• aggelalex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    He’s right. AI isn’t doing a good job anyway. If a company can “”“replace”“” (cut) jobs like that and survive, the position is useless.

    The question is, is it truly so? Or did this move start the company’s doomsday clock?

  • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    And here I thought it was going to be him referencing Graeber in a way that indicates he never read the full book or understood its point. But nope, dumber.

    Altman, if the masses are unemployed and you’re fabulously wealthy, well, read a history book to see what happens.

  • mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    look I love to shit on AI, but this is a fucking terrible misleading headline

    The thing about that farmer,” Altman said, is not only that they wouldn’t believe you, but “they very likely would look at what you do and I do and say, ‘that’s not real work.'”

    This, Altman said, makes him feel “a little less worried” but “more worried in some other ways.”

    “If you’re, like, farming, you’re doing something people really need,” Altman explained. “You’re making them food, you’re keeping them alive. This is real work.” But the farmer would see our modern jobs as “playing a game to fill your time,” and therefore not a “real job.”

    “It’s very possible that if we could see those jobs of the future,” Altman said, we’d think “maybe our jobs were not as real as a farmer’s job, but it’s a lot more real than this game you’re playing to entertain yourself.”

  • nightlily@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    If jobs replaced by LLMs and image generators aren’t real work, then what work did those steal from?