And I disagree about them being existential threats to many, and to the whole current layout of the economy. It’s not designed to perform well for everyone with high unemployment rates in the first place, let alone in the Gilded Age 2.0.
And I disagree about them being existential threats to many, and to the whole current layout of the economy. It’s not designed to perform well for everyone with high unemployment rates in the first place, let alone in the Gilded Age 2.0.
Rossphorus@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Don’t forget this is all under the umbrella of the initial hypothetical where AI stalled at it’s current level. I don’t believe that existing LLMs systems will destroy the economy. They’re a tool that people are trying to fit into every hole, much like blockchain during the crypto bubble. We’ve already seen companies fire their customer service departments, try to replace them with LLMs, then have to go crawling back when that failed catastrophically.
If AI systems continue to improve, however? As I said previously, all bets are off.
MotoAsh@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Ehh, even current LLMs are good enough to fool the fools who hold the purse strings. Even you are directly admitting that. We’re already aimed for a massive recession/depression, and the extra turmoil from AI, regardless of how permanent its job losses are, may be enough to ensure it hits much greater lows to the point where it will take decades to recover if ever.
Rossphorus@lemmy.world 3 days ago
This is how bubbles always go, see the Gartner hype cycle. People always overextend, try to apply new tools/tech into places that it doesn’t belong, and only then do people realise the limitations of technology. This is common in business, C-suites explicitly exploit the hype cycle to secure naive investor funding, but investors always become wise eventually - it’s a game to see how much money can be extracted from them before they become increasingly aware of the limitations of the technology. There will be niches where the tech actually settles, but it’s always much smaller than what’s promised. I’m a programmer, I’ve been listening to people say that LLMs are going to take my job for the past five years, and yet every time I’ve actually tried to apply an LLM directly to my work it’s failed in a pretty drastic manner. I find existing systems useful as a tool, but that’s about it.
MotoAsh@lemmy.world 2 days ago
The fact bubbles grow only means that this partivular cycle’s downfall will be particularly harsh, given all of the factors I’ve already cited are lining up.
That’s the point! The fact that it is a bubble only reinforces my point.