So, I've been having this idea of having an AI model write an article about AI taking peoples' jobs in an attempt to be cheeky. The first time I tried it on bing's AI model, it just gave me resources and canned talking points about job retraining and crap. But I decided to try again, and this time it worked. I will now post a bit of a guest article written by Bing's AI and analyze it.
You
write an essay about ai taking peoples' jobs
Copilot
Certainly! Here’s an essay discussing the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on jobs:
The Impact of AI on Employment: A Historical Perspective
In today’s rapidly advancing technological landscape, the fear that AI will replace human jobs looms large. However, this concern is not new; it has echoed throughout history whenever transformative technologies emerge. To gain insights into the current debate, let’s revisit the past and explore how AI’s impact on employment compares to previous technological shifts.
The Great Depression and Technological Unemployment
In 1938, the world was still reeling from the Great Depression. Unemployment rates in the United States hovered around 20%, and people were anxious about their livelihoods. British economist John Maynard Keynes had already warned of a new ailment: “technological unemployment.” The rapid adoption of labor-saving machinery and advances in industry seemed to threaten jobs across various sectors.
Karl T. Compton, then president of MIT, penned an article titled “The Bogey of Technological Unemployment” in MIT Technology Review. Compton grappled with the question: Were machines benevolent genies fulfilling humanity’s needs or Frankenstein monsters poised to destroy their creators?
Compton’s grounded view emphasized the uneven impact of technological progress. He distinguished between the effects on “industry as a whole” and the individual hardships faced by workers. His essay remains relevant today, especially as AI technologies raise similar concerns.
AI and the Modern Landscape
Fast-forward to the present, where breakthroughs in generative AI, smart robots, and autonomous vehicles fuel apprehension about job displacement. Silicon Valley techno-optimists even speculate about a jobless future where AI handles everything.
However, Compton’s wisdom still holds. Let’s consider some key points:
Complementing, Not Replacing: AI is more likely to complement human work than entirely replace it. While certain tasks face automation, AI cannot replicate emotional intelligence, intuition, or creativity. Fields like counseling, art, and strategic decision-making will continue to rely on human expertise1.
Uneven Impacts: Just as in the past, AI will have varying effects across industries and individuals. Some jobs may disappear, but AI will also create new roles and enhance existing ones2.
Economic Considerations: Rather than conjuring genies or monsters, we must apply economic understanding. AI’s impact on jobs depends on factors like skill adaptability, education, and policy frameworks. It’s not a zero-sum game; technological progress can spur economic growth and innovation3.
Conclusion
AI’s influence on employment is multifaceted. While it may eliminate certain jobs, it also opens doors to novel opportunities. As we navigate this transformative era, let’s learn from history, address fears pragmatically, and ensure that AI serves humanity rather than threatens it.
In the end, the real challenge lies not in fearing AI but in harnessing its potential for the greater good. 🌟
Again, it's not necessarily AMAZING at it. But it at least did what I asked this time. So I'll write and analyze it.
It seems to have a relatively jobist bias, not seeing automation as something that replaces work, and seems to push the typical jobist mantra of "oh we'll always create MORE jobs", as if that's a good thing. It portrays joblessness as a boogeyman, which in our jobist society it is, but this is a value statement not just by AI but by our culture at large. I believe Keynes was right and we could've chosen to work less. And we probably should have if I were to inject my own values into it.
Still it's likely correct about the impact it will have in coming years, given jobist value system we have. It likely will complement tasks, not fully replace tasks (like I gotta read and analyze this stuff to make sure it makes sense, and I'd likely heavily modify it if I were to write based off of it). It will likely have an uneven impact, impacting some jobs massively while not impacting others. And yeah, it's gonna push job retraining and crap and push the "not a zero sum game" line.
I mean I guess if you were some sort of student looking for a surface level take on a subject, and not a highly impassioned political activist like myself, this does the job. But yeah, it's...not AMAZING. it's competent, but yeah, I still see the need for a human mind to go over this, expand on it, grapple with the concepts, etc.
Still, interesting idea. Just an experiment I wanted to do at some point, but any time I tried previously it ended up failing even my prompt miserably.
I was actually about to do a blog post instead on why AI is dumb as rocks and why it CANT even do this, and I was gonna post conversations anyway. But since it actually did the thing, i'll write on that instead.
No comments:
Post a Comment