Anonymous wrote:I am a journalist at a large media company. They have introduced an AI "helper" and it's not any better than I am. In fact, I have to reject most of its suggestions because it doesn't understand the nuance in a story and draws wrong conclusions.

I have had more success with ChatGPT in areas of health queries and understanding the zillion rules of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security so I can assist family members.

I am always surprised when people say "well it's bad at this area where I have expertise, but good for understanding an area I know nothing about." Wouldn't you think it's equally bad, and you just don't know enough to spot the errors?

Anonymous wrote:We’re about to hit a Tsnami of old people. Will AI care for them?

No, RFK Jr. will just tell them to eat more beef tallow and avoid flu vaccines.

Anonymous wrote:lol also that you just concluded this. My oldest in college is already learning how to get around this situation. He's on the ground floor so it will work out for him. It's going to go back to being a lot of "who you know" as to who will get the cushy jobs monitoring AI and who are the forced labor.

The French film The Beast depicts this well:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beast_(2023_film)

Anonymous wrote:I am a journalist at a large media company. They have introduced an AI "helper" and it's not any better than I am. In fact, I have to reject most of its suggestions because it doesn't understand the nuance in a story and draws wrong conclusions.

I have had more success with ChatGPT in areas of health queries and understanding the zillion rules of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security so I can assist family members.

I am a writer and I asked Chat GPT to help me with developmental editing out of curiosity. It was awful.

I am a journalist at a large media company. They have introduced an AI "helper" and it's not any better than I am. In fact, I have to reject most of its suggestions because it doesn't understand the nuance in a story and draws wrong conclusions.

I have had more success with ChatGPT in areas of health queries and understanding the zillion rules of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security so I can assist family members.

The AI bots can’t even help me.

If this is true why is there so much angst about declining birth rates. With automation, 1 person does the job that 20 did 40 years ago. Even the trash collection and plumbing work is going to be automated. People who think blue collar jobs are savage are kidding themselves — those will get replaced faster than white collar jobs because it’s easier for the AI to learn.

Have you seen how your kids interact with AI? I am not worried. They will figure it out.

My kids are 11 and 13. Wow. My daughter for instance we were supposed to study for the Algebra 1 test then I fell asleep. When I woke up she told me she already asked chatgpt to create tests for her. She said she kept doing them until she had questions she had never seen better. She got 105/100 on the test.

My son has created couple of video games etc ..

I don't know I am genX and I think the next generation will figure it out.

The AI overlords have read it cant happen here:


The Displacement of Workers
The novel describes a system where the government "mobilizes" the unemployed into quasi-military labor units. These units are then "leased" to private corporations.
• The Replacement: Corporations fired their existing unionized or higher-paid staff to hire these "Labor Troops" for almost no wages.
• The Economic Trap: Lewis explains that while this was branded as "ending unemployment," it actually resulted in a race to the bottom where even the "employed" were forced into the camps just to survive.
The descriptions of the labor camps (often called "District Training Camps") where the character Shad Ledue eventually ends up or oversees:
• Hygiene: The book mentions workers being reduced to "bath-day" once a week, often using primitive, communal facilities that felt more like livestock troughs than human bathrooms.
• Transportation: One of the most symbolic "falls from grace" for the American middle-class worker in the novel is the giving up of the private automobile. Lewis emphasizes the irony of the "pioneer" spirit being invoked to force people to walk 10–15 miles to their job sites.
• Family: Wives and daughters live in the camp to serve as unpaid cleaning and cooking crew.

Basically look at the life of a migrant worker— that is our future.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If AI is so amazing, why can’t any of the chatbots these companies put on their websites answer or even understand my questions? I have just defaulted to typing “representative” rather than dealing with them.

AI can't fix human organizations. Even if we admit that AI is an above average, inexhaustible and comparatively inexpensive coder, the failure to deploy tech efficiently is a management problem. I've moved on from coding but most orgs are bogged down by process/agile ceremony, silos, disorganization, and pursuing projects that offer no value (frequently some upper management vanity project that lingers on in zombie mode).

What does that have to do with fact that AI consumer chat bots suck?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work in law and AI is constantly hallucinating things. How is this going to replace anyone at all?

Do you think AI will always be hallucinating in your field of work? Or do you think it will improve? In other words, are you confident that law will forever be shielded from AI?

