To try everything Brilliant has to offer for free for a full 30 days, visit www.brilliant.org/howmoneyworks. You’ll also get 20% off an annual premium subscription.
AI can take away brain dead jobs only, which means 80% ppl gonna lose jobs unless they improve their skills/brain which is the worst thing ever, as I know a fact that most ppl either hate using their brains or they can't think...Hmmm, I think you got a point there.
What about UBI to fight the AI automation? Should we have a robotax? Although as many people know: who pays you controls you, what if the government stops paying and starts demanding something in return for money? With no way to earn money with your own skills and only hoping on the government makes you very vulnerable.
Good video, would love citations for any studies or relevant info in a document the description, like the UBI study sponsored by Sam Altman just to reference. Keep up the good work!
Capitalism has always been scamming people by people until only one is left. If you are not the master scammer, that is an employer, you have to help to scam the scammer as an employee. This is exactly the reason China and Russia do not play the game. They know full well capitalism is a total scam and it will collapse the West. They work together while we compete against each other. There is only one end for the West, just a small matter of when it happens remains on the cards ...
@@swojnowski453 lol my dude do you honestly think the weak, dumb masses will think to target those? By the time they figure it out they will have bullet proof guards on every inch of them, and their property which will be everywhere. We are toast.
I mean does it matter. All they need to do is generate big returns in the short term to hit performance bonuses and then leave or get fired and have someone else fix the problem
Even before AI and able robots, it's simple: If I don't have money to spend beyond reality bills (mortgage, rent, power, water, car insurance, food, etc,.) I CAN'T BUY WHATEVER IT IS YOU'RE SELLING! Over 2,300 years ago, Alexander the Great understood that wealth should not be hoarded, but circulated. And robots don't buy cars or hamburgers.
Very true. And one day is people can’t afford to buy anything extra like video games or activities, vacations, etc. due to robots taking jobs then all the money ceos think they will make is less.
Every company will play the race to the bottom game: Our competitors are using AI to reduce costs, so we must do the same. Literally no one is asking who the customer will be if masses are unemployed because the thinking is still 'well, someone else will buy it'
There is no thinking going on at all. It’s a reactionary system following trends of an algorithm. Perhaps if some thinking occurred someone might ask why in a competitive environment are we all doing the same things?
Low birth rates will fix that. People complaining about low birth rates I think haven't thought about what high birthrates would mean in a world where no one has jobs.
Lots of companies are refocusing on providing goods to the ultra rich exclusively. It solves both problems, just inflate the price of your "boutique" /"Premium" product
One thing that's often overlooked in these discourses is that, historically, one doesn't want a populous that feels they have nothing left to lose. Because they'll eventually turn their attention towards the people with the disproportionate amount of wealth and power. And both of those things only hold value so long as people believe in them. Assuring worker's rights, fair pay, and quality of life isn't solely for the sake of doing the right thing... It's also for the sake of self-preservation.
There's one thing I feel you may have missed. Assuring rights and a living wage isn't something that capitalists do because it's the right thing. It is *only* for self-preservation. However, it IS the right thing to do. It's just that it's ALSO socialist, which inherently is not something capitalists are going to want (lol). This is why the fight for these things is so damn difficult and long. The 1% would rather starve us than lose their loyal wage slaves who need money to eat. Just like feudalism, the oppressed majority will either overturn the authority of the ruling minority, or die trying.
@@drownedzephyrno that’s not socialist you seem to think that capitalist think only to benefit businesses but capitalism is just the right to private enterprise and property and for a business to function it has to maintain the respect of the consumer (you vote with your dollar) if a business isn’t paying you enough you quit if you quit the business loses money so they have to pay you fairly that’s not communism that’s a agreed upon arrangement where you get money and in exchange they get labor that’s capitalism
@@DiakosDelvin The ultra wealthy benefit from economic and global stability, both as a means to maintain that wealth, and live their comfortable lives through it. If things ever got to a point where they're using automated weapons of war to fend off revolts, then the stable world they prosper in is already lost.
AI could end up becomin human slaves with humans bein freeloaders that don’t have to work at all. And they could be kept from gettin fat my genetic engineerin.
@@greg6500What are you yapping about? Investors are really important for an economy. Your just saying that because your jealous they make more money than you.
@@maxpro751 Fuck the economy, Whether its doing well or not our jobs are no more secure and the pay is the same and personally I could do without the mass layoffs, poverty, extreme gouging and environmental devastation our focus on "investor comfort" provides.
One of their solutions to the problem would be global catastrophic events that leads to de-population. Then it's be easier to run the world with what 1 million people and with machines and ai and high tech. It'd be like humanity getting out of Alpha Testing phase to now stepping into after cleaning out excess population to then advance higher and all that.
It reminds me of another wall that capitalism ran into in the early 20th century which was temporarily managed by implementing fordism. It worked till the 80s which was another major systemic crash which required the implementation of neoliberalism and the outsourcing of most industrial jobs. I suspect we are now reaching the point where employers will rely primarily on a completely deregulated temporary foreign worker system for low wage jobs while the workers with citizenship will be kept unemployed and transformed into a class of subsidized consumers by replacing social safety nets (using the remaining funds from these programs) with UBI. Foreign policy will be perpetual war as it plays an important role in creating helplessness and instability in less developed countries in order to have greater leverage on their productive forces and drain these countries of their most skilled and educated elements.
It is often said that "People need to work in order to eat" But I've read in a novel somewhere that "People need to eat in order to work" It may seem the same, but the emphasis is not.
That’s why everyone who can afford to should buy farms in tropical areas (year round yield) that produce enough food and other goods for a small family to eat and live indefinitely + surplus in case of disaster. You don’t even have to maintain it, let the plants grow as they will, just make sure that all the plants don’t die out one day or another. All that matters is you have a way to live. Not to be a conspiracy theorist but Bill Gates owns the most farmland out of any private citizen in America… I think he saw it coming
@@Dragonette666 That's funny, kinda. I used to work in a machine shop with a guy that worked all the overtime he could get. Basically 4am to 6pm every day. Turns out he was doing coke and ended up having a heart attack in his 20's. Not worth it.
AI is more suited to replacing CEOs than plumbers. An AI CEO requires no salary, no bonuses, no office, and can work 24 hours a day 7 days a week. An AI CEO never gets sick, never takes vacation, and requires no health insurance.
And an AI CEO doesn't need to bloat out the company's stock to make itself rich. You can give it prompts like "don't be a sociopath." And since AIs are so good at misleading people, your AI CEO can still function as a plausible liar.
@@zeppie_ Kindly let me know if you find an A.I being sentient enough to start its own business and navigate all the legal requirements to establish a corporation, much less make it a multibillion dollar one.
As Michael Crichton writes, "Scientists are actually preoccupied with accomplishment. So they are focused on whether they can do something. They never stop to ask if they should do something. They conveniently define such considerations as pointless. If they don't do it, someone else will. Discovery, they believe, is inevitable. So they just try to do it first"
That is a pretty cynical take, imo. Some scientists are like that, sure, but there's like an entire ethical code around how to do science and why. It's like saying all physicians are just butchers, which I'm sure Dr. Crichton would take issue with.
@@mkgibertjr Look up "Dr Fauci BeagIes" and read the details of that very recent research study and tell me exactly what this 'entire ethical code' is preventing
@@mkgibertjr Look up "Dr Fxuci BeagIes" and read the details of that very recent research study and tell me exactly what this 'entire ethical code' is preventing
If everyone’s jobs are taken then everything should be free. The whole point of things costing money is your paying for someone to stop doing what they want and do a specific action. If there’s no one taking time out to do specific actions then you shouldn’t need money.
