Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Lysmerry t1_jdo5l4x wrote

Reply to comment by 1714alpha in ChatGPT is about to revolutionize the economy. We need to decide what that looks like. New large language models will transform many jobs. Whether they will lead to widespread prosperity or not is up to us. - MIT technology review by HorrorCharacter5127

i am very pessimistic about these technologies benefiting people as a whole. But the industrial revolution did lead to an overall higher standard of living, a drop in disease and death etc. But at least in the US it required a lot of regulation of industries to make sure many werent sacrificed for it. I do worry because those workers were able to unionize, whereas AI will replace workers.

4

1714alpha t1_jdo9oo2 wrote

The industrial revolution did not provide workers with fewer hours, better pay, or better working conditions. Labor unions, worker's rights organizations, and progressive activists did that, and all in the face of stiff and violent opposition from the capitalists who absolutely would have kept kids in coal mines for 12 hours a day if they could've gotten away with it (for longer than they already had).

Make no mistake, technology is nothing but a tool. The real problem is the slave drivers with their whips at our backs to keep us using those new and better tools for as long and as cheaply as they can possibly get away with, no matter how much more value we produce for them in the same time.

If we workers were truly going to benefit from the advancements in technology, our paid time off would be increased in proportion to the rise in the company's value each year. If the company stock goes up 10%, I should get 10% more PTO than I already had. Not even more money, just more time to live my life, because I was able to do more work in less time, and therefore deserve to reap the benefits of the advanced technology that let me finish that work faster.

Of course, you can see why this would never survive as a business model when competing with other businesses who don't reward workers in proportion with their productivity. There's a perverse incentive for employers to pay as little as possible and demand as much work as possible. Business interests are not human interests. Technology, in and of itself, benefits the owners, not the workers, and rising tides do not necessarily lift all boats equally.

10

GPUoverlord t1_jdqimd3 wrote

Do you think people in the year 1905 said “The labor movement is starting in a few years…”

One thing happens then another, few years later, everyone looks back And go “that’s was a neat little labor movement”

Makes it seem like it was planned, that it takes a leader

It’s not, it’s just people reading their breaking points

And the labor movement in America sucked, miners and farmers in America were too scared dying so we never got universal paid time off, universal healthcare and all that good stuff

1