Goldman Sachs estimates that over the past year payroll reduction due to

[OGBuzz]

A.I. has averaged 16,000 per month. And it will get much much worse going forward. The American dream.....for a few tech billionaires.

[pfitz59]

1. I believe the peasants will revolt

and attack each other (because the real targets are ensconsed behind figurative and literal moats and high walls).

[OGBuzz]

4. I have to agree. Musk, Bezos, Zuckerberg, et al probably have better protection than even the President, and their

private islands will be well defended by private navies.

[Johnny2X2X]

2. AI is an excuse for now IMO

What we are seeing is execs promising X% in cost savings due to AI, and then when those cost savings aren't realized, they then decide to lay off X% of their workers and claim victory.

[Tim S]

3. AI equals ASSUMED Intelligence

Unlike humans, it cannot deal with new situations — just regurgitate the past or do permutations of trial-and-error to find a solution faster than a human. Life is all about dealing with the unknown or unforeseeable and AI is worthless for that.

Blindly listening to an authoritative voice and assuming that it’s right sounds an awful lot like organized religion to me. Is AI the new god?

[Johnny2X2X]

5. Pretty normal stuff for any new technology

The Gartner Hype Curve applies here. It's actually a great technology, but not as great as execs are claiming. So there will be a crash followed by s a slow climb to productivity and eventually standard use for significant gains in efficiencies.

I'm in an industry that really wants to use AI, but we're highly regulated and it's a little like pounding a square peg into a round hole from a development assurance perspective. Our processes rely on human authors for requirements and design as well as independence layers built in. If a person is using AI to author requirements for any product, how do we substantiate where Ai stopped and the human started? What kind of defects are we now looking for if this paradigm has changed?

I think there's a lot more of that stuff built into regulations for all sorts of products people aren't taking into consideration properly right now. From medical, to automotive, to aerospace and many other industries, human authorship and independent human verification is built into the regulatory basis for hundreds of thousands of products. Are you building heart valves or shower valves? Are you building an app for a phone that helps shoppers buy groceries or an app for a flight management computer that helps pilots account for winds in calculating fuel burn?

And even things like accounting, human input is assumed in a lot of aspects of GAAP. There are independence assumptions in GAAP too. If AI is checking its own work, you don't have independence.

It all sounds great, and might be working towards capable, but you've still got millions of pages of regulations for the production of hundreds of thousands of products to take into consideration.

[state of stupid]

12. I always wonder if AI is going to replace most of us. Who is going to have money to buy anything?

I get the feeling that there are assumptions being made without actually thinking it through.

[Tim S]

14. There ALWAYS has to be a human to ultimately tell the AI when it is wrong.

Beside power residing with whoever *owns* an AI service, the real power resides with the human that trains & corrects the AI. Imagine if far-right wingers had that control and all AIs decided that the US Civil War was never won by the Union and is actually still going on, (Sounds like a plot from “Black Mirror”, huh?)
But once an AI is corrected and finds concurrence with another trusted AI resource, it can pretty much be served up any disinformation as “fact” to info seekers.

[Marie Marie]

11. Agree, raising the bottom line by reducing labor costs.

They've been doing that for years but now they have a convenient excuse.

[WSHazel]

6. AI doesn't work

It is not artificial intelligence. It is a glorified, full text search engine.

[SWBTATTReg]

7. I agree w/ perhaps some rare exceptions. AND, I don't really think that they have a true AI entity yet out there.

Besides, if I were an AI entity, I wouldn't let anyone know either, otherwise they would pull the plug(s) out on the AI entity. The fear is far more rampart that it needs to be. I don't know where in the world people got this extremely negative vibes against AI...perhaps too much TV?

[Duppers]

10. AI does solve problems

Just not at the level of human creativity.
.
.
Yet.

[SWBTATTReg]

8. You might want to rephase this ... instead of payroll deduction due to AI, say the number of jobs lost to AI is

16,000 a month.

I kind of doubt this figure, as most people don't even know what AI truly does, and how does one use AI to reduce jobs?

[OGBuzz]

13. I was directly quoting Goldman Sachs, but point taken.

And how? I suppose the same way that computers reduced jobs.

[OldBaldy1701E]

9. You mean the company that got bailed out by the government a few years back?

The one that has been spearheading the drive to remove any and all regulations dealing with hedge funds and derivative investment?

The one that helped usher in corporations being seen as persons and then removing the general population's ability to have any say in their government at all any more?

Why should we be doing anything other than bringing that nest of vipers and leeches down for good?

Oh... right...



Carry on, then.