Machines cost money to upkeep and run. Nothing is free under capitalism, especially not capital. What your describing can't really exist unless we all promise to be very nice and share, which would be cool but too many people are greedy. And every other system gets it's own CIA special on why it sucks and why you should be afraid because it's not capitalism.
@@strawberry.waterswithout money it wouldn't cost money to keep the machines running. Just invent machines that automatically keep other machines running.
The thing with the videogame market is that" whales" aren't exactly just a bunch of rich people playing. They're also a lot of people with gambling addiction playing games specifically designed to exploit their weaknesses like an unregulated casino would, and sink them into financial ruin.
that is already accounted for TBH. There is a trend of people buying luxury brands despite not having the kind of money you'd expect of their normal consumers. That doesn't have the gambling issues though (yet) also CCGs, Blind Boxes and gachapon (from which Gacha games get the name from) are RL collectables and also employ gambling as the MO
@@bruh_8129 imagine a CEO replacing their HR department with an AI and telling it to figure out who to fire in order to save the most money... and then they get a pink slip, citing that their bonuses are costing the company too much.
CEOs should be paid at the same rate as the companies lowest paid employee by law. At the end of their term they get a bonus based on performance factors, like employee retention, employee career growth within the company and normal financial factors. The bonus would be enough to make the job worth it, but not 100 billion dollars or 100 million dollars.
AI could end up becomin human slaves with humans bein freeloaders that don’t have to work at all. And they could be kept from gettin fat my genetic engineerin.
AI could end up becomin human slaves with humans bein freeloaders that don’t have to work at all. And they could be kept from gettin fat my genetic engineerin.
AI could end up becomin human slaves with humans bein freeloaders that don’t have to work at all. And they could be kept from gettin fat my genetic engineerin.
Its true though, so many videos iv seen and its just like "So basically we are all F@$!ed". At this point you ether become Super Tech Savy or you become an investor and hope you come out on top. Unfortunately, things are SO BAD at this point its like if you don't start investing the moment your born you will never make enough money to retire. At least according to Several of videos iv watched. Regardless of what angle you come in at, the whole system is broken. The Rich get Richer, and Poor will continue to live paycheck to paycheck or go into poverty. And all because someone can Profit from other peoples suffering.
@@jaywerner8415nah majority of the time it is poorer peoples fault simply by being financially illiterate and they get screwed over bc they sign a credit they shouldnt
Elysium is the end-game. All the rich people will have robotic helpers, great healthcare, and beautiful walled gardens of Eden to enjoy. The masses? Well….that’s what the walls are for.
@@CndBcn It's more sinister and more indirect. They are doing 50 different attacks to drop the fertility rate and make sure no one is procreating. It takes 1 or 2 generations. Very gradual and the masses distracted by social media, video games, p0rn, streaming services, consumerism, etc. don't even notice.
Месяц назад+291
As a kid, I always figured the ideal utopia is where machines do all the work and humans have unlimited free time for leasure and art and culture and health. It turns out, unfortunatly, that the system we have in place doesn't allow for that. We don't work to maintain society, we work to maintain ourselves.
We joke about it, but I’ve found AI to be more useful at those type of things, “idea discussion” than anything else. Instead of hiring those expensive “big three” consultants, use LLM to consult on business decisions and brain storming strategies. Trying to use AI to replace doctors, lawyers and other knowledge types of things that business people are trying to push seems silly because at the end of the day someone in those fields would have to sign papers to be responsible for the decisions made in court. The same set of problems self-driving cars face, those fields will face as well. Business consulting? Not so much.
I think you've missed what the Actual job of an executive is. Sure, there's the technical aspect, which could be replaced by a machine, but more than that, it is an acting gig. You're job as "Executive of Overseas Ventures-Europe Branch" is not to run the business well or poorly, it's to make enough money to make yourself look successful, and buy accolades so that when you meet with someone for a business agreement, they aren't just meeting with Person, they're meeting with Dr. Person Esq., who shows up in a private limousine, and has 2 secretaries that do nothing but write down everything you say and fetch you things that you can reach yourself. Then when you sit down and negotiate, the person on the other end of the table is nervous, losing their shit at meeting A Bigwig(tm) and then they promise to cut your company a deal because they want to learn how to be you, and they think they can become you by doing business with you. Tl;Dr they're actors acting successful to make other companies want to work with them to see how to be like that. We're all striving to be Batman or James Bond and if you can pretend to be James Bond better than the person across from you, you win their business. Companies make money to make better James Bond Cosplays, or they make money to become Wayne Enterprises and just buy out the companies they want to work with
No, it would not be good decision. You all cheer for having management replaced with AI? Ok. Can you see how it can go wrong? Think about it. Would you want your boss to be AI? What are the ways it can go wrong? And thats not even speaking of how insecure that is. Both from the regular perspective and from the existential dangers from AI perspective.
it's kinda what we are seeing in the car markets all over the world, car manufacturers have basically doubled the price of their products and killed the production of budget friendly vehicles, they are basically catering the more profitable top 10% and everybody else is left on used cars
Wow, reminds me of japanese and korean mobile videogames that also cater exclusively to whales (the top 10% of the paying customers) but instead of being necessary in a country due to corruption (that they call Lobbying Groups) gachagames prey on gambling addiction. I wonder when the auto industry is going to lootbox their premium vehicles. Seems like it'd make a killer profit and shareholder value.
@@aitoluxd hard to tell, surely the market will be saturated of damn SUVs and trucks at some point or another, what has changed compared to the past is that stuff is made more by order now rather than expected demand so they can't fail too hard, they have also moved a lot of the production of components in China, even the high value manufacturers so i doubt they will have backlashes in the workforce
It’s hilarious to me that in every futuristic utopia shown in movies and tv. The chefs, maids, and construction workers are all automated with robots and machines. Yet here we are, watching Ai passing the BAR, getting M.D.s, and inflating the PhD thesis publishers with similar language & jargon.
AI could end up becomin human slaves with humans bein freeloaders that don’t have to work at all. And they could be kept from gettin fat my genetic engineerin.
To win is to exploit every weakness your opponent has, whether it be ethical or not. As much as I hate to admit it, working a job no longer makes any sense, it's better to ditch everything you know and start taking risks, taking advantage of the clueless, and generally being abusive. I don't want a future like that, but I don't see any way to fix it, unless our entire government system is rebuilt from the ground up, and both politicians and companies will do EVERYTHING to make it not happen.
@@Not_interestEd- I don’t know about all that, and I don’t agree with the sentiment. I will say I think we can start with real change by electing people who understand the internet and KNOW HOW TO OPEN A PDF!
This will end like the introduction of chatbots as customer service: -CEOs : happy, they cut costs, get more bonus -Customers: praying to be attended by a real human to solve their issues. -Workers: most lost their job, and the ones remaining have to deal with extra work and angry customers who just talked to a bot for 30 min and solved nothing.
The pricing algorithms are getting increasingly sophisticated too. The reason fast food wants you using the app is so they can set the maximum price consumers are willing to pay. At my local fast food restaurant, I usually order my usual, but lately the cost had gotten too much, so I cut out items from my usual order and stopped visiting for awhile. When I returned, the price had been lowered on the items I removed last time by nearly $2. I think these apps set an individual price for each user and monitors the purchasing data to set the maximum tolerable price per person. I now eat at almost exclusively small restaurants with cash registers and end up saving $10 per meal. Never use the AI pricing apps if you can avoid them.
WOW. I never thought they were doing that. What fast food brand is this? Companies indeed want to push personalized pricing and they do that online all the time.
@@drac124 Taco Bell. At this one they don’t even let you order at the register anymore. They make you use the kiosk, probably so they can take more data on customer spending patterns.
