Larry Summers, Now an OpenAI Board Member, Thinks AI Could Replace 'Almost All' Forms of Labor (fortune.com) 126
Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, now on the board of ChatGPT developer OpenAI, believes that while AI has the potential to revolutionize the economy, its impact will take time to materialize. However, Summers maintains that AI could be the biggest economic development since the Industrial Revolution, eventually replacing most forms of human labor, particularly cognitive tasks. He said: "If one takes a view over the next generation, this could be the biggest thing that has happened in economic history since the Industrial Revolution,"he added. "This offers the prospect of not replacing some forms of human labor, but almost all forms of human labor."
From building homes to making medical diagnoses, Summers predicted that AI will eventually be able to do nearly every human job, particularly white collar workers' "cognitive labor."
From building homes to making medical diagnoses, Summers predicted that AI will eventually be able to do nearly every human job, particularly white collar workers' "cognitive labor."
What Larry Summers thinks is usually wrong (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What Larry Summers thinks is usually wrong (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
There is zero scientifically sound reason to think that. In fact, that looks less and less likely.
Re: (Score:2)
Not until they build substantially better robot bodies. And even so I place that as a bit over a decade from now. Then there's the question of "but will it be economical?", and that's a VERY sticky one.
Replacement versus augment (Score:2)
The big thing I disagree with from the story is the replace element, it's going to augment most fields instead. Going through the fields in the article:
For labor, AI will dramatically augment (not replace) lots of fields in construction. Coupled with automation and robotics, not AI by itself, construction will still have people involved but it will be robots hammering nails, with human construction coordinators and human decision-makers directing the robots. Yes, we'll have less need for humans to climb on
It doesn't really matter if he's right or wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
The real AI revolution is getting CEOs to go top down through their entire organization and automate absolutely everything they can. That's going to cut your workload and when that happens they're going to lay you off. And here on slash dot we're old farts so we are always the first ones to go
Re: (Score:3)
CEOs think he's right and they're looking top to bottom for everything they can automate when previously they thought there were things that just couldn't be automated. There are tons and tons and tons of jobs that are about to just go away because we've been in a position to automate them for some time but some schmuck who was a legacy at Harvard and doesn't know his ass for a hole in the wall thought that because of magic they couldn't be done by computers. The real AI revolution is getting CEOs to go top down through their entire organization and automate absolutely everything they can. That's going to cut your workload and when that happens they're going to lay you off. And here on slash dot we're old farts so we are always the first ones to go
It makes me wonder what the next cost-cutting phase will be once automation takes over most of the workforce. Will they be able to outsource to countries where power generation doesn't come with environmentally focused costs? I assume a datacenter in China will be able to crunch more than a datacenter in the US for the same buck if the scales are large enough. Gonna be an interesting few years.
Re: (Score:2)
Automation isn't a bad thing. And gaining efficiencies isn't bad either. Men can dig holes with shovels and take hundreds of hours, or a single man can dig a hole with a backhoe and take a half a day.
In a society where if you don't work you don't eat (Score:2, Flamebait)
How would you feel to be dragging your ass into work every week for 40, 50 hours knowing that somebody else is sitting around eating bon bons because you busted your ass learning a skill and they're too dumb to do anything useful?
Is any of what I wrote above even remotely true? Who cares. It's all about feels over reals. If I post that fast food workers should be paid a decent wage and point to count
Re: In a society where if you don't work you don't (Score:2)
"How would you feel to be dragging your ass into work every week for 40, 50 hours knowing that somebody else is sitting around eating bon bons because you busted your ass learning a skill and they're too dumb to do anything useful?"
I'd feel the way I feel about the rich now. For a summary, check out the song "lazy motherfucker" by The Coup.
Good for you I guess (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I'd like to know how these out of touch rich dumbasses think AI is replacing the basic jobs? Sure, AI might replace "Almost All" office jobs, but there are many other forms of labor, these guys never even think of, however, they are the most important ones. Without them, you'd not have houses, transportation (sure that is getting more and more automated), food (while there is more and more tech in farming, is still very manual labor intensive) and most manufacturing. Sure large manufacturers can automate
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The guy is an economist, after all. It's the only job where you can be more wrong than the weatherman's 50% and still get promoted. I'm sure he'd love it if AI replaced the plebeians completely. This guy is the definition of an "Elite". The only job I've seen replaced by AI is the order taker at the local Carl's Junior, but okay, sure, Larry Sommers, great friend of Epstein.
