• Fandangalo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    This has been my general worry: the tech is not good enough, but it looks convincing to people with no time. People don’t understand you need at least an expert to process the output, and likely a pretty smart person for the inputs. It’s “trust but verify”, like working with a really smart parrot.

    • _number8_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      it’s basically just a calculator but with words. you can’t just hire a calculator even tho it knows a lot of math

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      For software, it’s like working with an intern who’s really good at searching StackOverflow.

    • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      AI can’t replace a person just yet, but it can easily augment a persons output so only a quarter as many workers are needed. Yes, this has happened throughout history, but AI is poised to displace workers across almost every industry.

      • Fandangalo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        I generally agree. It’ll be interesting what happens with models, the datasets behind them (particularly copyright claims), and more localized AI models. There have been tasks where AI greatly helped and sped me up, particularly around quick python scripts to solve a rote problem, along with early / rough documentation.

        However, using this output as justification to shed head count is questionable for me because of the further business impacts (succession planning, tribal knowledge, human discussion around creative efforts).

        If someone is laying people off specifically to gap fill with AI, they are missing the forest for the trees. Morale impacts whether people want to work somewhere, and I’ve been fortunate enough to enjoy the company of 95% of the people I’ve worked alongside. If our company shed major head count in favor of AI, I would probably have one foot in and one foot out.

        • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          Doesn’t have to be so obvious as, “We’re cutting people because of AI.” My team has gradually shrunk over the last few years, not due to AI, with no intention of replacing people that leave occasionally. AI could easily be a way to regain productivity losses after running a skeleton crew for months or years. Same effect, but the layoffs were front loaded.

  • someguy3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    No kidding huh. I’m glad we’re finally having the discussion about AI and what that means for employment and things like UBI, but this is far from actual AI.

    • krashmo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Are we actually having that discussion? All I see is people concerned about being replaced by AI asking to put constraints on it and people wanting to replace their employees with AI ignoring them. No one will get UBI or anything like it until the latter group is more concerned about a mob with pitchforks showing up at their door than they are with giving their stock price a small bump.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        What really concerns me is that the modern-day version of mobs with pitchforks seems to be fascism, because fascists have learned how to create the mob and harness it for their own purposes.

  • 800XL@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    Start spinning up githubs poupulated with broken code and incorrect processes for other jobs to train the AI and make it worse

    • coffeeauntie@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Loads of good points in that video, thanks for posting. The only argument I don’t really agree with is about bias. She’s implying here that a human decision maker would be less biased than the AI model. I’m not convinced by that because the training data is just a statistical record of human bias. So as long as the training data is well selected for your problem, it should be a good predictior for the likelihood of bias in your human decision maker.

      • MyTurtleSwimsUpsideDown@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        I think with a human operator, we can be proactive. A person can be informed of bias, learn to recognize it, and even attempt to compensate for their own.

        An AI model is working off of aggregate past data that we already know is biased. There is currently no proactive anti bias training that can be done to a AI model without massively altering the dataset, which, at some level of alteration, loses its value as true to life data.

        Secondly, AI is a black box. we can’t see inner the workings of the model and determine what types of associations it is making to come to its result. So we don’t even know what part of the dataset would need to be altered to address the bias.

        Lastly, the default assumption by end users will be, unless there are glaring defects, that any individual result is correct and unbiased, because “AI was made by smart people and data, and data doesn’t lie.” And because interrogating and validating the result defeats the whole purpose of using AI to cut out those steps of the process.

      • Serinus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        the training data is just a statistical record of human bias.

        It’s not. It’s a record of online conversations, which tend to be more polarized and extreme than real people.

  • Jaysyn@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    The thing about AI is, it makes a terrible scapegoat and absolutely doesn’t give a shit if you fire it.

    Hence, my job is safe for the foreseeable future.

  • PatFusty@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    Don’t get this mistaken with the fact that a lot of people know their job is bullshit. People like to sit there thinking ‘an AI can’t take my job’ while at the same time thinking ‘a monkey can do this job it’s such a waste of time’

    • greenskye@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      My job isn’t bullshit, but management has no concept of the true amount of time it takes to do my job. Depending on projects I can go from 2 hours of work a week up to around 60 hours of work a week. With the majority of weeks being under 40 hours. And yet management somehow thinks that they’re giving me 8 hours of work to do every day despite them regularly being the blocker to new work.

      • NounsAndWords@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Middle management only cares that it looks like you’re working (and thus their job of supervising you doing the work is necessary (apparently)), and upper management only cares that you’re making them money.

      • Rodeo@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Clearly it’s the clueless middle managers above you whose jobs are bullshit.

        • PatFusty@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          If I get a whiff that I can automate your job, you bet your ass I will fire you and try. If it doesn’t work, worst case scenario is I found out AI isn’t where I need it to be and I will hire someone else.

          I hate lazy people who complain. But then again, I’m full of shit writing this during work hours so fuck me

    • BlackArtist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      I don’t think AI could do my job effectively and tbh I don’t think people would want it too.

  • doublejay1999@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    1 rewind 40 years 2 replace ‘ai’ with ‘computers’

    Exactly , and I mean exactly, the same thing was said back in the 80s

    • Coreidan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Ya what’s your point? Are you saying that the invention of computers didn’t displace a lot of jobs?

      If you’re saying that AI is going to disrupt the market and displace a large number of jobs just like computers did then you’re 100% right.

      Nothing is finite. AI isn’t going to be the first or last thing to shake up the world.

      Eventually your skills are going to become less valued and you’ll have no choice but to retool. Either you figure out how to retool or you get left behind.

    • Hawk@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Well this isn’t quite true, automation and computers have replaced many jobs. They just haven’t been skilled labour.