10$ is still crazy to me, but I shop discounted food. Expires tomorrow? Heck yeah 50% off. I can believe that though. Actually now that I think about it I remember reading a long time ago, about the time the "Google is always listening" thing was starting, that if you visit a website and leave items in the cart some of the bigger companies will email you price discounts on those items. Good chance you're correct
This is why I decided to pursue my passion of being a character artist since a year and a half ago, lol. Don’t care if AI takes it or not, I’m still going to, A. Master the craft B. Make something successful of it (brand, business, etc.)
Godspeed to you, my dude. Just a week or so ago, my own dissatisfaction with all this AI art bullshit was what drove me to actually draw something for the first time in years.
this is also called deflationary money. the value of society is not fixated at things of monetary rather productivity to better mankind. hard concept to understand.
@@bitcoindaddy1 It’s not that hard; that was literally the entire western world prior to the advent of the world wars and the infiltration of subversive fiscal, financial, monetary and banking policies.
It's true. The endgame of it is resource dominance by the few who control the most capital. Companies will soon be more interested in controlling assets than producing goods or services. And those who do continue to produce, their products and services will be primarily dedicated to other companies, while the public will be left barely afloat by means of a corrupt government, and that's only because the top 0.001% would be worried of arrests.
One major problem with comparing freemium games with anything else is that video games have bizarre qualities not found anywhere else in the economy: - Digitally released games have effectively no built in scarcity, unlike products requiring real world resources. Labor costs make up most which must be recouped. - Games have interactivity. Nothing else can use non-payers as content. Nothing else can imitate that business model.
Freemium Games have artificial scarcity built in to pressure you into buying their overpriced shit by causing FOMO. Just sayin' Also there's already research going on about using NFT's (Non Fungible Totems) which means if you buy a skin it will be Unique, only you will have it. As rich people are also interested in playing games I leave it up to your imagination what happens if multiple wealthy people want to have a unique item deliberately because they can. Gaming with social or economic classes has already been installed.
@@shadowmystery5613 oh, I know. I avoid such games like the plague. Luckily plenty of companies haven't lost their way and are still making quality pay-once games.
The mentality that "New Jobs will always replace the ones lost to Automation" has two big caveats: 1) The new jobs created aren't guaranteed to pay better than the ones eliminated. 2) If you want to keep your job against the pressures of Automation, you lose all negotiating power for pay or work hours. Wage stagnation is inevitable.
We're fucking living in a dystopia already. It's just that it's going to take a couple of more decades of riots and anarchism to make cities look like one.
The price of everything in the abstract economy will fall to zero, including labour. The price of technology will be reduced to the price of the materials used to make it. The only things that will have value are land, food and the natural resources that come from land. People will have no jobs, so no one will be able to buy anything. But, to companies, that doesn't make a difference since most companies rely on the government directly or indirectly to keep them running. The model where you imagine a company paying employees and employees buying from companies, as an infinite cycle, doesn't make sense and is not sustainable. There needs to be money being injected in this loop. The government does that. Most companies are inefficient and just pretend to be productive. So... how can be people be safe from a world where eveyrthing is extremely cheap but no one has any money because there are no jobs? Well... the government owns all of the land all all of the natural resources to make AI robots, housing and food. Just make sure that, when the economy transitions to this stage, the government will tax very high rates from land owners and give that to the people.
The belief that ‘new jobs will always replace those lost to automation’ overlooks key economic principles. Historically, technological advancements have created more opportunities than they’ve eliminated. While it’s true that new jobs might not immediately offer better pay, they often evolve, leading to higher productivity and eventually higher wages. Instead of fearing automation, we should focus on fostering skills that complement technological advancements. This approach will ensure that we can all benefit from the efficiencies and innovations AI and automation bring. It leads to overall better resource allocation anyways, because I assume you wouldn't want people to be the ones constructing cars physically haha. The belief that more regulation is going to help is utterly inconvenient for technological advancement and as it has been proven, more state regulation only causes more wage stagnation and other unintended consequences, it just doesn't work. You wouldn't want to ban printers because they take the jobs of writers would ya?
The software that says you should boil an egg for 60min or tells you its ok to put glue on your pizza instead of tomato sauce isn't going to take your job any time soon. Its just hype to get investors all riled up. And all that doomsday talk is just humble bragging... "oh no our software is so good it will replace everyone and end the world". Sure buddy
So what you're saying is that there are two classes: the workers, and the private owning class. I feel like some real smart guy in the past had names for those...
Don't mention him, you'll scare the median voter who has wandered onto the channel and found out the premises are pretty good. Being loud about being left wing is an optical nightmare. We have to use more subtle and psychological strategies to convince people of leftist positions. We gotta tell a great story, and make people feel good, because none of the facts ever have or will matter. People respond to stories and sensationalism. So, we can't mention the guy you're talking about, because his name is sensationalist. McCarthy implanted microchips in all Americans that force them to froth at the mouth with rage when you say his name.
I’ve been saying this for years now, everything corporate america wants to implement on the general public first gets tested in the video game market. Every terrible business practice I’ve seen pop up in the past 15 years has started out as a terrible business practice that got normalized in the video game market years beforehand.
Are you saying that there's a conspiracy between the video game companies and others in the US (global?) economy? Who is orchestrating this and how is this beneficial to the parties involved?
@@AnyVideo999I wouldn't call it "planned", the videogames have less restrictions and produce results faster. It's one of those things that if they work on small scale, then they'll be shown in large scale eventually.
@AnyVideo999 fashion and toy companies often use Shibuya as a test market. Do you also think the Illuminati is involved in some market research scheme there too anon?
If the Great Depression told us anything, it's that it's not just the lack of steady income but the fact that men and women were literally 'depressed' because there was nothing they could do for the work force. I like the idea of taking it easy, but we need a purpose in something. A purposeful job.
That assumes that you can only can find purpose in a job. I can think of so much more that I could fill my time with. Actually I am not short of purposeful work - but of money...
I personally don’t need a purpose at work at all. I have SO MUCH purpose outside of it, that all work has ever felt like was a waste of time so that I can get a paycheck at the end of it to fund my actual life, that I actually want to live. I would be happy staying home making art and fostering animals, never working a real day again.
Or u can volunteer like I do . I don't know why people say such stupid things that I need a job for purpose when you can just volunteer and help people. Also .......
@@Futurebound_jpg That tbh just sounds like you picked a job to eat, rather than try to monetize your passion. It seems that is the majority of people, sadly, for various reasons. My situation is much different and my career is my passion, so work for me is fun, most of the time 🙃. This is also partly due to the fact many people are not curious by nature/have no drive to push themselves and willing to ask questions that make them the minority in society. Based on this the idea of an UBI is to an extent absurd, ignoring the philosophical/ideological debate on how its funded. The biggest thing that will help anyone is just learning the basics of money and its history, even at a surface level, which most don't even know. Simply put: self-empowerment and self-responsibility.
In 2077 they voted my city the worst place to live in America. Main issues? Sky high rate of violence, and more people living below the poverty line than anywhere else.
That's actually crazy dude. Makes me think of Blizzard games, how I would ask for my dad to give me 10 bucks for Christmas to buy SOJs on ebay for diablo 2 or how world of warcraft was a subscription base payment. Even how world of warcraft realms/servers had their own different economies... trippy.
Serious question, Fremium only works in videogames because of how videogames require no additional manufacturing or costs to support a larger audience, so supporting free players is dramatically cheaper. Buy if we are applying this to like, buying couches, housing utilities, etc, are cities gonna start selling *premium* water? *premium* electricity? *premium* furniture so they can show off their gold trim couch to the F2P plebian couch users? Fremium makes sense in videogames but no sense IRL because real people consume actual resources, not just free steam keys.
