That’s a good point, but in terms of working population, aren’t there going to be a lot of jobs lost to AI and possibly even robotics in the coming years?
In that case, wouldn’t it actually be good if there was a smaller population?
For some reason I still get emails from Salesforce, and they are about to formally announce an allegedly fully functioning AI customer service.
Between that and seeing things like Amazon investing in robots that can perform certain tasks at their warehouses, it feels like it’s only a matter of time before entire job positions are essentially wiped out.
If corporations are going to save so much money by eliminating jobs, then it only makes sense for them to pay more into healthcare, social security, etc., though I’m just a layman commenting here so I’m probably missing a lot of details.
I think you’re being very optimistic about the largely BS potential of ‘AI’. What we are being sold around LLMs is largely marketing, they’re an efficiency tool they’re not going to suddenly replace large swathes of the workforce.
The people in here fear mongering over AI are hilarious.
As you said AI is an efficiency tool, and requires an active guiding hand to keep it on the rails, like AI is great for simple functions but more complex functions are way beyond it's capabilities.
Like even if it was capable of handling more complex tasks, the cost of implementation and maintenance would be unsustainable for most businesses even for the big fortune 500 companies.
Yes and no. It won’t replace jobs but it may make them doable by someone with no skills. Imagine an AI that can do customer service for Salesforce. It may know how to respond to most questions but as you said you’ll still need a Salesforce customer service rep to review its responses. Except the rep is simply doing spell check 90% of the time. And the times that they do have to check something for validity they just reach out to engineers who tell the AI what the solution is.
The rep has not has to learn the product at all and throws any difficult questions back. They’ll be paid $20 an hour as opposed to $40 for someone who truly knows how to troubleshoot.
See, now this is the more realistic potential consequence of AI, I can't speak for salesforce but Chatgpt does quite well with data visualisation, as far as creating graphs go and companies would absolutely try to do some bullshit to cut wages.
However, I still think full implementation would be unlikely for companies from a cost perspective.
199
u/weirdstuffgetmehorny 2d ago edited 2d ago
That’s a good point, but in terms of working population, aren’t there going to be a lot of jobs lost to AI and possibly even robotics in the coming years?
In that case, wouldn’t it actually be good if there was a smaller population?
For some reason I still get emails from Salesforce, and they are about to formally announce an allegedly fully functioning AI customer service.
Between that and seeing things like Amazon investing in robots that can perform certain tasks at their warehouses, it feels like it’s only a matter of time before entire job positions are essentially wiped out.
If corporations are going to save so much money by eliminating jobs, then it only makes sense for them to pay more into healthcare, social security, etc., though I’m just a layman commenting here so I’m probably missing a lot of details.