Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because we’ve never had a technology like AI that replaces, or makes obsolete, human reasoning. We may have to get used to the world from WALL·E. A bunch of dudes drinking meat in a cup in flying chairs.

More jobs to fix the robots? Bro, robots will fix robots. Read up on Boston Robotics and Tesla stuff coming soon. We simply aren’t ready for what’s coming.

There is no such thing as “artificial intelligence.” It is a very clever marketing trick to call it AI because you have been primed by movies like WALL E to think that AI is possible.

LLMs like ChatGPT are more accurately called statistical language models, a much less sexy term that doesn’t inspire breathless coverage or debate. All of the tools you have been reading about are based on pattern recognition, not actual abstract thinking or reasoning. You have basically been manipulated by a marketing campaign.

Enough with semantic bullsht. You understood when I wrote. No one is being manipulated by slick marketing. The impacts of AI in the workplace are being felt and these jobs are not being replaced. And soon robotics will introduce additional labor shortage challenges. What are you scared of to admit that?

It’s not semantics. Intelligence is a word with an actual definition and “AI” does not meet it. In this case definitions are very important.

I actually use AI enthusiastically in my job and come up with use cases all the time. But it’s not “intelligent.” It’s a wonderful tool, the same way computers and word processors and online databases and cell phones are tools. It can’t actually do much right on its own and that’s ok- I get a lot out of this tool and am finding ways to do my job better. But unless your job involves no skills whatsoever, it can’t replace you.

One thing I see on here and on Reddit is people talking confidently out of their azzes: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/26/mit-study-finds-ai-can-already-replace-11point7percent-of-us-workforce.html

That’s just another example. I’m no Luddite, but can see that this tech, which essentially improves daily, will displace millions of jobs and potentially our entire current way of life for something new. You’re over here basically putting your head in the sand, but have no clue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because we’ve never had a technology like AI that replaces, or makes obsolete, human reasoning. We may have to get used to the world from WALL·E. A bunch of dudes drinking meat in a cup in flying chairs.

More jobs to fix the robots? Bro, robots will fix robots. Read up on Boston Robotics and Tesla stuff coming soon. We simply aren’t ready for what’s coming.

There is no such thing as “artificial intelligence.” It is a very clever marketing trick to call it AI because you have been primed by movies like WALL E to think that AI is possible.

LLMs like ChatGPT are more accurately called statistical language models, a much less sexy term that doesn’t inspire breathless coverage or debate. All of the tools you have been reading about are based on pattern recognition, not actual abstract thinking or reasoning. You have basically been manipulated by a marketing campaign.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because we’ve never had a technology like AI that replaces, or makes obsolete, human reasoning. We may have to get used to the world from WALL·E. A bunch of dudes drinking meat in a cup in flying chairs.

More jobs to fix the robots? Bro, robots will fix robots. Read up on Boston Robotics and Tesla stuff coming soon. We simply aren’t ready for what’s coming.

There is no such thing as “artificial intelligence.” It is a very clever marketing trick to call it AI because you have been primed by movies like WALL E to think that AI is possible.

LLMs like ChatGPT are more accurately called statistical language models, a much less sexy term that doesn’t inspire breathless coverage or debate. All of the tools you have been reading about are based on pattern recognition, not actual abstract thinking or reasoning. You have basically been manipulated by a marketing campaign.

Enough with semantic bullsht. You understood when I wrote. No one is being manipulated by slick marketing. The impacts of AI in the workplace are being felt and these jobs are not being replaced. And soon robotics will introduce additional labor shortage challenges. What are you scared of to admit that?

It’s not semantics. Intelligence is a word with an actual definition and “AI” does not meet it. In this case definitions are very important.

I actually use AI enthusiastically in my job and come up with use cases all the time. But it’s not “intelligent.” It’s a wonderful tool, the same way computers and word processors and online databases and cell phones are tools. It can’t actually do much right on its own and that’s ok- I get a lot out of this tool and am finding ways to do my job better. But unless your job involves no skills whatsoever, it can’t replace you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because we’ve never had a technology like AI that replaces, or makes obsolete, human reasoning. We may have to get used to the world from WALL·E. A bunch of dudes drinking meat in a cup in flying chairs.