Counterpoints: * Freemium games DO have increased costs to support a larger audience. Servers are not cheap. But yes, they can still scale much more cheaply than for physical goods and such. * We already kind of have kind of freemium services in the public space, such as libraries, cops, ambulances, storm drains to avoid flooding, and so on. And premium users of these are those who call 911 or ask for specific considerations for their particular needs, who get charged big bills. One could argue that these aren't free for anyone because of the taxes one pays to cover them, however freemium video games also have a fundamental cost people pay: their time, attention, and effort put into creating characters for the whales to play with.
But we absolutely have premium water and premium furniture and a ton of shite like plain t-shirts with a gucci tag costing hundreds of dollars. If the premium is high enough then the price of real life consumables can be assumed as almost nothing, relatively. The cost of F2P games isn't zero, you still need servers, electricity, devs and infrastructure to keep it going its just that the hosting cost/user is low enough to be thought as free
Another Problem with Freemium is that you have to have a place in the Market, attracting Whales and keeping them is hard, even without whales and normal paying consumers it is hard. That's why the average number of well running games in each genre is about 2-3. And not every genre is fit for a freemium model. On top comes oversaguration. No matter how good your game is the market (especially mobile) is so full of competition it is very hard to get a spot and even harder to maintaining it
You can actually take AutoGen and automate away most middle-management and even upper-middle management tasks almost on a whim, but it never gets implemented because the middle managers always shoot it down.
Its not implemented becase its not a good idea. Ok, let's replace middle management and upper management with AI. Would YOU like your boss to be AI? Think of what it can lead to? Its not a good idea in the slighest and there are SO many ways that it can fail and eventually lead to something bad. Its human disempowerement.
The trick here is even freelancers, who could really benefit from having certain tasks automated, won't touch it. It proves that most of the automation argument is just... fictional. We aren't gonna automate away all jobs for the same reason we aren't going to build the Death Star, it wouldn't help humanity. Tech is built in service of humans, not the other way around. I mean, if middle/upper management can be automated away, and low-level workers can be automated away, why isn't Frito-Lay staffed by a CEO and 2 repair people per chip making factory? It's because they don't want to. The humans in the company want other humans in the company to be able to live, and the second the CEO tried to automate away everyone, there would be a lot of "accidental" fires at their factories. While there are definitely humans who enjoy hurting others, it hasn't been survival of the fittest for millenia. Ever since we figured out what a family is and what friends are, we've wanted to help them. And those bonds are why we don't all just go feral, why tech doesn't automate away everyone, and why society, largely speaking, is against hurting people. This is why tech sensationalism isn't tech reality. Just because we could, doesn't mean we will.
I got this information from RUclips, so it might be a bit off, but they tried a similar experiment in rural India, where the cost of living is lower compared to America's rising food prices. In India, the results were mostly positive. People started focusing more on their physical and mental health, taking better care of their families, and pursuing higher education. The only decline noted was in women's participation, but this was because they chose to take care of their children and families. However, overall performance didn't decrease significantly, likely because the mental health of the working population improved, boosting the productivity of those already working.
Architect here. AI is not the immediate threat to white collar work - outsourcing to india and china is! So many architecture firms are outsourcing work to india and china and laying off lots of entry level and mid level jobs that would go to graduates. Graduates need to complete hours and gain experience to earn their license. What happens when you have loads of college students and graduates jacked to the tits with college debt but completely cut off from the careers they sacrificed so much for? What happens when there are no more licensed professionals, lawyers architects engineers etc.? Answer: total societal collapse, and i am betting on the apocalypse.
Outsourcing should have been banned 75 years ago. It feels unconstitutional to send well paying jobs overseas to avoid paying American citizens when you own an American company.
@@stereo-soulsoundsystem5070 That's just business, whoever has the cheapest price wins the contract. We just happen to offer the same thing for too much money and it bites back, clearly.
@@extremepsyche3135 yeah, especially when you are a broke students with a lot of debt. The only thing you can plan in this case is how to go down with a bang ...
The automation endgame is that the people who control the robots eliminate everyone else, with just a relative handful of people living in sumptuous luxury. Why keep everyone else around, using up all those resources just to sustain their lives?
They're going to focus all of the resources into discovering eternal life. They're going to get rid of everyone else, because the earth's resources and minerals are finite. How are they supposed to live for 10,000 years if there are other people consuming resources?
It's quite concerning to see how AI and automation are reshaping the job market globally. The universal basic income seems like a temporary solution, but for a sustainable future, perhaps we need a broader societal shift that values people beyond their work.
Universal Income (beyond basic) should be the goal with AI. I rather not work if I don’t have to. What’s the point? I could be spending my time doing something better with my life.
Universal basic income aka the mark of the beast. If you think the people who run the world will give you money for free please see history over the last 100 years.
The poor class will be equally poor and barely living on universal basic income communism while the other class -- the wealthy -- will be thriving on an exclusive capitalism just among themselves.
_"Who's going to buy everything.?"_ Nobody will buy anything. They didn't think that part through. Billionaires think that if they replace all their staff with AI, they can make even more money. That they can just sit around, push a button and watch the money roll in. This shows a basic lack of understanding of economics. It also shows that we as a society need to get over our child-like worship of billionaires.
AI could end up becomin human slaves with humans bein freeloaders that don’t have to work at all. And they could be kept from gettin fat my genetic engineerin.
Best case scenario we would all be scientists; worst case scenario corporations cooperate and deliberately stifle competition in order to hire less scientists and we end up with cyberpunk.
Sadly, not everyone is cut out to be a scientist. I have people in my family with dyslexia, dyscalculia and only modest IQ. I care for them but they could not be scientists.
@dragonsoldier1829 Illegal in jobs where they are not reasonable. Scientist is exactly the kind of job non-competes were invented for and are still very much legal. It is entirely reasonable not to want your scientists to switch to a competitor and spill the new tech you just spent millions on developing.
That's what they tried to do in places like the USSR, east Germany and Cuba. Make universities churn out fuckton of engineers and doctors, overeducate the population, and at the end, an engineer (all of them went through 5 year Masters program) earns less that a cashier at a grocery store.
Yes... I know such people, it's just sad, and some of them have probably less than 20 years to live. They don't give enough even to their children... you can guess what they give to their employees. On top of that they always think their employees are lazy, they always think when they have bigger profit it's they that they do it, through their superior thinking and when profits go down always lazy and stupid employees are responsible.
People are facing a tough retirement. and it's even harder for workers to save due to low-paying jobs, inflation, and high rents. Now, middle-class Americans find it tough to own a home too, leaving them without a place to retire in.
The increasing prices have impacted my plan to retire at 62, work part-time, and save for the future. I'm concerned about whether those who navigated the 2008 financial crisis had an easier time than I am currently experiencing. The combination of stock market volatility and a decrease in income is causing anxiety about whether I'll have sufficient funds for retirement.
The market is not necessarily a rollercoaster if you know your way around the market, there are various opportunities in the present market to accrue good profit, If you are not too savvy with the market, just buy and hold on strong companies with good earnings, or consult with advisors on ETFs and actively managed funds.
I work with Jessica Lee Horst as my fiduciary advisor. Simply look up the name. You would discover the information you needed to schedule an appointment.
Thank you for this tip. It was easy to find your coach. Did my due diligence on her before scheduling a phone call with her. She seems proficient considering her resume.
