Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

MistyDev t1_jdmruk6 wrote

Reply to comment by SomeoneSomewhere1984 in Who do you think will be the winners and losers of the coming AI revolution? by tshirtguy2000

I'm so tired of these pointless one liner comments. Do people honestly think these "rich get richer and we are all screwed" comments are actually adding anything of value?

If people want to make this argument, for gods sake please just add some level of original thought. These sheep comments aren't helping anyone.

What should we be watching out for? How might we prevent this from happening?Historically is there a similar situation?

Or maybe take the opportunity to respond to the OP instead circling around to the same talking point.

2

SomeoneSomewhere1984 t1_jdmu6sa wrote

Telling the truth, instead letting people indulge in naive optimism, adds something of value. Once humans are no longer needed because the people with power have machines to do everything for them, they'll leave the rest of us to starve in the streets.

Too many worship billionaires and hate their fellow humans (especially those of another color, religion, sexuality, etc.) to try to do anything to stop it. The hateful morons will stop any attempts to organize to make post-AI capitalism non-genocidal because they'd rather see others suffer, then not suffer themselves.

14

peadith t1_jdmurx1 wrote

I agree with what you say about celebrity billionaireism but it's already starting to look like billionaires are going to find out first about how much they're really worth and the followers will have to find something more significant to worship.

1

Assembly_R3quired t1_jdmvhaa wrote

How does this comment add value to your prior comment? I still don't understand after reading why billionaires are going to win because of AI.

−3

SomeoneSomewhere1984 t1_jdmw0rn wrote

The reason capitalism works now is that billionaires need workers, so they pay people to work, and those people use the money for things they need.

When they don't need workers anymore, because they can use AI, the vast majority of humans won't have a way to contribute to society well enough to earn a living.

5

Assembly_R3quired t1_jdmyejm wrote

Ah yes, just like how the average quality of life dropped when the plow was invented.

Or how the average quality of life dropped when electricity was discovered.

Or how the average quality of life dropped when assembly lines were automated.

−2

SomeoneSomewhere1984 t1_jdn8thv wrote

I don't think you understand the difference. Those things still required humans to run them. Now we're talking a technology that can do everything humans can do.

8

Assembly_R3quired t1_jdrwdii wrote

That's cute, but ultimately, all of the above directly caused the destruction of millions of jobs. You can make up any qualifiers you want, but the truth is what it is.

0

Used-Comment-5003 t1_jdv0e2k wrote

How do you think humans will make money if AI takes all the jobs?

1

Assembly_R3quired t1_jdy6seb wrote

Wrong question. Do you think Uber would exist today if we relied on horses for transportation?

Jobs are created even when their isn't direct need of them, and assuming you can guess what those will be is what you're doing when you say humans won't be able to find employment.

1

Content_Date_318 t1_jdmvrr8 wrote

The goal of automation is to drive down the cost of labor. Historically speaking workers don't win when automation comes in, it drives down the cost of labor and makes them inherently less valuable which weakens their bargaining position when it comes to negotiating for wages.

​

If you'd like to study a really good example of this, read about the luddites. Plenty of other good historical examples out there too if that's too old for your tastes.

3

Villamanin24680 t1_jdn3c4c wrote

>What should we be watching out for? How might we prevent this from happening? Historically is there a similar situation?

Challenge accepted. We need to fundamentally restructure the way wealth is distributed in society, moving particularly in a more Nordic direction. Iceland is a good example of what that looks like. Strong welfare state and co-ownership of productive firms. Also within top 10 countries for average life expectancy. Now, will what I've just suggested actually happen? I'm not optimistic. If we want it to happen we basically have to start organizing political parties and civic groups with class consciousness foremost in mind.

3

nofluxcapacitor t1_jdo1tjk wrote

It's important to note that the nordic countries have roughly as much wealth inequality as the US, but they just have more taxes which reduces income inequality.

They probably would reduce wealth inequality if they could but the fact that much capital is mobile means the very wealthy can threaten to leave and basically control the government's choices about wealth inequality.

If one country was able to reduce wealth inequality significantly, the wealthy of other countries would likely pressure their governments to condemn and then impose economic sanctions on that country. Along with funding opposition politicians and media within the country.

So it would be a big task to actually reduce it without significant cooperation between governments (e.g. EU's minimum corporation tax would be a very small example).

2

ConfirmedCynic t1_jdpkcp4 wrote

It's what is already happening though, with corporations becoming increasingly monolithic and wealth becoming increasingly concentrated. Why would this trend change, seeing as the process feeds itself? More wealth means more power means more ability to tilt the table to one's own advantage means more wealth.

If companies were interested in being fair, they would have shared the fruits of increased productivity of their employees with their employees. Instead, they do everything they can to squeeze the employees and increase their own take. Why ever would they suddenly have such a fundamental change of heart and share the fruits of increased productivity achieved through AI, which doesn't even come from the employees?

It all seems pretty obvious.

1