Sadly, this time around, he will be proven right, but probably not anywhere near as quickly as he's hoping. I doubt he's right by knowledge. He's accidentally right in that he's espousing this in the hopes of churning some more profit up, but eventually automation and artificial intelligence will push us all out of a job, if we don't manage to kill ourselves off or destroy enough of our infrastructure to set us back a few hundred generations.
Re: (Score:2)
This from the guy who told the Winklevoss twins to just come up with a new project.
Re: (Score:2)
For years i have considered him a corrupt and evil mother fucker who orchestrated the overthrow of a governments, during the east asian financial crisis, and the architect of the 2008 recession.
Re: What Larry Summers thinks is usually wrong (Score:2)
Weather prediction is reliably wrong for Humboldt county CA where I live. They almost could not be wrong more often. Maybe it works somewhere, but it sure doesn't work here.
Thinking small? (Score:3, Interesting)
Industrial Revolution? Larry may be understating it. This may be the biggest thing since the agricultural revolution, and the beginning of civilisation itself.
Either way, it is likely to happen a lot faster than the industrial revolution, which took many decades. Wiki says:
Industrial Revolution began in Britain in the 1780s and was not fully felt until the 1830s or 1840s
Replace all board members with AI (Score:3)
At least the AI can produce hot air with renewable electricity.
Shirly (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
AI Robots
Re: (Score:2)
Duh (Score:2)
We have the 'I' that AI is supposed to replicate. It's nowhere near that yet, but once it is it will be able to do everything humans do, only better. Untethered from evolution and biology, it can be made 'better' than us however we define the term.
To say this is disruptive to our current system is like saying a nuke is slightly bigger than a firecracker.
Re: Duh (Score:2)
It would be nice if we had some sort of examples of progress of this. I been hearing about AI and automation for 35 years! Automation has heavily progressed over the decades but no where the hype.
Wake me when I can step into my car anywhere in the US, go to sleep, and wake up at my 14hr long destination averaging around the speed limit and the ride is as smooth and efficient as a train. Ants do this all day.
Much of the stuff I hear about AI "solving problems"... my dad did 30 years ago. His simulations w
Re: (Score:2)
>Wake me when I can step into my car anywhere in the US, go to sleep, and wake up at my 14hr long destination averaging around the speed limit and the ride is as smooth and efficient as a train.
With the exception of the occasional spectacular failure that makes the news (and refuelling/recharging stops), this is already possible. Not legal, but the technology is there. I wouldn't trust it, but it's on the roads and plenty of people are using it all the time, ignoring the warning that they should be ready
Re: (Score:2)
With the exception of the occasional spectacular failure that makes the news (and refuelling/recharging stops), this is already possible. Not legal, but the technology is there.
Nah. I've rode a couple of robotaxis around the city, and while the ride is nice, it's clear we're nowhere near "get in a car and go to sleep." For one thing, the vehicles aren't even allowed on highways yet. And they require months of training on any particular urban area before they can perform reliably. I don't think there's been any training in rural or even suburban environments, which have different challenges. What you say may eventually be possible, but we're still a long way off.
Re: (Score:2)
ignoring the warning that they should be ready to take over at any time if the computer acts inappropriately.
Oh, and there's no such warning. When you get into the backseat of a robotaxi, it won't even start moving until everybody is wearing their seatbelts. I hardly see any passenger leaping into the front seat and grabbing the controls in a traffic incident.
Re: (Score:2)
It would be nice if we had some sort of examples of progress of this.
Well, there is all kinds of progress - what happens though is that skeptics keep moving the posts - as soon as a machine can do something that used to only be possible for humans, they redefine it as "not intelligence". This happened again and again - here are some previous "proofs of intelligence" that people used to say a machine will never be able do:
- playing chess or other complex games. Machines can now win consistently against a human, in chess and go
- natural language processing: LLM
Re: (Score:2)
Observing humans in action, I doubt that we have the "I" that AI is supposed to replicate. We've got *parts* of it. A real intelligence wouldn't lie to itself so often, and wouldn't feel that it had to claim to know something when it really only had enough information to establish a 60% probability.
