1084
AI Is Starting to Look Like the Dot Com Bubble (futurism.com)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
340 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

As the AI market continues to balloon, experts are warning that its VC-driven rise is eerily similar to that of the dot com bubble.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 3 years ago (1 child)

@SCB The Luddites were not upset about progress, they were upset that the people they had worked their whole lives for were kicking them to the street without a thought. So they destroyed the machines in protest.

It's not weird, it's not just a trend, and it's actually more in touch with the reality of employer-employee relations than the idea that these LLMs are ready for primetime.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -4 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (2 children)

    Luddites were wrong and progress happened despite them.

    I'm not really concerned about jobs disappearing. Get a different job. I'm on my 4th radically different job of my career so far. The world changes and demanding it should not because you don't want to change makes you the ideological equal of a conservative arguing about traditional family values.

    Meanwhile I'll be over here using things like Synthesia instead of hiring an entry level ID.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    @SCB The Luddites gave way to Unions, which yes were more effective and gave us a LOT of good things like the 8 hour work week, weekends, and vacations. Technology alone did not give us that. Technology applied as bosses and barons wanted did not give us that. Collective action did that. And collective action has evolved along a timeline that INCLUDES sabotaging technology.

    Things like the SAGAFTRA/WGA strike are what's going to get us good results from the adoption of AI. Until then, the AI is just a tool in the hands of the rich to control labor.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    Not everyone can flex into new roles. Have some compassion for those who get left behind. The lack of compassion in your response actually causes you to look conservative.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)

    I have compassion. I think the government should invest heavily into retraining programs and moving subsidies.

    I don't think we should hold all of progress back because somebody doesn't want to change careers

    Edit: retraining, not restraining. That's an important typo fix lol

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago* (1 child)

    What if we were finally able to get insurance companies out of healthcare in the US? Thousands would lose their jobs, but millions would suddenly be able to get care. So much money would be saved, but so many people would suddenly be out of work.

    I don't know about you, but I hate paying several hundred dollars a month (and 100s or 1000s if I actually get care) to prop up a whole ass middleman between me and my care.

    Anyway, my point is we can't keep old systems just l only for the sake of preserving jobs. The guy you're replying to is short sighted and relying too heavily on a language imitation program, but he's essentially right about not keeping jobs just because.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    @new_acct_who_dis Yeah, but that wouldn't hurt as much because all the people out of work would still have healthcare.

    AI displaced creatives will lose their healthcare.

    Now if we passed healthcare, and THEN started replacing people with AI? That would make things considerably less dire for the future. But only one of those is happening and it's AI alone, because the rich do not care about other people.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    You could use this kind of argument for almost anything. For example if we stop burning coal, many coal miners will lose their jobs. That doesn't mean that we should keep burning coal.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    @Freesoftwareenjoyer interesting you mention stopping burning coal. Because mining and burning coal is bad for the environment.

    Guess what else is bad for the environment? Huge datacenters supporting AI. They go through electricity and water and materials at the same rates as bitcoin mining.

    A human being writing stuff only uses as much energy as a human being doing just about anything else, though.

    So yes, while ending coal would cost some miners jobs, the net gain is worth it. But adopting AI in standard practice in the entertainment industry does not have the same gains. It can't offset the human misery caused by the job loss.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You could say that gaming is also bad for the environment and that's just entertainment. But I wouldn't say that we should get rid of it. Both cryptocurrency and AI have uses to our society. So do computers, internet, etc. All that technology has a cost, but it is useful. Technology also usually keeps improving. For example Etherum doesn't require mining anymore like Bitcoin does, so it should require much less electricity. People always work on finding new solutions to problems.

    A human being writing stuff only uses as much energy as a human being doing just about anything else, though.

    But if a computer the size of a smartphone could do the work of multiple people, that might be more efficient and could result in less coal being burned.

    Computers and automation have improved our lives and I think AI might too. If AI takes away my job, but it also improves the society, would it be ethical for me to protest against it? I think it wouldn't. I've accepted that it might happen and if it does, I will just have to learn something new.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    @Freesoftwareenjoyer Gaming isn't as bad as cryptomining farms and the stuff required by an AI server, man. You need to go look up some of the load on this stuff.

    And you still haven't gotten back to me on how AI improves society. People too lazy to learn to draw can say they drew something they actually didn't? That's not improvement.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago

    If you have statistics on power usage, I would love to look at them.

    And you still haven’t gotten back to me on how AI improves society. People too lazy to learn to draw can say they drew something they actually didn’t? That’s not improvement.

    If I want to make a game, but I can't create music and AI could do it for me, that would be very useful. I would be willing to pay for such program. Or if it could write a program that automates something for you, makes your job or your life easier somehow, that would be pretty nice, wouldn't it? It lets people do things that they might not be able to do otherwise, because nobody is an expert in every field. If that's not an improvement for you and you think it's silly - that's fine, but keep in mind that we barely just started to use this technology for something useful and it will keep improving.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent