Comment

Comment on Thousands of CEOs admit AI had no impact on employment or productivity—and it has economists resurrecting a paradox from 40 years ago

<- View Parent

stoly@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

That’s reductive. I’m no economist but it goes like this: there are models that predicts the effects of certain industry changes. The invention of certain technologies at a certain time didn’t fit the prediction and they don’t know why. Someday somebody will figure it out and the model will be better. In the mean time, the model continues to work just fine with other stuff.

source

Sort:hotnew top

ech@lemmy.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

The invention of certain technologies at a certain time had effects that didn’t match the prediction and they don’t know why. Someday somebody will figure it out and the model will be better.

Also known as “being wrong”. Being wrong is fine. It’s great even. It means that there’s more to discover and improve. Calling it a “paradox” is a pathetic, self-serving attempt to save face when presented with evidence that makes them look bad. Instead of saying “We don’t know, but we’re working on it,” they pass it off as unsolvable.

source
- stoly@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  Paradox was a word chosen by the journalist for clicks.
  
  Not knowing enough is not the same as being wrong. They are different things.
  
  source
  - ech@lemmy.ca ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    Maybe. Until they start calling this out for the farce it is, I’m gonna blame them as much as the journalists pushing the hype.
    
    source
  - Windex007@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    I’m angry at social science. Just not about this specifically.
    
    source