Only if valuable work is virtual (Score:5, Insightful)
AI's not coming to rewire your house, build you a deck, fix a plumbing problem, pave a road (not 100% anyway) or anything else that the hundreds of millions of blue collar workers are doing. This is an apocalypse for people who sit in a chair all day and push buttons. The people doing the real work won't be replaced anytime soon.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Only if valuable work is virtual (Score:4, Interesting)
A lot of administrative assistant work also got pushed upwards onto less competent and more expensive employees. Instead of handing an admin a pile of receipts after a business trip you go into a web app and do it yourself. Since I only occasionally travel I end up spending a couple at $100 an hour first resetting a password, then using my phone to snap pictures of receipts, typing in values since, guessing at charge codes, and so forth. After that I am usually frustrated and annoyed for the rest of the day and have lost a lot of focus on my actual job. If only we had someone who did this regularly to do it in half the time, for a third the pay
So the promise of AI being sold to dolts in management scares me more than the actual likely future of AI in the workplace.
Re:Only if valuable work is virtual (Score:5, Insightful)
The first big pain point will be full self driving. There are ~2M over the road truckers in the US. When FSD trucks are available for under $100k, I'd guess it won't be 5 years before there are only 1% of those truckers still getting paid. That's a lot of decently paid people who mostly don't have other skills that can offer a similar income. They (and their families) will not be happy and their response is TBD, but I can't imagine it will be pleasant.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think so on the time scale. This will still take some decades. It will happen eventually. The ones really in danger in the next decade or so are "paper pushers" that do not need any real insight or thinking in their jobs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not quite. The first big pain point will be full self driving without network connected maps, and over a new area.
Elon, is that you? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
And why not? Construct the deck automatically in a factory, roll out a bot to dig some holes for the posts, attach the deck. Done.
Plumbing? The robot won't care about the stench so can really get in there.
Pave a road? Why not? A robot slowly rolling along dropping asphalt, another rolling slowly behind it to smoothe the asphalt.
If you think hard physical labor is the only thing that can't be replaced by robots I've got news for ya.
Re: (Score:2)
And why not? Construct the deck automatically in a factory, roll out a bot to dig some holes for the posts, attach the deck. Done.
Plumbing? The robot won't care about the stench so can really get in there.
Pave a road? Why not? A robot slowly rolling along dropping asphalt, another rolling slowly behind it to smoothe the asphalt.
If you think hard physical labor is the only thing that can't be replaced by robots I've got news for ya.
Said by someone who never fixed a sewer leak (or any plumbing for that matter), or installed more than one deck at an actual home. The road asphalt - sure, so long as it's akin to tilling farmland or harvesting crops.
Re: (Score:3)
Your idea of construction and plumbing is very far from the actual situation. It's still something that's "doable in principle", though not in the way you suggest.
For paving the road...well, you need an automated driver that you can REALLY trust, but that one's almost right. There the problem is deciding which roads to pave when. (Also dealing with the areas near the curbs, what to do about cars left parked, and various other problems.) Alligator cracks are a good sign, but not the only consideration.
Yeah, it kind of is (Score:5, Insightful)
You know that even as those jobs go away supply and demand doesn't, right? Less work means less demand for workers which means lower pay. Lower pay means less people who can afford to rewire a house let alone build a deck.
We're taking millions of consumers out of the economy. A *consumer* based economy. And you don't see how maybe just maybe that's a problem???.
And this is before we talk about how AI (or again, more realistically computers) is making those plumbers, deck builders and electricians more efficient.
I did some work in construction. Never was very good at it so I bailed, but we Used to be able to get all the stuff we wanted for building and wiring our own projects for free from job sites. Left overs because they had to ship a *lot* more than they used.
That stopped. About 20 years ago. Better manufacturing meant they didn't need to send all that extra material in case there were some bad spools of wire or 2x4s. Manufacturing done by machines. Automation. Better logistics meant that they knew exactly how much they needed. HUGE increases in productivity and efficiency.
There's more. Remember video game magazines? They didn't die out until the early 2010s. Because they were never there to sell mags, they were there to sell ads.
Big data meant that companies like Sega and Nintendo could track how effective magazine ads were. They weren't. Effective that is. And all at once they pulled their adverts and the mags went under. A lot of jobs too.
Oh, anyone remember blockbuster?
70% of middle class jobs since 1980 were lost to automation [businessinsider.com]. You are massively underestimating the scale of what's happening and been happening.