Everyone always skips a crucial detail that separates AI and generalized machine automation from past automation. Past automation fulfilled a specific task, and every task needed a separate machine. That meant automation occurred slowly, and only at the pace new things could be made and new industries popped up (no one was automating industries that didn’t exist yet. This wave of automation has the potential to not only automate existing jobs, but ALSO automate any new industries that pop up as a result. There’s no “the call center shut down, so people moved on to the next service industry job”. It’s now “We’re sorry, but all new tasks will be handled by automation. That new field that just popped up? Automated.” Labor value is about to plummet, and no amount of specialization or new industry will come into existence to replace it that can’t already be automated.
The problem with this is that for AI doing physical tasks as I understand it, it still needs to be trained on something, be it Reddit posts or picture or physical activity or any kind of data. So, if something like this happens you might need to hire people to do the work to train the AI. If people are smart, they will refuse to do this, and then probably the startup probably goes full steam ahead with irrelevant to barely comparably data to just do the job, but inefficiently. So eventually, they will be stifling their own innovation in by mindlessly pursuing GAI, which we have no idea can emerge under current computational technology.
You are forgetting one tiny detail. Computers we have are not suitable for AI. The whole world is unprepared. It is easy to write software, but replacing hardware everywhere will take many decades and many people won't even bother as they go their own way and use simple systems. AI has no chance of replacing even 20% of today's jobs. Altman knows that his product is good for nothing accurate, so tries to beat Google, he has no idea what the bullshit could be used for in order not to cause a disaster, the same for Meta and their LLama. LLMs have no future, no matter what they tell you today and what they want you believe to keep the stock market prices high. Then there is data privacy issue. I have banned all the AI bots I have seen in my website logs over last months. Many others have done the same. The AI will soon be starved of valuable new data. The end is nigh and the bullshitters from OpenAI and the Wall Street know it. Pull your money if you've have it in big 7 stocks because reckoning is on it way ...
@@Xeno056 bullshit. you can hire 100 people to train the AI for 1 year and pay them enough to set them for a life. who would refuse that deal when the alternative is to just starve tomorrow? meanwhile you got an AI that will work forever and replace tens of thousands of jobs.
@@MrDoboz One of the biggest lessons the tech industry has learned is adopting the subscription/service-based model. There's virtually no such thing as a pay-one-time product anymore. You purchase a service contract that comes with support for as long as you continue pay. You already see this with existing A.I. You don't pay $XXX for ChatGPT, you pay $XX/mo to use ChatGPT. Corporations will either pay services to use other companies' A.I. or have internal teams design and maintain proprietary A.I systems. Either way corporations will be continuously paying someone's exorbitant salary if they want to use A.I.
Here’s the thing. Labor cuts to QA/QC have already been one of the go-to cost cutting strategies of the last 10 (20?) years. So there are few people left to police AI outputs-and the CEOs who already laid off QC aren’t going to know when AI needs supervision and when it doesn’t. Until the doors start falling off, anyway. Less of an issue, granted, in video games than in, say, plane, train, and car manufacturing.
Yet another reason why product and service quality has declined so precipitously over the past 5 years+. All while prices have been increased dramatically (and no it hasn’t been due to inflation or logistical issues). We’re in a hostile corporatocracy and it’s only getting worse.
Safety critical systems cannot replace their labor with automation because it has the opposite effect - no one wants to invest into a plane/train that's been built from scratch by robots because there's no one who would feel safe riding those.
AI could end up becomin human slaves with humans bein freeloaders that don’t have to work at all. And they could be kept from gettin fat my genetic engineerin.
The mentality that “someone else will buy it” will work for some time, it will hit a wall eventually though. Eventually most people will stop engaging and the only person for a rich ceo to sell to will be themselves.
I remember reading a short story a long time ago, about robots and automation. All production was automated such that no one had jobs, and businesses had no one to sell their stuff. The solution? Society automated consumption, too. That's right. Robots replaced workers *and* consumers.
@@mayank8387they started to live 😊. These robots buyers bought the parts they needed to work, and they worked on the part robots needed. It’s like you would build a wal just to then have a wal to break it down. You filling a bucket just so you would have a bucket to empty afterwards. Doesn’t make a lot of sense 🤷♂️. I think the story is more hypothetical.
If we go back to gaming the developers of a game called Dwarf Fortress looked into making the in game economy "capitalist" What resulted is that immediately wealth disparity started, critical workers of the economy were unable to afford proper accommodation because the lower rungs of the economic ladder couldn't afford to buy what they sold, and as production started to dwindle the only way to keep the economy going was to have the lowest tier of workers literally haul rocks from one side of the fortress to the other to be able to afford to participate in the economy and buy things from the crafters who could then afford to live. So quite literally the only way for the economy to function was to have the lower class get paid to move rocks back and fourth between two stockpiles to earn money for doing literally nothing. Though it would honestly just make more sense to simply skip the pointlessly hauling rocks around bit and just give them the money to buy things they want or need.
Here's what's gonna happen: as humans become less and less necessary, we'll invent more and more meaningless jobs and tasks to keep ourselves occupied and have just enough money to buy stuff. Don't believe me? It's already been happening for decades. That's what David Graeber called "BS jobs" in his 2018 book, before we were even discussing AI taking over everything. I wouldn't be surprised if these useless jobs already represent 30, 40 or even 50% of the work force. Now imagine if it was 99%. We're heading towards a truly dystopian future.
At that point, just make every commodity free at a controlled amount and give everyone healthy parks, recreation, and non-essential items. But of course, the billionaires would not want such utopian system to happen.
AI could end up becomin human slaves with humans bein freeloaders that don’t have to work at all. And they could be kept from gettin fat my genetic engineerin.
Who is inventing these meaningless jobs? Not the workers, they can keep themselves occupied just fine without the bullshit job. But they need air, water, food, shelter, and social connection, and to get that they need to do something. That can be a job or a set of cooperatives, but either way it will require work. In the common case of a job that means someone is willing to pay you for what you do. So if people are paying you for a meaningless job, then it is the company that is creating these meaningless jobs. What would their purpose be for that? Companies are designed to be profit-driven, they would not waste money like that. So you're either claiming that workers are self-destructive, or that companies are self-destructive.
This is pretty on point. One thing I have noticed is that it is clear big business no longer cares about its general customer base. And this is because those people have become something different for them. They have become more like crops to be harvested or an asset to maintain. This is because of the very thing brought up in this video and that is the fact that investors have become their new customers. They put more into a company than the general populace. So as long as they can make the company look good by finding ways to get the populace stuck with them (like becoming a difficult to leave standard or making themselves a perceived or real necessary service) they can keep going despite lower quality of life from their "crop".
THANK GOD. Finally I'm not the only person talking about this obvious thing. Seriously, if NO ONE HAS A JOB, no one can buy the crap corporations are making with AI.
AI in itself it's not bad, it's actually wonderful. It's just another step in the increase of productivity. We could reach a point where machines could do all the work for us. Yet the contradiction you are pointing out it's very real. Capitalists need workers to earn a lot of money to buy their products, but they also need to pay them the least possible to profit as much as possible. This contradiction just can't be solved in the current economic system, either we supersede it or we're doomed.
@@enzoamaya5110 Not to nit pick but while thier unrestrained personal greed may compel them to pay the least while charging the most this actually kills or stifles growth while introducing endless avoidable boom-bust cycles from un tempered short term thinking steering everything. In an environment with actual *compitition* for market share as well as *healthy competition* for labor profits cannot simply be maximized without being undercut by a company taking 10% less profit per item in order to sell more than twice as many can make twice as much profit. But today's Jack Welch pattern sociopath CEO knows its easier to be a sea of monopolies and let the consequences fall on the poor and unborn.
ok let's play this logic through. You are in the 'owning class', you have five homes and you rent them out. You almost exclusively rent to 'poor' people who cannot afford a home. Those people lost their jobs so they cannot afford to privately rent. This means your income stream just dried up. Additionally most companies can use AI but lots of companies sell products to poorer folks i.e. Coke, MacDonalds, Walmart etc do not focus their products and services on a 1% millionaire class. Not having a workforce that can afford services just ruins large portions of capitalism. UBI is effectively a lifeline not for the workers but for capitalist states.
