• fizzle@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 hour ago

    Because they’re not really successes.

    No one here is saying AI has reduce their workload so now they spend half their time catching butterflies.

    The answers are all saying that AI has automated some mundane task that wasn’t particularly important, and now they can spend their time doing something more interesting.

    Is the changes to their role, multiplied by millions of employees, actually better for humanity or society?

    In a way, this is what Doctorow is arguing: where is the data showing the productivity gains.

    My follow up question is, how are these productivity gains being used, if they exist.

    • benjirenji@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      19 minutes ago

      Aren’t you assuming productivity gains will lead to free time? Why? It never has. Most of us work a fixed amount of time and get paid for that time. Not the amount of tasks we finish if that can even be measured or measurable.

      Salaries have also not increased with increased productivity long before chatbots came online. So they won’t suddenly increase now.

      AI is much more just like a new laptop you get from work. The new device is faster, has more RAM and allows you to do more, potentially.

      The big question is, if the purchase was worth it. Unlike a new laptop, LLMs are an ongoing cost to users and providers. Nobody except for GPU producers are actually making money right now. Hyperscalers make some of the money back they themselves invested into the companies using their services, but in the end the ROI looks pretty dim for anyone.

      So even if there are real productivity gains, you won’t see people relax with their kids more. And even if these gains are significant they may not prevent a huge economic collapse so we all will have plenty of time with our kids in the end anyway.