Hell, we have 600k homeless and 15.1 million empty homes. We spend billions on homeless when it would be cheaper to house 'em and give them a social worker to keep 'em from causing trouble. WAY cheaper. But we *want* those homeless just like like we want hungry children. [msnbc.com]
And as I said on another post, we are very much an "if you don't work you don't eat" people. We are not ready for a post scarcity economy.
But like Reagan said, "if you're explaining you're losing". And here I am explaining...
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And as I said on another post, we are very much an "if you don't work you don't eat" people. We are not ready for a post scarcity economy.
Right there is your entire argument breakdown.
By literal definition, if you can't eat because you're not working, or in fact if there is any "can't" attached to the condition of working, then that is not a post-scarcity economy.
One explicitly excludes the other.
You're arguing against "post-scarcity" because you don't want a "dystopian capitalist nightmare"
You should be arguing against that dystopian capitalist nightmare instead.
To become a post-scarcity society would require *everyone* having *all* needs me
I'm not arguing against a post-scarcity economy (Score:2)
I'm all in favor of housing, food and healthcare guarantees. We've got the money and there's zero reason not to use it.
But if I just say it like that I get modded down to -5 around here.
But if I say the exact same thing indirectly (by pointing out that currently voters would fight you tooth and nail against creating a post scarcity economy) I
Re: (Score:3)
You know that even as those jobs go away supply and demand doesn't, right? Less work means less demand for workers which means lower pay. Lower pay means less people who can afford to rewire a house let alone build a deck.
It's not zero sum, and the situation is far more complex than you're making it out to be.
Let's say they automate away a job function from a company, and lay off 500 people. Yes, most of those 500 people will be looking for work elsewhere doing the same thing, some will re-skill to somethin
Our current system is zero sum (Score:2)
Trying getting Americans onboard for "to each according to his need..." sometime and see how that works out.
The article is literally about a study. That's the substantiation. Somebody looked to see how many middle class jobs were lost to automation and it was 70%.
Remember when Bill Clinton started saying we were going to be a service economy? That's why. He knew (or more to the point his adv
Re: (Score:2)
And as I said on another post, we are very much an "if you don't work you don't eat" people. We are not ready for a post scarcity economy.
Pretty much. Essentially still "cave man" level of thinking. Let's hole Europe does better. There are some indications it might, but also some the other way.
Re: (Score:2)
Note that his "insight" is toward an indefinite future using a vague definition of 'AI'. So on infinite timescale yeah, it is presumably the case that AI driven robots of all form factors would become viable.
At the same pace they can cover white collar work, they can drive machinery to achieve the blue collar tasks.
What that pace will be, who knows.
Re: (Score:2)
See, now this is the interesting question here. What are the bottlenecks for (semi-)humanoid robots to become 'good enough' to replace lots of manual workers?
- The backflipping antics of Boston Dynamics' Atlas is a testament to the general level of agility hardware and software have reached. A lot of the other robot companies need to do a lot of catchup here with their wobbly locomotion, but it's not going to take 10 years.
- Figure01 shows that ML-driven relatively fine motor skills can be copied from human
Re: (Score:2)
This is an apocalypse for people who sit in a chair all day and push buttons.
Not entirely.
You'll see 2 ways that this problem is approached by companies:
* using it to automate the lower branches of problems, and allowing their skilled workers to use that output/those tools. Staff will be cut, but only/primarily with inexperienced workers.
* Using it to automate "everything" in a domain and cutting the most expensive (knowledgeable) people first.
The first will have the most success, but more businesses will t
Re: (Score:2)
https://mashable.com/video/som... [mashable.com]
https://www.fbr.com.au/view/ha... [fbr.com.au]
I've seen sheetrock robots and others.
Wouldn't be bad for it (Score:2)
Re:Wouldn't be bad for it (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, one little thing dumb capitalists always fail to understand: In order to sell something, people need to have money to buy it. Yes, a little detail, but ignore it and all comes crashing down.
He forgets one thing (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
AI Robots running digging machines.
Let's assume for a moment that was correct... (Score:4, Interesting)
Therefore I am pretty sure that long before the last human job is replaced by some AI/Robot, a pretty high ratio of AI and Robots will be utilized to fend off the now expendable former workforce.
Re: (Score:2)
none of the owners of AI or Robots will see an incentive to give the products of those away for free
Not until it's too late for them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Hubris. They won't see a reason because they feel they can handle the poor. They're wrong.
