Slashdot Mirror
Futurist Predicts AI Will Take Jobs, Benefiting the Rich But Not Workers (venturebeat.com)
Citing "significant" new corporate investments in AI technology, futurist Gary Grossman argues that AI "may be the fastest paradigm shift in the history of technology -- and warns there's a counter-argument to the theory that AI will create as many jobs as its displaces.
"The other view is that this time is different, that we are not just automating labor but also cognition and many fewer people will be needed by industry."
KPMG claims more than half of business executives plan to implement some form of AI within the next 12 months... The disruption is already beginning, with fully 75% of the organizations KPMG surveyed expecting intelligent automation to significantly impact 10 to 50% of their employees in the next two years. A Citigroup executive told Bloomberg that better AI could reduce headcount at the bank by 30%. In the face of all this change, many companies publicly state that AI will eliminate some dull and repetitive jobs and make it possible for people to do higher-order work. However, as a prominent venture capitalist relayed to me recently on this topic: "most displaced call center workers don't become Java programmers." It is not only low-skilled jobs that are at risk. Gartner analysts recently reported that AI will eliminate 80% of project management tasks....
A New York Times article noted that while many company executives pay public lip service to "human-centered AI" and the need to provide a safety net for those who lose their jobs, they privately talk about racing to automate their workforces "to stay ahead of the competition, with little regard for the impact on workers." The article also cites a Deloitte survey from 2017 that found 53% of companies had already started to use machines to perform tasks previously done by humans. The figure is expected to climb to 72% by next year.... The net of this dynamic is that workers are not a major factor in the economic calculus of the business drive to adopt AI, despite so many public statements to the contrary.
So perhaps it's not a surprise when the Edelman 2019 AI survey shows a widely held view that AI will lead to short-term job losses with the potential for societal disruption and that AI will benefit the rich and hurt the poor.
He also shares a sobering quote from historian, philosopher, and bestselling author Yuval Noah Harari on why Silicon Valley supports Universal Basic Incomes.
"The message is: 'We don't need you. But we are nice, so we'll take care of you.'"
A New York Times article noted that while many company executives pay public lip service to "human-centered AI" and the need to provide a safety net for those who lose their jobs, they privately talk about racing to automate their workforces "to stay ahead of the competition, with little regard for the impact on workers." The article also cites a Deloitte survey from 2017 that found 53% of companies had already started to use machines to perform tasks previously done by humans. The figure is expected to climb to 72% by next year.... The net of this dynamic is that workers are not a major factor in the economic calculus of the business drive to adopt AI, despite so many public statements to the contrary.
So perhaps it's not a surprise when the Edelman 2019 AI survey shows a widely held view that AI will lead to short-term job losses with the potential for societal disruption and that AI will benefit the rich and hurt the poor.
He also shares a sobering quote from historian, philosopher, and bestselling author Yuval Noah Harari on why Silicon Valley supports Universal Basic Incomes.
"The message is: 'We don't need you. But we are nice, so we'll take care of you.'"
> Dad, why do some people want socialism if it doesn't work?
> Because they also don't work, son.
I improved your headline.
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
It is obvious that deploying AI has nothing to do with deploying robots in factories. This is just a software deployment !
The previous automation revolution, ie robots in factories at least required robots be built. The AI revolution only requires someone at Google or Amazon to push the deployment button and could wipe by this single action loads of jobs.
As such is unlikely we can consider the AI revolution as something that will replace old jobs with new jobs, It will simply destroy them. End of story. A very small team of engineers and data scientists could actually wipe a whole type of job... worldwide.
It's not like the AI they're talking about will have any use for rich people. Seriously, what do "the rich" bring to the table that "AI" needs?
Other than the plot of yet another Terminator movie, of course....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Wow. We are nice. There's a howler. The Big Lie, say something outrageous. Silicon Valley, the home of intolerance, is telling us deplorables that it's nice and will care for us? Show of hands, who believes this?
In this context, taking care of us means what it means when mafia says they will 'take care' of someone
The article also cites a Deloitte survey from 2017 that found 53% of companies had already started to use machines to perform tasks previously done by humans.
I'd say it's closer to 100%. Do you still have switchboard operators? Elevator operators? Calculators (it used to be a person, not an object)? No? Then you've already replaced humans with machines. Ever send an e-mail or fax? Then you've replaced the postman and the telegraph operator, too...
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Futurist predicts $RANDOMTECH will benefit the rich not the poor.
There you go. I just built the first AI based title generator about AI and obvious facts...
Video of some good progressive thrash music
They need lots of people to buy whatever crap it is they are selling, yet they don't want to have to pay people enough to be able to afford their crap. So once they finally get rid of all or most of the workers no one is going to be able to buy their crap and then what? Ford had the right idea.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
When they got rid of the receptionist in the office and gave me part of her work did my salary go up? No. When they got rid of local HR and gave me an email address I could use, did my salary go up? No. When I started to do three times as much work because technology got better, did my salary go up? No. . If I applied for a job in a different company that had already done these things would they pay me more? No.
What would lead anyone to believe the workers will get anything out of automation but more work to do for the same pay and just to be thankful for a job.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
The rich are parasites, they didn't get to wealth by their efforts, they tapped into and exploited workers and the state to steal from both.
Well Jew or not, we need to acknowledge the capitalists have taken over our earth and are now trying to figure out how to get rid of us, while using our own labor to dig our own graves.
Venezuela is not a socialist country. It is a failed petro-state that would have actually succeeded if:
1. Oil prices didn't collapse.
2. Horrible mismanagement by Maduro and previously by Chavez in his later years.
Saudi Arabia does the same system as they do and they've pulled it off for decades. No one is calling Saudi Arabia "socialist".
This whole Venezuela is an example of how socialism can't work is total horseshit told by people who have an audience of people who can only understand things on a bumper sticker level.
Venezuela's predicament is extremely nuanced and complicated that has nothing to do with socialism. Their problems were decades in the making - waaaay before the "socialism".
Pretty much the nail on the head. The main reason that something will have to change is that all these companies that are having these thoughts will have to realize (and quite quickly) that if a large portion of the work force is jobless, they are also going to have no money, ergo no one will be able to purchase from the company. Now, one could argue that this creates an oppressive loop where they give out and take back the money in just such a way as to keep the world turning, but not allow anyone a way to the upper class. However, that is a bit hyperbolic. It would also require a lot of other things to go awry before that situation would come to fruition, and I would hope the people of the world would see if before it happens.
To illustrate how quick it would have to change, remember when unemployment was at 8 and 9%? Imagine if it suddenly jumped to 15% how much it would crush some of the these industries. There is a vested interest in keeping the system running the way it does now. It would require some very radical things to create the dystopian future that so many fear AI will bring about. Remember, only a few of those stories with such a terrible future actually even show or explain in any real depth how it got to that point, and even then the writers can literally control for everything.