Sundar Pichai recently claimed that no job is safe, not even his own, fretting that we'll have to suffer through AI whether we like it or not.
  • JiveTurkey@lemmy.world
    541·
    3 months ago

    I think we can all agree, we should put people like this in the wood chipper and unboubtedly the world would be a better place.

  • aesthelete@lemmy.world
    341·
    3 months ago

    What do you call a private jet full of billionaires crashing into a mountain?

    A good start.

  • Formfiller@lemmy.world
    26·
    3 months ago

    That’s actually a pretty good idea. What if we started putting tech billionaires through the wood chipper? It could be like the American guillotine

  • jj4211@lemmy.world
    20·
    3 months ago

    The things to remember is that these CEOs have made a whole living out of not knowing what they are doing, but being insufferably confident in whatever vomit of words they spew, whether they know anything or not, while ultimately just saying the most milquetoast blatantly obvious stuff and pretending it’s very insightful. All this while they believe and the money proves that are the most important people in the world.

    So naturally it’s easy for them to believe LLM can take all the jobs, because it can easily take theirs.

  • The_Blinding_Eyes@lemmy.world
    18·
    3 months ago

    This type of stuff is exactly why I am moving all of my accounts away from Google. Google is now as bad or evenworse than Microsoft.

  • Phegan@lemmy.worlddeleted by creator
    11·
    3 months ago

    If AI is going to take our jobs then UBI is absolutely necessary.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      3 months ago

      AI isn’t going to take your jobs, though. AI is going to take over management of the economy, which is a very different thing.

      The jobs will still exist, because manual labor continues to be far cheaper to produce and deploy than machine labor. The conditions of employment will get worse over time, as computer management tools prioritize “efficiency” (aka margin of profit) over quality of life and ecological sustainability.

  • bluegreenpurplepink@lemmy.world
    10·
    3 months ago

    Doesn’t this situation call for companies that could decide to block AI and double down on the human workforce? And those companies who do would be rewarded by all of us who hate AI and they would succeed by the supposed rules of the free market. Why isn’t any company stepping up to compete against AI run companies? Wouldn’t it be an amazing opening to compete and win?

    Also, it wasn’t talked about in the article, but one of the big arguments for why this AI thing has to be so inevitable is that we have to compete with China. They think we have to start this race with China, to try to win AI.

    First of all, I think we might have already lost the race. Second of all, even if you don’t agree that we’ve already lost. What if by embracing AI, China and all the other countries are destroyed by it? What if it just makes so many mistakes and errors that it just destroys their economy and destroys their country?And then the countries who were cautious about AI would be fine.We’d be the winners, not having succumbed to this ridiculous urge to use everything AI.

    People always forget that anything and everything hooked up to a network is hackable. I’ll say it again. Everything hooked up to a network is hackable.Including this shitty AI stuff. If we put everything into AI, even if we win, another country could just hack us. And screw everything up. The bottom line is.There is a space to say no to AI and succeed.

    I know I’m not that super articulate about this, but I would love to see somebody else write about these ideas with more finesse than I have, so that we could all start talking about this more and stop letting this inevitable push to AI just keep going without pushing back.

  • C1pher@lemmy.worldBanned
    3·
    3 months ago

    He is going to suffer, what a bitch, investing all those money into a circle jerk scheme. I hope when that AI crashes, so will the stocks.

  • blady_blah@lemmy.world
    3·
    3 months ago

    I’m going to go against the grain here and agree with him. If you look at it as this being a new technology, like robotics or computers, then they will cause disruption in the workforce as people who used to do the tasks are replaced with a technology solution in it’s place. That’s how the tech CEOs are looking at this, as a disruptive technology that will either replace people in the workforce (tech support being replaced by AI) or make people more efficient (one programmer instead of a team).

    I honestly don’t think he’s wrong. But just like the two technologies I mentioned above, there will be a limit to what AI can do and it will find it’s disruptive nitch and then no longer be cost effective. Back in the 50’s or in the 80’s computers and robotics were going to drive us all out of work… but lo and behold, we all still have jobs.

    The real issue isn’t AI, but how this will allow the few to capture even more wealth. AI is just a technology step, the ultra wealthy are a crime.