Hacker News Reader

Comment by meowface | Hacker News Reader

You could be right, but short of an eternal Butlerian jihad or other extremely strict global government action that effectively bans most forms of AI forever, I think the probabilities of that are exceedingly low.

What you think won't happen in 1000 years is what I think is almost certainly happening within 40 years. I'd bet everything I own it'll be way, way, way more impactful than the sewing machine within 40 years. I think some bits of physical labor may still exist in 40 years, but almost none, and only when a human really wants to talk to or deal with a human, such as in some medical and therapeutic professions, some art fields, etc. (Again, assuming no universal outlawing of AI.)

View on HN

Now you're already hedging and narrowing your claims: "almost" none, "some" physical" labor. For someone who claims to be willing to stake his whole bank account, you're not that confident.

Why do you think restaurants with waiters keep opening when the automat has existed since 1895? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quisisana

You are also probably unfamiliar with the history of the sewing machine and its impact on society. As AI has already poisoned search engines, here's an AI slop overview that hits some of the main points: https://sciencepedia.blog/sewing-machine-societal-importance

When money's on the line, everyone hedges.

Yes, I think even in some crazy distant future utopia, humans will still often want to interact with humans for things, and even to pay them for some services. Tasks that include speaking one-on-one and producing works of art will always retain some value to people, even when AIs can one day trivially produce things which most humans find aesthetically superior to anything a human could ever produce alone. People will seek other things out of art beyond aesthetics, like expressions of human emotion.

Humans will enjoy and seek out human contact. This is not surprising. Just, for economy-impacting labor, I think it's almost all going to be machines, with very few humans playing any role. Even an oversight or accountability role. I think there's a 95% chance of it by 2100 and an 85% chance of it by 2066, conditional on no laws that forbid replacing jobs with AI.

I could point out that that as far as economy-impacting labor goes, it's almost all machines already today. At least in the developed world, few people do any kind of work that isn't at least partially mechanized. You don't see it because lawnmowers and spreadsheets are "normal" machines in your mind.

You're making the "this time it's different" case that AI will be categorically different from every other form of labor-saving automation that's come before it. I work with these models every day and I'm not buying it.

The hypothesis is about theoretical future models, not existing public ones. I'm making a prediction based on a pace of improvement that I believe will probably continue unabated and which likely is not going to hit significant bottlenecks for very long.

Well, good luck with that. Consider reading When Prophecy Fails to steel yourself for the possibility that 2036 ends up largely the same as 2026, only with more spam and surveillance.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com