> Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei routinely says that half of white collar jobs are going to disappear because of his technology. Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, noted that “AI will probably most likely lead to the end of the world, but in the meantime, there’ll be great companies.” And Alex Karp, CEO of Palantir, said during an earnings call that “This is a revolution. Some people can get their heads cut off.”
This is the sound of people who know they’re safe high up on the economic totem pole, safely out of physical harm’s way, and don’t need to care a shred about what the public thinks.
I figure it's just part of their marketing, bragging about how powerful their products are. I fully expect the balloon to pop, but if it doesn't, and people start building guillotines, won't they all have the surprised pikachu face.
It sounds like the public is only booing. Barely anything of note yet.
I think right now the public is slightly annoyed, but not quite annoyed enough to make real changes to our society. The question to me is when do people actually get angry and start changing the world in a way that improves the situation they are in?
No one is censoring anybody in the ways that matter here.
When people were angry about gun violence a decade ago, we got "This is America", and other songs representing our disgust at the gun situation. Maybe the laws haven't changed but at a minimum I expect consolidation and comradery.
Where is the graffiti? Where are the songs? Like we got a few books from a crowd but we haven't even seen a cohesive counter-movement come up over AI yet.
No songs, no punk rock lyrics, no raps yet. Let along solid political action (which often comes later after ideas are coalesced with songs / or other communication).
If a bunch of people riot in the streets, most major platforms will cover the event. Not the statements of the participants, but the event itself, with some (perhaps distorted) mention of why they are rioting.
More generally, sure I can express this anger. I can say "People hate AI" or even "I hate AI". Watch this post not get censored.
I can say that people are afraid. I can say that they are afraid of losing their jobs, and their middle-class life, and their hope of a better future. And I can say that if it starts to happen (not just to 100,000 tech workers, but to 100,000,000 middle class workers of every stripe), then there's going to be real anger and real, physical expressions of that anger.
> If a bunch of people riot in the streets, most major platforms will cover the event. Not the statements of the participants, but the event itself, with some (perhaps distorted) mention of why they are rioting.
Reminds me of the Occupy Wall Street protests. Media: “they’re protesting, but gosh if we could only figure out why!” Protestors: “We’re protesting for economic justice and against inequality!” Media: “Huh… did you hear anything? I didn’t! We still have no idea what they’re protesting against, but they’re really mad looking!” Protestors: “We are against billionaires.” Media: “Well, I guess we’ll never know what they are so upset about!”
Can you say, what happened the last time we had major technological revolutions of the sort of AI? And I say "like" because it's the closest observed approximation we have to describe what could be happening now. I think we saw instead of global leadership change or helping of the people affected, leadership instead resorted to alpha-chimp style tactics of creating enemies and accelerating war.
These wars are documented in history. Perhaps the story around them has been changed or morphed by the victors. They are WW1, WW2, and probably other global wars through human history can be looked at from this lens of tricking the majority of people. I see this as being a viable perspective as throughout history most people have been too busy struggling: insufficient food and diet, they are sick, struggling or otherwise weak and unable to understand the bigger picture of whats happening in the leadership structure around them. Most people are thus conditioned to be weak gullible and naive unable to tell they are being tricked as a way to avoid accountability.
Seldom do real and considered changes come from anger or annoyance. Especially if you add the qualifier of 'improves the situation they are in'. That is unfortunately the exception. We didn't solve Polio by getting really angry at it.
> Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei routinely says that half of white collar jobs are going to disappear because of his technology. Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, noted that “AI will probably most likely lead to the end of the world, but in the meantime, there’ll be great companies.” And Alex Karp, CEO of Palantir, said during an earnings call that “This is a revolution. Some people can get their heads cut off.”
This is the sound of people who know they’re safe high up on the economic totem pole, safely out of physical harm’s way, and don’t need to care a shred about what the public thinks.
I figure it's just part of their marketing, bragging about how powerful their products are. I fully expect the balloon to pop, but if it doesn't, and people start building guillotines, won't they all have the surprised pikachu face.
