Hacker News Reader

Comment by foco_tubi | Hacker News Reader

No one is claiming the entire workforce would be eliminated. You’re making that claim up because you misread something along the way.

View on HN

No, I’m not. You can take it to mean just the tech workforce, and still none of these quotes say that the entire tech workforce will be eliminated overnight. The second one is the closest, but it’s talking about tasks, not jobs. Most of the others are all talking about max 50% of the tech workforce over years, not “entire” workforce “overnight”. The Altman one is a tiny fragment, who knows what the context even is!

AI skeptics constantly lie and misrepresent what the leaders in this field have actually said, and then get themselves all spun up about something they fabricated in the first place!

It’s both humorous and a little sad.

You can also take it to mean a subset of the entire workforce, which has already lost their jobs to AI. Again, you’re the only person in this thread using the phrase “THE entire workforce” in regards to the idea that jobs will be replaced with AI. People here are telling you that that isn’t the argument being made and you keep rallying against it anyway.

You can also take it to mean a subset of the entire workforce, which has already lost their jobs to AI.

OK, so I guess the claim is true as soon as one person loses their job?

And again, YOU are the one focused on "THE entire workforce", I already said fine, we can just talk about tech or whatever subset you'd like. The point is that it's pretty clear these quotes are not nearly as widely sweeping as AI detractors usually misrepresent them as.

It's genuinely possible English is his second language? It's pretty subtle, but there's a big difference between "an entire" versus "the entire."

Right. A workforce can contain a workforce, as a set can contain a set.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com