How to Get Free Food for Life (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if you want to burn down a country, that is the way to do it.
Re: Let's assume for a moment that was correct... (Score:2)
Charlatan (Score:3)
Charlatan says snake oil will solve everything.
Already happened (Score:2)
I get all my psychotherapy from Eliza and we continue to be amused by all this recent fuss over non-Eliza models.
I wish I could be as wrong as this guy... (Score:2)
A translation of his quote (Score:5, Insightful)
"If one takes a view over the next generation, this could be the biggest thing that has happened in economic history since the Industrial Revolution,"he added. "This offers the prospect of not replacing some forms of human labor, but almost all forms of human labor."
For those of you not fluent in the language of corporate greed, allow me to translate:
"Over the next generation, we intend to promote and market AI as the greatest thing in economic history, not because it is, but because our silicon snake oil will force businesses everywhere to pay us a fuck-ton of money to subscribe to our AI software, making us insanely rich, and to hell with the humans that lose their jobs in the process."
Fuck our corporate overlords.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. Pretty accurate.
Here's a Thought (Score:3)
Let's get to about ten to fifteen million men with no job, no career, nothing to do all day, very little to eat, no girlfriends, no possibility of intimacy, no chance to start a family, no wealth, no dignity, no honor, no legacy and no place to live. ...surrounded by excessive wealth and eligible women.
Let's see that works out.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes.
Time for a revolution.
Tax the capitalists and give everyone a guaranteed basic income.
Re: (Score:2)
People don't want handouts. They want opportunity. The solution is competition. Not fitting yourself for a leash.
Re: (Score:2)
They're accelerating that process by allowing the hordes of young men to immigrate here with no skills and nowhere to stay, too. All for "cheap labor" (and possible other guises, we'll see).
Let's start now (Score:2)
particularly white collar workers' "cognitive labor."
We can remove every C suite person now and replace them with AI. For the CEO the AI only needs to consider two conditions: how many people to fire and how much to raise prices. Since AI can lie [yahoo.com] just as well, if not better, than a human, it should be an easy fit.
Or, if you prefer, we can start with economists, Larry. Put you out of work and set AI loose. Let's see how it fairs making predictions compared to your ilk.
Hans Kristian Graebener = StoneToss
Re: (Score:2)
I basically need upper and mid-level management to communicate priorities down to me. Ideally those priorities should be based on data and represent business decisions that lead to a profitable quarter. I don't actually need all the other bullshit that comes with a sack of meat. Like the posturing, the false empathy, unfounded beliefs in team building exercises, or ridiculous cheerleader at company meetings.
My concern is that we replace C suite with AI and we get all the bad parts above and little of the an
Re: (Score:2)
I basically need upper and mid-level management to communicate priorities down to me.
That's what AI is for. It can sift through everything going on and make that decision far more quickly than a human can.
Ideally those priorities should be based on data and represent business decisions that lead to a profitable quarter.
Which is exactly what I said. How many people to fire and how much to raise prices.
I don't actually need all the other bullshit that comes with a sack of meat. Like the posturing, the false
Re: (Score:2)
That's what AI is for. It can sift through everything going on and make that decision far more quickly than a human can.
Funny. I prefer quality or speed when it comes to decision making.
And you won't with AI. It will make decisions based solely on the data it has.
This isn't what we're seeing with LLMs. So what's changed?
See above again.
Wrong on every point. Thanks for playing.
Capitalist wet dream (Score:2)
Every capitalist's wet dream is to get rid of those pesky, expensive employees so they can make more profit.
The obvious solution (Score:2)
I think its only fair we automate away Larry's job first.
keras.models.load_model('LarrySummers.keras')
I'll show myself out.
Robotics tech sucks (Score:2)
AI may be getting smart, but robotics tech sucks and improves at an almost plateau-like pace. Possibly due to the failure of materials scientists to invent e-muscles. That aside, the software part of robotic control is unsolved too. There are certain jobs, a robot will never be able to do. A robot won't replace an electrician or plumber for at least 50 years, possibly more. A robot (for at least the next 50 years) will not be able to remodel your kitchen. It's even questionable if a robot will be able to re
Re: (Score:2)
FWIW, task 1, by itself, would take me much longer than 2 minutes, if I could do it at all. (I haven't been able to thread a needle using the needle threading tool for a few years now...so some of my shirts need buttons.)