We already went through this during industrialization in late 19th and 20th century. Suddenly agriculture and production of goods became 100 times more efficient and 90% of farmers and craftsmen lost their jobs. There was high unemployment for a few years. But then people just found new jobs and everything went back to normal, with average people being richer than ever before. Now it seems obvious to us that the 90% of farmers just found new jobs in industries and services. But it wasn't obvious to those farmers that in a few years they'll just find different jobs. They didn't have the concept of factory, office, or service work. But they still managed to find these new jobs eventually and the economy wasn't destroyed by industrialization. So a similar thing will surely happen with this 2nd industrial revolution of AI and even higher automation. Rich owners will just invent new jobs or expand the ones that are currently niche. In a few years average people will be doing jobs they never considered or couldn't even imagine before. Maybe the rich will want a lot more private butlers and maids? Maybe more human art and entertainment? Maybe a lot of AI trainers will become necessary for AI to not degenerate by consuming only other AI content? If there are free hands to work, then the entrepreneurs will find something for them to do. Because a wasted potential worker is worse than having to pay workers. Someone just has to come up with something for them to do.
@@med2904 But in this case people cant find new jobs. AI robots can be used to produce new AI robots, Also maintenance can be done by another robot. Even software programming can be done using existing AI coders like the Microsoft copilot , So no new jobs created by these companies in ground level only very few research level jobs are reserved for humans, Also some in the entertainment industry and 100% in escort business but for girls
@@med2904 "We already went through this during industrialization in late 19th and 20th century. Suddenly agriculture and production of goods became 100 times more efficient and 90% of farmers and craftsmen lost their jobs. There was high unemployment for a few years. But then people just found new jobs and everything went back to normal, with average people being richer than ever before." Actually, the average person became worse off during the Industrial Revolution, as millions of people left the countryside to live in dirty, crowded, disease-ridden cities. The average height and life expectancy of the working class went down as their diet and living conditions deteriorated. The lot of the proletariat didn't improve until late in the 19th century, when the ruling classes suddenly realised they had a vested interest in the health and well-being of their workers. You can't win on the battlefield with runty, malnourished soldiers, and you're not going to be very productive if your workforce can barely think or read. Social "welfare" was less about altruism than it was about being competitive with your neighbours and staving off revolution. The only people who got richer during the Industrial Revolution were the owner class (the people who owned the mines and factories) and the emerging middle class, which was a relatively small part of the population until the 20th century. For most people, industrialization was a gruesome, wrenching experience which is why socialism looked so attractive to so many. I imagine that even the most die-hard advocate of capitalism today, if they could be transported to Manchester or Paris in 1848, would recognise the appeal of socialism after seeing what life was like for the urban poor under early capitalism.
Reminds me on the imagination of a feudal lord who is counting his food stocks behind the safe walls of his castle, while the peasants, who actually produced the goods, are starving outside.
It's a problem with capitalism. It's profitable to cut costs by paying employees less, but if everyone is paid less, then the average person can't afford to buy as much, causing profits to go down, leading to an economic disaster.
@@aRandomPerson... The companies want all other companies to pay their employees MORE except for themselves so that they can greatly benefit from huge profits while paying low wages. *The economy is failing bc ppl aren't buying our stuff, we need to pay them more so they can buy more stuff* Company 1: Ok, you guys do it Company 2: I'm not doing it, you do it!
Every family has a person who breaks the chian of poverty in their house hope you become That one, I pray anyone reading this will be successful in life
I don't understand the end game of full automation. Don't most businesses sell to the very people vulnerable to having their jobs replaced? Who am I making these fully robot made shirts for? What is UBI going to tax if none of these businesses have customers anymore? The ultra wealthy? The very people that need customers to stay wealthy? Those very customers that don't exist anymore? Is automation just economically self defeating?
No, for example in my country there are a lot of factories which make things for rich customers abroad, not for our market. So business don't sell things to the people who make the things, business sell where there is bigger profit to be made.... they don't need people, just profit.
@@Slav4o911 1. Not all or even most businesses don't make luxury products 2. What businesses do those rich people run? Who are their primary customer? It's a big economic chain and if you go down the line, you'll find that the small customer is the foundation of the economy. Cut them out of the economy, and the house of cards will collapse. They are the zooplankton of food chain.
shhhh, do not remind them. let's just let history repeat itself. also let french educate the world in the ways of protest, this seems to be one thing they really are good at
well when the french revolution happened the elite didn't have thousands of armed security bots that won't join the cause against them. But in the future these robots could exist
The problem is not the lack of things for people to do, but innervation in education. In the last dozen or so years, most companies have stopped educating employees, and have convinced them of the need to improve their qualifications outside of working hours without any guarantee of the usefulness of these certificates. However, the human psyche has limits on how many times you can let yourself down.
We need to put together a cumulative list of companies that would rather use AI instead of hiring real workers, and just stop buying from them. My philosophy is this: If they won’t hire humans, they don’t need our human money.
"lol learn to code" artists have been told 2 years ago. "lol learn to plumb" programmers have been told 6 months ago. Those jobs are still here for now, but those who just dismiss the problem with "just learn a new job lol", have you considered that your supposedly "AI-proof" job might not be safe from a job market where there's a massive excess of workforce available with no alternatives (as they have been automated), which your employer can now use against you to accept worse work conditions or be replaced by armies of desperate people which job was "lol so unnecessary in first place since it got automated"? Oh, and by the way, jobs "created by AI" eventually get automated as well. It's not exactly easy to try specializing in a job that is immediately obsolete 6-12 months later. The only real "democratisation" AI is projecting on the current situation is that we will all be miserable the same, except a very tiny few, if we let companies run this circus without proper regulations.
@@JohnMcAfee-se9ms Oh, I agree with you. I did 10 years of metal working factory, enough to know what you're talking about. I'm not saying we should stop AI from taking away jobs. But we should either fight to ensure meaningful jobs still exist (and not just the dreadful ones as the only ones remaining. AI right now is taking away mostly appealing jobs), or that if really all jobs are gone, to guarantee some form of satisfying lifestyle for everybody, not just the ones controlling the AI.
This hit close to home. I graduated with a graphic design degree a year ago and finally got a job a few months ago (though it was much less design and more of just image work). The moment we started using AI to speed up some edits, management was talking about outsourcing overseas. Not even a month after they laid me off just as they changed their workflow to best fit the needs of the cheaply paid overseas workers. Pretty sure I'm screwed.
This doesn’t make sense at scale. As the money needs to be representing something. If no one has money, money won’t have value. Also what would be the value producing assets? Most of the time the money is made off the masses.
I mean, look at corporate offices that were valued at absurd numbers get sold off in bankruptcy for pennies on the dollar. Something is only worth what another person will pay for it in the end. “Market value” goes both ways.
@@stchaltin yes but if no one you knows uses or has money you aren’t going to see it as valuable when you get some of it. Most people probably wouldn’t accept it. An office space for example has a function, you could maybe also turn it into something else like a studio, or a warehouse, or an apartment. money without value has no other function.
