Everybody these days has something to say about this AI thing.
There has been a wealth of wide ranging posts and stories about this thing we call AI….even in the blogging world it has become popular authors employing it for posts and even comments.
There are both pro and cons in the usage of this technology.
I read an interesting article recently that takes a look at AI and productivity growth…..
It is really painful to see the regular flow of pieces debating whether AI will lead to mass unemployment. Invariably, these pieces are written as though the author has taken an oath that they have no knowledge of economics whatsoever.
The NYT gave us the latest example on Sunday, in a piece debating how many jobs will be affected by AI. As the piece itself indicates, it is not clear what “affected by AI” even means.
What percent of jobs were affected by computers? The answer would probably be pretty close to 100 percent, if by “affected” we mean in some way changed. If by affected, we mean eliminated, then we clearly are talking about a much smaller number.
Thinking of AI like we did about computers is likely a good place to start. First of all, we should remember that there were predictions of massive layoffs and unemployment from computers and robots for decades. This did not happen.
In fact, we have a measure of the extent to which computers, robots, and other technology are displacing workers. It’s called “productivity growth,” and the Labor Department gives us data on it every quarter.
Productivity is the measure of the value of output that a worker can produce an hour. We expect this to increase through time as we get better equipment and software, we learn how to do things better, and workers get more educated.
For the last two centuries, productivity growth has been a normal feature of the U.S. economy, and in fact, most normally functioning economies around the world. This is the basis for rising living standards through time. It is the reason that we can feed our whole population, and still export food, even with just around 1.0 percent of the workforce in agriculture, as opposed to more than 50 percent in the 19th century.
The big question is the rate at which productivity grows. Productivity growth has actually been pretty slow in recent years. It averaged just 1.3 percent annually since 2006. By contrast, it averaged close to 3.0 percent in the quarter century from 1947 to 1973.
AI, Job Loss and Productivity Growth
I am told that people cannot tell the difference between actual writing and the AI generated….if that is true why bother doing the writing?
I use quotes and my own thoughts…I do not use or need help.
Be aware I said ‘I’….that does not mean that I condemn the use….just that it is not for me.
That out of the way….
Any thoughts?
I Read, I Write, You Know
“lego ergo scribo”
In its present user form (meaning ChatGPT) I have used it a few times.. and here’s how…
1. I’ve checked the results of my various medical tests, specifically a diagnosis about normal degenerative aging issues starting with my spine and new pains showing up, mostly to gauge accuracy of ChatGPT itself to my actual doctors. AI came out pretty accurate to what my docs told me. I’ve dabbled in a few other medical things I have and again, pretty accurate to that end.
2. Related to above, when I want to learn more about some “medical malady of the week” in the media or some new drug in a TV commercial for old people, or something a celebrity is dying from, this AI has proven useful for general info. If I wanna know more I check out proven medical sources.
3. I have used ChatGPT on a number of occasions on-the-fly when I am verifying/fact checking the garbage being said on Conservative/MAGA blogs and I need quicker data for a quicker response and there’s little time for large scale research. Pretty handy. BUT… this does not mean I surrender my ability to utilize my “rule of reasonableness” when using stuff acquired from AI. So far at my level of inquiries AI has not proven.. “manipulative”.
4. One time I did engage ChatGPT in an intellectual philosophical exchange, with my presenting arguments and counter-arguments and it did fairly well holding to subject, although there was a slight tendency for its responses to me being a bit patronizing when it didn’t need to be, because I am not all that smart and don’t mind being told I am way off the mark. Nonetheless, it was interesting.
Now, regarding AI in general.. I am scared to death of this stuff. You can pass all the laws you want but there’s no containing this genie in a bottle.
That can of worms has been opened….no going back. chuq
AI is a new technology that has been the subject of much debate. Some people believe that AI will lead to mass unemployment, while others believe that it will create new jobs.
There is no clear answer to the question of whether AI will lead to mass unemployment. However, we can look at the history of computers to get some clues. Computers were also feared to lead to mass unemployment, but this did not happen. Instead, computers created new jobs and led to increased productivity.
The key to understanding the impact of AI on jobs is to think about how it will change the way we work. AI is likely to automate many tasks that are currently done by humans. However, it is also likely to create new tasks that require human skills that AI cannot replicate.
Overall, the impact of AI on jobs is likely to be mixed. Some jobs will be lost, but new jobs will also be created. The key is to make sure that we have the skills and education that we need to take advantage of the new opportunities that AI will create.
No reason to fear the rise of computers; no reason to fear the effects of Y2K, no reason to fear the onslaught of the Industrial Revolution, everybody is always a little fearful of things that are new and that the average lay person lacks the knowledge to completely understand the potential …it has been that way all through the ages … and it will be that way for all time yet to come. But, inevitably, all new technological advances will have their advantages and disadvantages and we need to focus on appropriating the advantages and solving the problems associated with the disadvantages.
I do not fear it just rather do my own work….I am not lazy yet chuq
But are you as capable as the computers? I know that I am not.
Capable of what? Thinking for myself? chuq
I stopped burning kerosene lamps a long time ago and got electric lights installed in the house …gotta keep up with the times.
I still have kerosene lights…they come in handy when a storm blows through. chuq
In a vacuum I would fully agree with your reply here, John… but given governments, militaries, and kids working from their basements… the bad applications is a time bomb. But along the lines of what you said for creating new jobs, I am thinking the new jobs will be in the form of law enforcement looking more like Timecops.
You might have a point but I was thinking more along the lines of new jobs in the associated technology and its inevitable mountain of spin-offs.
I understand. My old Republicanism/Capitalist kicked in as well at the thought of exploiting AI.
Pretty much what the article said….chuq
I see AI as a modern version of Pandora’s Box. Once opened, the possibilities are limitless, and also incredibly dangerous. The future will be a very different place to how we understand things now.
Best wishes, Pete.
I can see what you are saying…..I see comments here that smack of AI….I am still processing this turn….have not decided one way or the other just yet. chuq