      Now AI is catching up with skilled labour, whether it’s CNNs for loss prevention, LSTM/1DCNN for anomaly detection in Time Series (e.g. biosignal, finance) or more recently llms explaining and adapting code.

      In one way or another, that work, at least in part, would have been done by a person, even if it’s an intern for example.

      • droans@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        They just haven’t been skilled labour.

        That’s where the majority of jobs are that computers and automation “took”.

        Large companies needed hundreds of accountants to do what a dozen can do now. Same goes for developers. Or biologists. Or architects. Or whatever else.

    • Aceticon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      The Segway was sold at the time as a “revolution in transportation”. Ditto for the Hyperloop, by the way.

      Then there’s the Theranos’ “revolutionary” Tech as mentioned in the article.

      And don’t get me started on how Pets.com (which famously went bust in the .Net Crash) was also revolutionary.

      There are way more situations of Tech snakeoil being peddled to the masses as “revolutionary” than there are of trully revolutionary Tech being sold as such (I can only think of 3 trully revolutionary Technologies in the last half a century: the Personal Computer, the Internet and Smartphones, and one of those was a surprise revolution whilst another was only hyped after it was actually starting to show revolutionary results, and only smartphones were hyped from the start), so the logical default position for anybody but the snakeoil salesmen trying to swindle the masses is to suspect of tall tales in Tech, the taller the tale the greater the suspicion.

      (I keenly remember the early days of the Internet, and it was incredibly low-key compared to the present day hype-spectables for bullshit that never even works).

      Believing such claims by default is either incredibly naive or the product of a vested financial interest in getting people to put money into it.

    • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s not that hard a sentence to comprehend… it literally didn’t occur to me that it might be overwhelming to anybody until you said something.

      It’s a quote from the article BTW, like 2 paragraphs in; in my opinion it is basically the thesis of the article summed up.

      And yeah I fucked up the link

  • Rooter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Cool, I literally replaced my entire job with AI, but I’m not telling anyone IRL.

    Well, aside from the pointless emails and meetings.

  • psycho_driver@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    I think AI right now has the best chance of replacing upper management and executives. Think of the savings!

  • Klicnik@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    Everything I read was well worded and well reasoned. However, it seems like either my ADD got the better of me, or that was the article that has no end. I didn’t really realize before that my attention has a word count, but I now know that it is less than this article.

  • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    I just hired an employee who managed things as I was on a leave of absence and things went fine without me. Getting a little pushback from MY boss now because you know, this cheaper employee just did my job.

    Of course, he did it for a portion of the year after I managed to complete 3 major projects early so he didn’t have to deal with them and I left a month-by-month explanation of how to do everything he had to do. And the one problem that popped up went unresolved until I returned.

    That is basically the situation with AI too. You still need someone knowledgeable in the loop to describe the things it needs to do, and handle exceptions.

    • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      The issue is that one specialist can oversee how many AI job holders? How many jobs are we getting rid of that will supposedly be bolstered by the new jobs created in the fields of manufacturing and AI hosting/training?

      Now how many of those jobs have or will actually materialize?

      That’s my issue, it’ll just get placed on IT’s shoulders without any additional support.

    • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      “You’re 100% right, you should promote me so I can train more people to be able to run things. Things falling apart whenever someone goes away is a key sign of a bad leader, not a good one. I think I’ve demonstrated that I’ve managed this department into where it can function smoothly without me needing to put full time into it and I’d do well with an opportunity to move some other things in the company forward.”

      “Hey, unrelated question, what’s your boss’s contact info?”

    • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      still need someone knowledgeable in the loop to describe the things it needs to do, and handle exceptions

      And any engineer or technician will tell you, exceptions are 80% of their job.

      • JDubbleu@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        I had to rewrite our entire scheduling system at work to use Outlook instead of Google Calendar. The guy who wrote the Google Calendar scheduling system made it so unmaintainable that it was faster to just rewrite the entire thing from scratch (1000+ line lambda function with almost 0 abstraction).

        At least 90% of what I wrote is just exception handling. There’s ~15 different 4xx/5xx errors that can be returned for each endpoint, but only 1 or 2 200 responses.

        • wabafee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 months ago

          I bet in the future someone who will see your code will also think of the same. Just the nature of things.

          • JDubbleu@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            This is fair, but it’s at least broken up so they can selectively gut the parts of it they don’t like instead of having to figure out what a 300 line method named “process” does.

  • Aux@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    Well, to be fair, most people are so bad at their jobs that any chat bot is better.

  • pacology@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    This is going to be like the self checkout lanes at the store but for creative jobs.

    At the end of the day, a company will be able to produce the same output with fewer people. Some stuff will be of lower quality, just like sometimes people spend time on Lemmy and then phone in some crappy work.

    • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      But all the self checkouts around me have been ripped out and replaced with cashiers again. For some reason having someone paid 30 cents over minimum wage watching a bunch of people shop on the honor system with a bunch of finicky machines didn’t work.

      • Grass@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        There’s a fairly big shoppers drugmart I went to in north Vancouver and they only have self checkout and one customer service desk. Most people still hate them from the moaning and groaning you hear while waiting in line though.

      • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        You might just live in crime central, that’s not happening everywhere. Probably on an individual cost of cashier versus lost stock basis with each location.

      • iknowitwheniseeit@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        I sense a lot of dislike for self-checkouts and wonder why they are done so poorly where other people live. In Holland they are fine. You can self-scan with either a portable scanner or your phone while you shop, or scan the items at checkout. I’ve literally never had to wait for a free machine, and they work well. Some people use the registers with humans scanning for you, and they seem fine too.