Re: (Score:2)
Do you have a medical condition? I've seen a 9 year old do tasks 1 and 3 (untimed, and separately, but it seemed like 2 mins total but it wasn't their first time doing those things), and task 2 is obviously possible too.
Why Would AI Build Houses (Score:3)
if everyone is out of work and can't afford to buy houses?
Will the ultimate form of captialism be one CEO directing an AI company to go through the motions of a human economy, just building empty buildings and businesses with huge walls to keep out the people?
Or will the CEO and invenstors be replaced as well?
Re: (Score:2)
If they kill off a couple hundred million people, it won't be a problem, now would it?
Really? (Score:2)
And if it does... where will 95% of us live, and how will we buy food and Stuph?
I know, that's an "externality", and will be dealt with by mass death due to climate change.
Show me you've never used an AI (Score:2)
blah blah blah
The AI industry (Score:2)
One job AI could easily replace (Score:2)
Replace the thinking jobs (Score:2)
The never ending debate here on slashdot is, what the fuck do you do with the millions of middle class white collar workers who become redundant if this “A.I. Revolution” comes to pass, with one side arguing that it will result in a universal basic income utopia where everyone is well fed by inteligent farming machines, and the other sid
high cost of idiots (Score:3)
They say idiots are a dime a dozen, but when they run things, there can be a very high cost.
I am a heavy user of AI.. (Score:2)
As a software developer, I use AI daily. I have seen first hand what the tech can do and the rate at which it is improving. The future that Larry speaks of, is not too far off. AI of today is in its infancy and has a lot of issues. But, the rate of improvement is scary fast.
None of us fully understand where we will end up. It could be a glorious future or we are all screwed. I honestly don't know.
Internet was big. This is bigger. Much bigger.
Ivory Tower lunacy (Score:2)
This offers the prospect of not replacing some forms of human labor, but almost all forms of human labor.
Such a statement could only come from someone who has never done a days labor in their life.
Labor is action. It is not staring off into space and thinking.
Robotics may replace a lot of labor, but usually still needs human minders to handle the edge conditions. AI may be able to control and direct robotics in specialized situations.
The AI is not performing labor. Neither is this guy. He is just showing us how out of touch with real life he is.
Re: (Score:2)
You are using a narrow definition of labor. It is *one* of the valid meanings, but far from the only one. Your argument is like a woman claiming that no many can do labor. There's a definition of the word that makes this a correct statement.
OTOH. He's clearly wrong this year, and I expect he's wrong for at least most of this decade. But even LLMs (which I don't consider a full AI) are capable of replacing many jobs, at least to the extent that fewer new hires are needed to accomplish more production.
Vague hand-waving (Score:2)
It's easy to make sweeping statements like this. It's hard to get specific tasks done by AI.
While I personally find AI to be a useful shortcut for many tasks, there's no way I would "trust" AI to do it right. It's necessary to supervise and correct every output.
The devil, as they say, is in the details.
Kinda weird (Score:2)
What could be easiest replaced is CEOs. Well, technically a magic-8-ball could, but AI certainly could easily replace those overpriced goofballs.
Wonder why just that isn't happening. Imagine the cost savings!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not really. The main job of a CEO is to cause other CEOs to trust them. (OTOH, AIs seem to be pretty good at getting people to trust them, even when they're hallucinating.)
Re: (Score:2)
even when they're hallucinating
We don't use that kind of language here, we call that "they are being visionaries".
Obvious bullshit (Score:2)
Just look at how he profits from pushing this "Big Lie" and things will become clear.
In actual reality, Artificial Idiots cannot replace anything. They can save some not very big amount of work for some jobs, but that is it.
yeah... nope. (Score:2)
With the current LLMs, noe jobs that need actual experience will be replaced anytiime soon. While the language capabilities are impressive indeed, even the best LLMs have a troubled relation with facts, truth and consistency. They'll gladly invent facts, put together totally different pieces of information of completely miss the point. For any question that I've asked an AI that requires expert knowledge where I have that knowledge (and used the AI to check or to generate more ideas) the answers I've gotten
Re: (Score:2)
We've got artificial wombs for sheep. Developing them for humans is harder because of ethics, but we'll certainly get there within a generation.
Re: (Score:2)
It's called an "old boy's network". Or, sometimes, nepotism.