People who have nothing to fear wouldn’t be building bunkers
is putting a paywalled article on HN actually allowed?
Is the public extremely angry?
It sounds like the public is only booing. Barely anything of note yet.
I think right now the public is slightly annoyed, but not quite annoyed enough to make real changes to our society. The question to me is when do people actually get angry and start changing the world in a way that improves the situation they are in?
> It sounds like the public is only booing. Barely anything of note yet.
I think this is being misunderstood. I read it as a final bit of civility. It's a warning.
Don't humanize crowds. Crowds don't have civility.
Crowds either do, or do not. If crowds start throwing tomatoes then you know they're actually angry. Or rioting, or... Stuff.
Booing? Kinda nothing in the great scheme of what crowds do.
You can’t even express this anger. You say something alluding to this you are censored online on most major platforms.
No one is censoring anybody in the ways that matter here.
When people were angry about gun violence a decade ago, we got "This is America", and other songs representing our disgust at the gun situation. Maybe the laws haven't changed but at a minimum I expect consolidation and comradery.
Where is the graffiti? Where are the songs? Like we got a few books from a crowd but we haven't even seen a cohesive counter-movement come up over AI yet.
No songs, no punk rock lyrics, no raps yet. Let along solid political action (which often comes later after ideas are coalesced with songs / or other communication).
If a bunch of people riot in the streets, most major platforms will cover the event. Not the statements of the participants, but the event itself, with some (perhaps distorted) mention of why they are rioting.
More generally, sure I can express this anger. I can say "People hate AI" or even "I hate AI". Watch this post not get censored.
I can say that people are afraid. I can say that they are afraid of losing their jobs, and their middle-class life, and their hope of a better future. And I can say that if it starts to happen (not just to 100,000 tech workers, but to 100,000,000 middle class workers of every stripe), then there's going to be real anger and real, physical expressions of that anger.
> If a bunch of people riot in the streets, most major platforms will cover the event. Not the statements of the participants, but the event itself, with some (perhaps distorted) mention of why they are rioting.
Reminds me of the Occupy Wall Street protests. Media: “they’re protesting, but gosh if we could only figure out why!” Protestors: “We’re protesting for economic justice and against inequality!” Media: “Huh… did you hear anything? I didn’t! We still have no idea what they’re protesting against, but they’re really mad looking!” Protestors: “We are against billionaires.” Media: “Well, I guess we’ll never know what they are so upset about!”
Can you say, what happened the last time we had major technological revolutions of the sort of AI? And I say "like" because it's the closest observed approximation we have to describe what could be happening now. I think we saw instead of global leadership change or helping of the people affected, leadership instead resorted to alpha-chimp style tactics of creating enemies and accelerating war.
These wars are documented in history. Perhaps the story around them has been changed or morphed by the victors. They are WW1, WW2, and probably other global wars through human history can be looked at from this lens of tricking the majority of people. I see this as being a viable perspective as throughout history most people have been too busy struggling: insufficient food and diet, they are sick, struggling or otherwise weak and unable to understand the bigger picture of whats happening in the leadership structure around them. Most people are thus conditioned to be weak gullible and naive unable to tell they are being tricked as a way to avoid accountability.
What?
Booing Eric Schmidt, for a point in a graduation speech about AI? That shouldn’t be happening. Those tend to be positive, happy press articles.
Nor is it the only data point, theres been multiple articles shared on HN alone about consumer sentiment and AI.
The light was green and is now blinking yellow. I wouldn’t be surprised when it turns red.
Seldom do real and considered changes come from anger or annoyance. Especially if you add the qualifier of 'improves the situation they are in'. That is unfortunately the exception. We didn't solve Polio by getting really angry at it.
"We did solve however solve feudalism."
Different problems are different. The problem of wealth concentration is not novel and it's been addressed many time.
Usually in ways the end poorly for those who believe themselves untouchable.