More jobs to fix the robots? Bro, robots will fix robots. Read up on Boston Robotics and Tesla stuff coming soon. We simply aren’t ready for what’s coming.

There is no such thing as “artificial intelligence.” It is a very clever marketing trick to call it AI because you have been primed by movies like WALL E to think that AI is possible.

LLMs like ChatGPT are more accurately called statistical language models, a much less sexy term that doesn’t inspire breathless coverage or debate. All of the tools you have been reading about are based on pattern recognition, not actual abstract thinking or reasoning. You have basically been manipulated by a marketing campaign.

Enough with semantic bullsht. You understood when I wrote. No one is being manipulated by slick marketing. The impacts of AI in the workplace are being felt and these jobs are not being replaced. And soon robotics will introduce additional labor shortage challenges. What are you scared of to admit that?

Anonymous wrote:Because we’ve never had a technology like AI that replaces, or makes obsolete, human reasoning. We may have to get used to the world from WALL·E. A bunch of dudes drinking meat in a cup in flying chairs.

More jobs to fix the robots? Bro, robots will fix robots. Read up on Boston Robotics and Tesla stuff coming soon. We simply aren’t ready for what’s coming.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because we’ve never had a technology like AI that replaces, or makes obsolete, human reasoning. We may have to get used to the world from WALL·E. A bunch of dudes drinking meat in a cup in flying chairs.

More jobs to fix the robots? Bro, robots will fix robots. Read up on Boston Robotics and Tesla stuff coming soon. We simply aren’t ready for what’s coming.

There is no such thing as “artificial intelligence.” It is a very clever marketing trick to call it AI because you have been primed by movies like WALL E to think that AI is possible.

LLMs like ChatGPT are more accurately called statistical language models, a much less sexy term that doesn’t inspire breathless coverage or debate. All of the tools you have been reading about are based on pattern recognition, not actual abstract thinking or reasoning. You have basically been manipulated by a marketing campaign.

Anonymous wrote:More robotics and A.I. = more jobs related to robotics and A.I. duh.

Anonymous wrote:Because we’ve never had a technology like AI that replaces, or makes obsolete, human reasoning. We may have to get used to the world from WALL·E. A bunch of dudes drinking meat in a cup in flying chairs.

More jobs to fix the robots? Bro, robots will fix robots. Read up on Boston Robotics and Tesla stuff coming soon. We simply aren’t ready for what’s coming.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More robotics and A.I. = more jobs related to robotics and A.I. duh.

And you believe this why?

Anonymous wrote:More robotics and A.I. = more jobs related to robotics and A.I. duh.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You ever wonder what logically could happen to the entire concept of capitalism? As I save money and buy tech stocks and so forth I am like “will this be worth it in 20 years given ai, robots and automation”? I mean think about how we’ve got “agentic assistants” at Saleforce causing white collar job losses, LLM progress every day, so much ai, and companies are now starting to release robots that can lay bricks and do laundry. What happens to human jobs?

In turn, what happens to the concept of owning stocks or investing? How does the advent of humans being second class to more qualified robots work and will companies values still grow? How will people be able to afford stocks if they have no jobs?

I asked this of Grok and this was the response:

Here’s a clear-eyed, non-utopian take on where this is probably heading over the next 10–30 years.