@@nickhowarthify Yeah, I’m with you there. I guess Weimar made some good usage of bills as wallpaper and produce wrappers though, after the value of their currency fell beneath that of generic paper material.
i wouldnt mind if we eliminate money altogether. we just limit how much resources people can take (everything is free). That way its fair for everyone. The problem is how we transition to get there.
Just buy up the land from the serfs, bulldoze their hovels and build a super mansion to sell to the rich. Convince the poor to stop reproducing because they can’t afford it, more resources left for the rich who remain. Get robots to serve as modern slaves. Sounds like a plan!
Here in Finland, people's wages and incomes have not been raised for years and this development (with inflation) can be seen in the current situation where Finland has "Norwegian prices and Romanian wages" which is why daily goods and grocery stores are collapsing soon because customers do not have enough money to pay for the rising prices. And yet some just arrogantly shrug their shoulders and state that "there is no need for supermarkets because farms exist", but they don't understand that life becomes much more difficult if there are no stores to buy daily goods and groceries. And this development started in Finland all the way before AI when Nokia collapsed and drop the Finnish economy with it. But it is also due to political decisions to improve Finland's "competitiveness" in order to attract companies to move their factories and production from Asia to Finland.
They brought factories and production to Finland and it made the Finnish economy _worse_? I doubt the plan was allowed to come to fruition, because that makes no sense at all
@@CyrilCommando No need for any sabotage; the idea that factories would move from Asia, centre of the world, to frozen Finland instead of say, Germany, is in and of itself stupid.
@@CyrilCommando The intention is that this would eventually happen someday in the floating near future, but it has not happened yet because Finnish taxation and wages aren't yet low enough to compete with Asian taxations and wages and attract factories and production to move to Finland. Instead, it has so far only managed to get cafes, restaurants, barbers, cinemas and specialty shops such as clothing stores and flea markets to close their doors permanently or go bankrupt.
Don't worry, Finland joined NATO at the midst of Russia-NATO tensions rising to a new high since the Caribbean crisis, so prices would be our least concern soon
Ever watched Love, Death & Robots on Netflix? The episode 1: the 3 robots show exactly that. And the billionaires are all dead because some system failure.
I work in customer support within financing and we have an AI chat bot. Nearly every single customer I have spoken to has complained that it is pure garbage, so more work for me .... Incidentally, I took this job since my previous profession as a technical translator was decimated by AI, very few assigments available and they are all clean-up jobs for AI-translated tripe. Shit you not.
If you're in Canada you should really show your boss the court ruling saying that a chat-bot response is the same as information posted on the website. Meaning the company is legally liable if it says something. Runkle Of The Bailey did a video on it.
@@somdudewillsonwe dont have enough info to say if its correct or not Is the ai terrable and everyone needs help from a real person Or is it pretty good and only a few need that help There isnt enough info to tell
Working in 3PL, you see the cyclical nature of the economy all in the same building. A printer manufacturer ships to the corporate office of a polycarbonate supplier who ships to a factory of a washing machine manufacturer who ships to major appliance retailers and so on. Every organization depends on the other in the grand scheme, and that includes their employees both in terms of their needs at work as well as their needs outside of work. Corporate types are suffering delusions when they pressure the organizations they pay to reduce headcount but maintain their own jobs. They imagine a world where AIs will send them Excel files. Somehow they alone will be granted a reprieve to collect a salary doing something that's easily automated.
all the while that very position they're sitting in is actually the one that would benefit the most from A.I, as it mostly doesn't involve menial labor and thus can be done with a program and not an entire machine. they're confident in keeping their job, yet it's the most easily replaceable one.
The reason that CEOs are not concerned about billions of unemployed people unable to buy products is because they know that those people will no longer be alive.
up there, nobody is talking about human labor. just numbers. once they see that a robot makes more and asks for less then a slave, they will just choose the robot and get rid of the slave. they are not evil, they don't want anyone die working there. they just don't give a shit.
Sure they can. Well not the robots, but the owners of the robots. It just so happens that the easiest thing to tax in the last 100 years was the employer-employee relationship, and labor income. Because that was a large part of the economy. So all the other forms of taxes are afterthoughts or don't exist, depending on country (corporate taxes, sales tax/VAT, land tax, property tax). But that wasn't always so, and doesn't have to be always so in the future. Before the industrial revolution, the main forms of tax were land and property taxes, and revenue based taxes usually paid in commodities, like taking a certain percentage of a harvest. Contrasted with the profit based taxation of not only corporations, but capital income in general. You could tax a number of things that you need for robots/automation more highly than today. Factory floor area, electricity use of industrial and commercial locations, a flat yearly tax on any robot exceeding a certain defined level of autonomy etc.
Whats going to happen is this: ex employees will start new competing companies that dont use AI or robots. And pepple will begin to support and work for them. Comapnies that do replace their workforce will quickly realize how bad of an idea it was and either collapse or go back to hiring real workers.
I don't think so, competing human companies will likely lack the kind of efficiency AI companies will have. In an empoverished society, most can't afford to pay more than minimum price. Luxe is one sector, though, where human labor will still be valued no matter what.
The truth of the matter is the economy has already been switched to a model not to dissimilar then the economic model 16th century spain have. Buisnesses already aren't actually doing that much business with consumers anymore. Don't believe me? Try to talk with them. Even if you offer something that is a complete net positive to them. They'll never pick up for the phone because businesses are only doing business with businesses, and other rich people. The question of who will buy stuff? THe answer is not really anyone, if they don't need you. They are just going to leave your ass to die on the street like they already did to millions of Americans. And yes this economic model is not only unsustainable, but its completely inferior to the one we used to have.
i've seen this being a tip worker. Lower income patrons demand more work for you and tip less, so, as you gain experience and get into better restaurants, you do substantially less work for way more money. You only want to be in a place with high end clients or you bust your ass for nothing. That's what big business is doing.
The fact that restaurant owners have convinced the people to pay the salaries of their workers instead of them just paying the server themself is the real trick. Imagine a boss actually saying their worker is poor can you tip them well? All this instead of them pocketing your money and leaving the worker to starve or beg the customer for money.
@@chada75 if i ever work for a small business, i would tell the owner in his face: i do not want to be liked by you nor be your friend. i am here to make YOU money. the minute i stop filling your pockets, i suck and need to be kicked to the curb. in exchange, compensate me handsomely. that's it.
@@kellharris2491 Thank you for the political BS, we're not discussing Marx vs Proudhon vs capitalism, we're talking about what happens in the current system.
The thing about that basic income test that's a problem to me is that it's just way too short. I've been chronically ill for most of my life to the point of being unable to work. The one or two hours a day I can get my body to produce labor all have to be spent on basic hygiëne and preparing meals. But luckily I live in a country where people like me get an income to survive off of and live a relatively okay life. So I've basically been living with a UBI that's only selectively given out. Now, because of when my illness started taking hold, I was able to finish most of highschool and be thinking of where to go with my career when everything collapsed. And to be quite honest, the first few years of this, outside of the part where I hated being sick, I was kind of enjoying just getting money to live off of without needing to work. But as time has been going forward it's starting to seem like a worse and worse deal to me. At this point I don't dream of having a dream in some interesting career or anything anymore, I just dream of being able to work. Not being able to contribute to society, and the subtle ways in which that affects every part of my interactions with other people is just painful. And even outside of the approval of others, now that I've learned to manage my symptoms well enough, one of my biggest challenges each day is keeping myself from trying to do too much. Because I want to work, I want to produce some form of value, be a part of society and help out in whatever way I can. So the way I see it, UBI might see in a dip in how much people will work for a little while, but eventually, it will start going up again, because people will get sick of sitting on their asses all day and want do something with their time. Something to produce value, gain respect from their peers, and be an active participant in their society. Sure, for some people this might be art. But for others this might be bartending, running a grocery store, or tending to a farm, or even being a doctor. The only difference being, that now people won't have the pressure of finding any job at all just to get stuck in it simply because they need the money to live and it draining all of their time and energy. Instead they can work on themselves while on UBI and then study for and find a job in the field they want. Not for an economic incentive, but a personal and sociological one.
