I think the core issue here is that, so far, AI has only taken away jobs that people want. People want to be artists, writers, and even programmers, and those are the only industries to be disrupted by AI thus far. If AI were to reduce society’s need for manual or emotional labor, I think you would see far less reluctance to accept it. Also, the self-diving car thing, from the outside, just looks to be a matter of public safety. I think most people would agree that cars will be able to safely drive themselves eventually, but the ones currently on the road feel underbaked and rushed along by a greedy cabal of tech industrialists.
How many artists jobs do you think that the introduction of photoshop or digital art took?
Better, how many artists jobs do you think that photography took. Before anyone wanting to preserve an image of anything had to pay massive money to an artists to paint it. Then some guy invented a machine that making one click can automatically make a image of anything.
Advancement of technology be like that.
Same with coding, there used to be a job that was sewing cables to create computer programs. Create the simplest of the programs was a job for maybe hundreds of people. Introduction of better programming languages, techniques an tech in general has made that a program that used to take hundreds of jobs now could be done by a single person. AI programming tools are just another step in that direction. And not even a massively large one (I think C destroyed far more jobs than AI).
You didn’t really respond to the core idea of my comment, which is that AI isn’t doing anything to help us achieve the things that we would actually want it to. And what about the safety concerns around current-gen self-driving vehicles? It’s easy to call everyone primitivists if you refuse to acknowledge their legitimate points.
daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 months ago
We got it boys. Let’s ban tractors because they took away the job of millions of farmers.
TheTetrapod@lemmy.world 3 months ago
I think the core issue here is that, so far, AI has only taken away jobs that people want. People want to be artists, writers, and even programmers, and those are the only industries to be disrupted by AI thus far. If AI were to reduce society’s need for manual or emotional labor, I think you would see far less reluctance to accept it. Also, the self-diving car thing, from the outside, just looks to be a matter of public safety. I think most people would agree that cars will be able to safely drive themselves eventually, but the ones currently on the road feel underbaked and rushed along by a greedy cabal of tech industrialists.
daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 months ago
How many artists jobs do you think that the introduction of photoshop or digital art took? Better, how many artists jobs do you think that photography took. Before anyone wanting to preserve an image of anything had to pay massive money to an artists to paint it. Then some guy invented a machine that making one click can automatically make a image of anything. Advancement of technology be like that.
Same with coding, there used to be a job that was sewing cables to create computer programs. Create the simplest of the programs was a job for maybe hundreds of people. Introduction of better programming languages, techniques an tech in general has made that a program that used to take hundreds of jobs now could be done by a single person. AI programming tools are just another step in that direction. And not even a massively large one (I think C destroyed far more jobs than AI).
TheTetrapod@lemmy.world 3 months ago
You didn’t really respond to the core idea of my comment, which is that AI isn’t doing anything to help us achieve the things that we would actually want it to. And what about the safety concerns around current-gen self-driving vehicles? It’s easy to call everyone primitivists if you refuse to acknowledge their legitimate points.