1. Most current white-collar and many blue-collar jobs disappear or shrink dramatically
• Agentic AI (like Salesforce’s Agentforce, Adept, Anthropic’s computer-use models, etc.) is already automating large chunks of knowledge work: support tickets, basic legal research, accounting reconciliation, software development, radiology reads, etc.
• Physical robots are crossing the cost-effectiveness threshold fast. Boston Dynamics/Figure/Hyundai, Tesla Optimus, 1X, Agility, Unitree, etc. are all targeting $20–40k price points within 3–8 years with 5–10× human speed on repetitive tasks. Bricklaying (Construction Robotics, Monumental), folding laundry (FoldiMate-style + dexterous hands), elder care, warehouse work, fast-food cooking, trucking (after regulatory approval) — most of these go to zero marginal labor cost once the hardware is paid off.
Result: 40–70 % of current jobs (depending on whose study you like: Goldman 2025 says 300 million globally, Oxford 2013 said 47 % in the US, McKinsey keeps revising upward) become either fully automated or “human-in-the-loop for exceptions” that supports 1 human overseeing 20–100 robot equivalents.
2. Company profits explode, stock markets keep going up (for a while)
• Labor is 50–70 % of costs in most industries. Replacing it with capital that costs 5–10 % of wages per year causes operating margins to balloon from 10–20 % to 60–90 % in many sectors.
• We’ve already seen this preview in software: Microsoft/GitHub Copilot turns one senior dev into 3–5× output → margins go from 35 % to 45 %+. Physical world version will be bigger.
• So yes, the S&P 500, Nvidia, TSMC, Tesla, the robot companies, the energy companies feeding the data centers, the copper/uranium/lithium miners — all keep compounding at absurd rates for another decade or two. The people who own capital capture almost everything.
3. The “how do unemployed people buy stocks?” problem
This is the core contradiction. You have three main historical ways societies have solved “not enough jobs”:
a) Massive political redistribution (UBI, sovereign wealth funds, “robot tax,” negative income tax, state ownership of the robots, etc.)
b) Massive make-work / service-sector bloat (the 20th-century solution: everyone becomes a therapist, diversity officer, yoga instructor, OnlyFans creator, etc.)
c) Social unrest / collapse / authoritarianism (the bad one)
We’ll probably get a mix of (a) and (b) with some places flirting with (c).
Current realistic paths people talk about:
• Alaska-style permanent fund but national/global: every citizen owns one “share” of the nation’s robot/AI capital, paid as a dividend (Yang’s “Freedom Dividend,” Sam Altman’s Worldcoin idea in richer form, etc.).
• Very high wealth / capital-gains / corporate taxes that fund UBI (the Nordic model on steroids).
• Government becomes the employer of last resort in “human” jobs (care, arts, local services) that are deliberately kept human and subsidized.
• Ownership democratizes: 401(k)s, sovereign funds, and retail brokerage keep growing; people live off a mix of UBI + modest investment returns.
4. Who actually owns the stocks in 2040–2050?
Top 1 % already own ~54 % of U.S. stock market wealth (Fed data 2024). That number will probably climb to 70–80 % unless policy intervenes hard. The bottom 50 % own <1 % today. Without redistribution, the median person will have almost no stock exposure and live entirely on whatever transfer system exists.
So the realistic outcomes are:
Best case (20–30 % probability): coordinated policy response → citizen endowments or UBI funded by 30–50 % tax on capital returns → most people live modestly comfortable lives with a lot of free time, own some index funds through auto-enrollment, and the economy keeps growing.
Middle case (50 % probability): patchwork UBI + continued financialization → top 10 % own almost everything, bottom 60–70 % live on $20–40k/year equivalent transfers, gig work, and family money. Markets still go up, but politics gets ugly.
Worst case (20–30 % probability): policy gridlock + inequality → markets still go up for owners, but mass unemployment + resentment → authoritarian backlash, capital controls, nationalizations, or worse.
Bottom line for you right now
If you’re accumulating tech stocks, robot companies, energy, and broad indexes over the next 10–15 years, you’re betting on the “profits explode” part, which looks extremely likely. The political response is the wildcard, but even in fairly aggressive taxation scenarios (say 50 % capital-gains + wealth tax), the pre-tax returns will be so high that post-tax returns still beat almost every historical asset class.
So yes — keep saving and buying, but be mentally prepared that “owning the robots” might eventually become partially socialized. The next decade or two of compounding still looks phenomenal for anyone who has capital today.

Change with AI will be real and certain jobs will require less people but new jobs will be created. None of what you suggest is really likely though. The changes will be big but managable.

“New jobs will be created”. That’s your take? That’s heavy.[/quot

Yes. When cars took over for horses blacksmiths were out of work as were farms that raised and sold those horses. But then mechanics were needed and people at car dealers. Same is true with every major change. This will be no different.