Anonymous wrote:The people on this site are the most pessimistic about AI I have ever met. I think part of it is because many in the DMV who frequent this site are extremely well paid and have relative safe jobs and they do not want the gravy train to leave.

We can't predict the future of AI. But to dismiss anyone who speaks about its potential tells me you are just as terrified about your future standard of living should some of the predictions about AI and white collar jobs turn out to be true.

No, the people here are highly educated and can sniff out fakery.

Anonymous wrote:i work in big tech and this article is 1000% true. I'm actually shocked that anyone is questioning it. We have teams working round the clock to build the capabilities for people to build entire industries on AI. Coders just understand how to use it better now.

We are pricing down and saving hard for the future. Get your kids an AI coding app and encourage them to use it. Seriously, get ready ppl.

Can I ask what you are coding for? To do thinking tasks for people? To replace doctors? To replace lawyers? To make research and writing easier? What exactly do you want the code to do and most importantly why?to what end?

Anonymous wrote:i work in big tech and this article is 1000% true. I'm actually shocked that anyone is questioning it. We have teams working round the clock to build the capabilities for people to build entire industries on AI. Coders just understand how to use it better now.

We are pricing down and saving hard for the future. Get your kids an AI coding app and encourage them to use it. Seriously, get ready ppl.

+1. My DH is a developer and he has been talking to me about the exact same things that this article has stated. I sent it to him hoping he would tell me it was being alarmist, but he agrees with all of it.

i work in big tech and this article is 1000% true. I'm actually shocked that anyone is questioning it. We have teams working round the clock to build the capabilities for people to build entire industries on AI. Coders just understand how to use it better now.

We are pricing down and saving hard for the future. Get your kids an AI coding app and encourage them to use it. Seriously, get ready ppl.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course it’s alarmist. It’s also more of an elaborate self-promo than think piece, so manipulative as well.

And despite being created with AI help, it’s poorly written.

I didn't think it was poorly written at all. I'm a professional writer. Actually, I think it was very well written and explained these things in a very accessible way for a lay audience.

Np. I’m a writer too, and agree it was well written. But that’s also why I think it seemed like AI helped write it. To smooth. I happen to agree with his thesis too, though I’m hoping it turns out to be a false prophecy.

Listen, if AI can do your job as well or better than you, it doesn’t mean AI is amazing - it means you’re not that good at your job.

Read. Nyt opinion today on AI and the ones who are warning and left their roles (left to study poetry etc?

Anonymous wrote:The only way any of this works is if these companies are heavily taxed and the govt pays out some sort of UBI. Otherwise, nobody has any money to buy any of these AI created products.

That being said, I think it's coming. The other day Trump was talking about 15% growth in an interview with Kudlow. It sounded insane at the time, but I connected the dots to that is the same growth rate the Anthropic CEO claims AI will be able to produce.

Both of these people are self-promoting liars. Start thinking critically about the things these people are writing and saying. It all falls apart under the most rudimentary inspection.

AI is really useful, but what if we are being told that a basic software advance will fundamentally change humanity? What if the emperor has no clothes? It will be a catastrophe for these mega companies if that comes out because their entire profit model is hinged on endless growth.

The only way any of this works is if these companies are heavily taxed and the govt pays out some sort of UBI. Otherwise, nobody has any money to buy any of these AI created products.

That being said, I think it's coming. The other day Trump was talking about 15% growth in an interview with Kudlow. It sounded insane at the time, but I connected the dots to that is the same growth rate the Anthropic CEO claims AI will be able to produce.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course it’s alarmist. It’s also more of an elaborate self-promo than think piece, so manipulative as well.

And despite being created with AI help, it’s poorly written.

I didn't think it was poorly written at all. I'm a professional writer. Actually, I think it was very well written and explained these things in a very accessible way for a lay audience.

Np. I’m a writer too, and agree it was well written. But that’s also why I think it seemed like AI helped write it. To smooth. I happen to agree with his thesis too, though I’m hoping it turns out to be a false prophecy.

I mean AI can’t take over all the jobs. People still need to read the contracts and make their own choices. Look, the experience of being human is ours. We need to start designing for humans and the human experience, not just for progress. unfortunately, the autistic tech bros in charge of tech (Musk, Zuckerberg) are unable to connect like regular humans and so we are currently getting the bad part of tech. Tech is being built by and for tech companies/ to be the first and best at AI.
Instead, tech bros should watch how segments of workers USE it (eg doctors, nurses, lawyers, etc) and then build AI to work for the industry.
Society has a weird way of designing for money rather than people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course it’s alarmist. It’s also more of an elaborate self-promo than think piece, so manipulative as well.

And despite being created with AI help, it’s poorly written.

I didn't think it was poorly written at all. I'm a professional writer. Actually, I think it was very well written and explained these things in a very accessible way for a lay audience.

Np. I’m a writer too, and agree it was well written. But that’s also why I think it seemed like AI helped write it. To smooth. I happen to agree with his thesis too, though I’m hoping it turns out to be a false prophecy.

So much noise and cope in the thread. If you're using Claude as a Google substitute, or ChatGPT as a therapist, you're missing the point. "Prompting" is now more than asking a question. ex: https://www.aihero.dev/tips-for-ai-coding-with-ralph-wiggum

(no, i have no affiliation to this guy, but I'm implementing his suggestions).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone point me to an AI-written legal brief involving a somewhat complex issue that is considered a good example of how AI can replace lawyers?

No, because it does not exist, but I can point you to the many lawyers who have faced discipline for putting hallucinated slop in their motions and briefs.

OK that's what I figured. When we're at the point that I can feed a complex complaint into AI, and it will give me a motion to dismiss (or even huge sections of it) that is perfectly researched and well written, I'll be worried. But I don't think that will ever happen. Maybe for a layperson who thinks contracts are indecipherable, the AI can take the contract and spit out some decent slop about what it says. It sounds like the "managing partner" referenced in this article does low-level work where something like that is useful.

Anonymous wrote:One word sums up this article: propaganda. He tried to create urgency in many ways in the article to induce you to do 2 things: 1) buy their monthly subscription to their AI and 2) getting you to ‘feed’ in your financial spreadsheets, contracts, law documents, etc. because the only way their AI improves is by ‘learning’—I.e. you give them all your professional work so they learn your field, etc. Don’t fall for this article!

This. It’s a demand to train his puppy for free. All these bros love free data (see FB, LinkedIn, DOGE).

One word sums up this article: propaganda. He tried to create urgency in many ways in the article to induce you to do 2 things: 1) buy their monthly subscription to their AI and 2) getting you to ‘feed’ in your financial spreadsheets, contracts, law documents, etc. because the only way their AI improves is by ‘learning’—I.e. you give them all your professional work so they learn your field, etc. Don’t fall for this article!