DP, hallucinations are inherent to how gen AI works, yes. I can imagine designing it differently, but then it would be more of a database search. To the point made earlier, we already have the tools for that and someone could use them to design a standout research and drafting tool that saved labor without introducing errors ... but they haven't, presumably for market reasons.

I think lawyer jobs are at risk from a few things in the world right now, but not AI replacement.

Talk to me when it can change bedpans.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll believe it when I see it.

AI still hallucinates like crazy and needs a lot of prompt engineering and training to do anything useful.

The notion that AI can replace “the vast majority of what we do in white collar jobs” is kind of laughable.

Yes, it will replace some things.

But it is very unlikely to replace the “vast majority” of people.

You're wrong. Google anything about this and read. This is a real thing that is happening.

Ok, let’s take one example.

Explain to me how AI will replace lawyers.

I’m not talking about AI being incorporated into legal workflows.

I mean a world in which we have no lawyers because AI is doing all legal work.

Will an AI agent represent a client in court?

What about doctors? Professors?

Will kids enter a classroom and be taught by an AI agent?

AI is not going to release all layers and doctors etc. but it’s going to greatly diminish the numbers of them.

Instead of 5 attorneys writing briefs you have AI write 5 briefs and then 1 attorney fact/law check it. Also while there are hallucinations now, exponential learning means AI will improve faster than we can adapt.

You will still have doctors, but they will be using AI to scour your treatment records and medical journals plus do much of your charting. Insurance companies will now expect doctors to see more patients more quickly. And this is already happening with PE getting into owning medical practices.

There are going to be fewer a fewer paths for normal people to build wealth and have professional careers.

I am a first gen college grad turned lawyer. My dad moved from blue collar to managerial blue collar work and my mom was a SAHM. I became a lawyer. I had hoped my kids will have a similar income and lifestyle as me, so I find it depressing that just 1 generation later they are now being expected to go into blue collar work again. The ownership class is going to keep us laboring for them as cheaply as they can and supplement heavily with AI unless we start legislating something soon.

This is such a great example of how the tech guys don't understand other fields that aren't structured like tech and don't scale like tech.

Law is not predominantly brief writing, and you do not write a brief (or anything else) in a closed box. Yes, there will be changes and probably efficiencies with new tech, just as email and word processing replaced most courier services and typing pools. But you will not see significantly fewer lawyers, sorry.

And, I don't think law is special in that way. I think most industries are dissimilar to tech.

I think it is more similar than you think. In my company, we’ve reduced headcount of lawyers because we don’t need as many. The number isn’t significant in my company (maybe reduction of 5 people right now), but multiply across companies, and parts of the company (it’s definitely not just legal where this is happening) and it will have a meaningful impact on jobs

+1 I'm an attorney and practice in an area that should be safe. If I were a trusts and estates attorney, I'd be very concerned. There's zero reason to pay an attorney to draft those documents when AI can do it for you. The days of enormous hourly rates are also going to be over because clients certainly aren't going to want to pay those fees anymore, even if they still want an attorney.

WSJ just had an article yesterday about how lawyer rates are higher than ever. Some are charging $3,400 an hour up from $2,500 just 18 months ago.

DP. I read that and those are outliers. Those are partners with highly specialized skill sets and large, high-profile clients. Your average partner in DC is not charging that much.

It said associates at the big law firms are now at $1,000 to $2,000.

I get that BigLaw is probably only 10% if lawyers…but it’s not just 10 lawyers charging crazy rates.

The article was definitely ai hallucination if it stated realization is 1000-2000 for average big law associate time.

Anonymous wrote:If AI is so amazing, why can’t any of the chatbots these companies put on their websites answer or even understand my questions? I have just defaulted to typing “representative” rather than dealing with them.

AI can't fix human organizations. Even if we admit that AI is an above average, inexhaustible and comparatively inexpensive coder, the failure to deploy tech efficiently is a management problem. I've moved on from coding but most orgs are bogged down by process/agile ceremony, silos, disorganization, and pursuing projects that offer no value (frequently some upper management vanity project that lingers on in zombie mode).

Anonymous wrote:I work in law and AI is constantly hallucinating things. How is this going to replace anyone at all?

Do you think AI will always be hallucinating in your field of work? Or do you think it will improve? In other words, are you confident that law will forever be shielded from AI?