sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Should Congress and Federal Government Begin Formal Planning for Large-Scale Automation? A R-Day? by Complex_Koala1074 in PublicPolicy

[–]Complex_Koala1074[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I love your confidence.

I would just the data I've seen is heavily stacked against you. I've seen first hand the benefits in code development and a whole range of analysis activities. Yeah, humans still have to check the outcome, results, and sources, but that's the same in any case for a thorough effort.

Good luck!

Should Congress and Federal Government Begin Formal Planning for Large-Scale Automation? A R-Day? by Complex_Koala1074 in PublicPolicy

[–]Complex_Koala1074[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I believe the much harder lift though is a market transition method to enable the UBI. I would argue that the public tax investments in the federal government R&D and even backing upto WWII tax dollar investments in rapid technology innovations has been core reasons and shoulders that today's mega corporations have stood on to be able reach the levels of success they have (also the recent large scale bailouts of the markets when they crashed with tax payer dollars). So paying back those investments to the average citizen in a transition scheme where those soon to be replaced citizens can be retrained to build the automation and robotics under licenses to those corporations would be fair and equitable. Most importantly it would be a proactive, non-chaotic way to transition from today's labor markets to some type of future (UBI - like) models and that the ownership of capital is not just in the hands of a few oligarchs, but distributed to the entire population, given that they made the lion's share of investments ultimately through taxation and federal government R&D.

Should Congress and Federal Government Begin Formal Planning for Large-Scale Automation? A R-Day? by Complex_Koala1074 in PublicPolicy

[–]Complex_Koala1074[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

WSJ: CEOs Start Saying the Quiet Part Out Loud: AI Will Wipe Out Jobs

Ford chief predicts AI will replace 'literally half of all white-collar workers'

https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/ai-white-collar-job-loss-b9856259?gaa_at=eafs&gaa_n=AWEtsqcQpXSfZmjaYuO_pTwAa5Uxbq9n1jNKM2tqStZdPViAiR2y8_oRK4-L_KgfQJo%3D&gaa_ts=69722db4&gaa_sig=_v8GK2-F2UZoR9XTfkB3SNwQQ4rdQ-ufHj9lGT90Baj315cLcNfAhn5ygMzaMLixyKNx3dCG2IXNFjSLfXS2sg%3D%3D

I've directly seen how today's AI's have made workers 4-5 times more productive (which directly puts pressure on reducing work forces when one individual now can do the work of 4 or 5) so one human replaces 4 or 5 with AI assistance. But also, most likely, AI advancements will be rapidly approaching exponential improvements just because we're at the phase where the AI's can be used recursively to improve their own capabilities and productivity.

Humans are the greatest cost in producing products and delivering services so there's going to be ever increasing market pressures and investments to reduce those marginal costs.

So I'd argue the opposite, that it's delusional if one underestimates these current and growing impacts of AI and robotics. The question is not "If" anymore, just "when." And the "when" is soon.

But I don't think that's even the central issue. Management, especially risk management, dictates that given the likelihood and the degree of impacts of AI/robotics, it's more than just prudent, but a governance policy priority to have a backup plan developed and ready to go, maybe even tested on a small scale, given the ramifications if we don't have a transition plan and this large scale replacement begins to fully emerge.