look we have an amazing tool, but it has some fundamental shortcomings that the industry seems to want to burry its head in the sand about. The moment the hype dies and we get to engineering and practical implementations a lot is going to change. Does it have the potential to displace a lot of our current industry: why yes it does. Agents can force the web open (have you ever tried to get all your amazon purchase history?) can kill dark patterns (go cancel this service for me), and crush wedge services (how many things are shimmed into sales force that should really be stand alone apps). And the valuable engagement is going to be by PEOPLE, good UI, good user experiences are gonna be what sells (this will hit internet advertising hard for the middle men like google and Facebook).

> I haven't seen this much hype and hopium since the dot com boom.

The notion that 99% of the workforce and military will be AIs isn't "copium", it's grounds for absolute terror. One of two things will be true:

1. The AIs will be controlled by the Epstein class, who will then have no use for most of humanity, either as workers or soldiers.

2. Or the AIs will be controlled by the AIs themselves, which also seems worrisome.

Really, any situation where 99% of the workforce and military are AIs should be deeply concerning, for reasons that should be obvious to any student of history or evolution.

And, sure, maybe we won't get there in our lifetimes. But if we did, I wouldn't expect an automatic utopia.

The GP does not believe that AI is going to end up running 99% of everything. Ever.

The GP is saying that it’s a major over-extrapolation of the current progress.

You seem to be assuming we will get there instead of expecting the cracks will become more and more obvious.

I think a lot of Dwarkesh's mentality about AI being inevitable / ubiquitous comes from the same part of him that thinks that artificial things are "good enough", e.g. the way he allows his production team to use fake plastic plants on set. Is he correct? I'm not sure, but I know there are at least a few people who notice the difference.

I always listened to the podcast and forget they even have videos. Have a hard time imagining myself sitting and watching a 2 hour interview when I could listen while exercising or doing chores. Am I missing anything?

Imagine if 5 years ago people said that 99% of the world's software would be written, designed, and tested by AI within 10 years. That would be insane hype and hopium and... oh wait..

Reply on news.ycombinator.com