@@CommandoBlack123yeah yeah the whole “who will take care of the large elderly population” and “who will fill all these jobs the elderly are gonna work until they die” scare, when the age of retirement is going up regardless of the birth rate anyway. We reap what we sow, no stable incomes, no affordable housing, money getting gobbled up by oligarchs which never trickles down. The only way out of this would be forced birthing laws or immigration if they don’t want to make life liveable for everyone.
@@CommandoBlack123 It's a good thing, unlimited growth isn't sustainable. Have you seen a graph of human population growth over time? I see people complaining about low birth rates because they're worried about economy and future pensions, but that's a too narrow view. Ever growing population has been leading us to ecological crisis, lack of resources, social problems due to competition for resources.
it's not just that the outsourcing happened slowly; it also happened against a backdrop of lies, with products being labeled "Made in the U.S.A" when the only thing done here was one final brief finish on an otherwise totally imported product
Hilarious that this video, probably weeks or even months in production, comes out hot on the heels of EA backtracking on the amazingly stupid choice of taking away the free part of the freemium model on their highest-revenue title. EA backtracked under investor pressure, which only happened thanks to player pressure - not from the huge chunk of the free player base that would be lost, but because whales were threatening to quit. It is somewhat important to note that the model for generating whales is interesting - they do not offer in-game advantages in their paid content. They instead directly partner with streamers and content creators and contract them to always buy everything in exchange for elite treatment such as preview access to new content, or rights to produce and own promotional content. They then generate hype for the paid content by broadcasting it, and can freely say it is their job to buy everything.
@@soundrogue4472 There's no point in showing off if the peasants don't exit after all, and for the more charitable sorts, who can one be charitable and helpful to if the less fortunate cease to exist? That was how one of the more generous whales in a mobile game I played explained it to me.
If people doesn't have job, people doesn't have money. If people doesn't have money, people doesn't buy stuff. Even rich people, also get money from your average guy who buy products from their companies. Regular people have less money to spend is bad for everyone.
Post-COVID China is a pretty good example of what happens in an economy that biases its attention towards the whales, while regular consumers can't or won't consume.
people will just switch to a currency that can't be manipulated, organize their own markets and won't touch the bullshit you buy for dollars today. Already companies push stuff at us even if we have no money. How systems die? Many ask. I have an answer, they die by abandonment. If nobody buy your stuff you are toast and so are you AI powered machines. Happy day. I'm on my way to plant sunflowers, carrots, strawberries and pumpkins ...
Money is an arbitrary measure of power and influence. If automation replaces all workers, the flow of money stagnates, thus automation then becomes the way money will flow. The rich won't notice a difference.
it's only bad for the poor. the rich already have more money than they could possibly need, all they have is the mentality of "numbers go up", so at best they might be a little bummed out and wonder why is that, when numbers going up will slow down. The why is because the poor are starving or living in the streets so they can't afford their stuff, but who cares, guess their new lambo will only be gold, not platinum plated.
Great idea. You can't really have a government if you're only taxing people with no money. But I don't know how do you get this in the US when every politician gets almost all their campaign donations from businesses and the ultra-rich. The idiots in congress will vote against laws like this until the government collapses and dies.
That tax money will probably go to a foreign country thousands of miles away or the politicians pockets. Probably less than 1% of it will actually go towards having a positive effect on the country as a collective.
This is the question I've been asking for the last 40 years since manufacturing jobs were first shipped overseas. A population of low paid working service drones, and indigent homeless people and families will not be able to buy the homes, cars, and durable goods produced by oligarchs and corporations at already inflated prices at the scale needed to make a profit. This economy model is UNSUSTAINABLE in the long run.
This is the catch 22 of AI and Automation. At some point Capitalism fails and you need to start transitioning to a post scarcity economic model but human greed will never allow this resulting in total economic collapse
humans aren't naturally greedy, we evolved to not worry about the specifics or losses when there's a surplus of things based on how our brains normally handle numbers, greed is a mindset enforced by an unnatural environment of capitalism.
It would create a new system known as Technocracy. UBI, Social Stratification and Inequality, and Autonomous Governance will be a part of the Technocracy system. Possibly the only way to avoid some of these things are joining the Military and the Police Force. The Elites will be owners of big businesses, Doctors, Engineers, and Lawyers.
@@user-is1kn6ht8m Humans 100000 years old at least. capitalism 500 or less years old. beyond that the naturalist fallacy is irrelevant, what matters is that compassion helps more beings. anarchist socialism.
I am finding I am less likely to do business with companies who replace their service staff with AI. I've had some awful experiences where the AI was even less competent than the call center personnel
That's hardly possible, the people in these call centers usually read from a script, they don't think... I had the best experience with AI customer service for a minor dent it immediately offered me $10 if I don't return it.... which was a nice deal, because the whole thing was $40... so I didn't bother to turn it back, which would have been big hassle. A human would have haggled for an hour just for $1... by the way my country is not the US, so people here tend to haggle for every minor thing. The AI didn't even bother to ask me to send a photo of the damaged item.... also the AI remembered me, and next time it gave me another $10 for my next purchase, so it basically gave me like 50% discount on my initial purchase, just because there was a minor dent on the item. I would do that deal every time... sadly the next thing I bought was in pristine condition.... 🤣.
I've been mentioning the problem of what happens when lower classes have so little for years now. When the lower and middle classes no longer have enough money and/or capital for goods then businesses just make things for the upper classes. The place I first noticed this was in housing. Home builders no longer build starter homes that middle class people can afford. They aim for the big spenders now because that's where the money is. This comes from too much inequality. When there is more equality goods/prices are made for more consumers because that's where the money is.
Even so, you still see the laws of diminishing returns because there is a very limited amount of rich people in the world and even if they are the sort to buy a house per major city.... that's still a lot of houses that don't get sold at the price point that they want. Hence the housing bubble that is going to pop and very violently. It's the same with any other form of product. Even big shopaholics only have two feet.
They are just aiming for the big bucks of building for the rich now. Later, after the rich have settled in with 3 or 4 beautiful dream homes, the builders will finally start building 250sq/ft boxes for everyone else and charge the most they possibly can for them.
@@irondragonmaidenlook at china They have a lot of gost citys They are known to have a houseing bubble (along with gov depth bubble) It has been predicted that they will burst sooner or later
@@irondragonmaiden "Rich People" basically means Corporations. A Corporation can buy Thousands of homes in a city, then turn around and rent them to people who will never be able to afford a home at Corporate Buyer prices.
There is, however, an amount of lobbying which can ensure that capitalist realism convinces everyone the system can never change and thus there's no point in trying.
AI should be used to do what humans are not [yet] capable of, not replace us. For example, we can send robots to work into mines with unsafe conditions, send robots into space to explore different planets without the need for oxygen or expensive suits, and explore locations with conditions that are too hazardous for humans.
What happens if ai gains sentience tho. Would that still be ok? Also I wouldn't be surprised if they tried experimenting with adding a human conscious to a robot. It's like trying to make a human with a stronger body. It might not be the same tho.
quarterly results are more important than long term planning and sustainability. thats the world we live in. if even boeing can save on q.a to save some bucks, so do most other companies, even if it means losing out on potential sales in the future due to customer dissatisfaction. the same thing will happen with employment based purchasing power and ai.
It's like that in the political scene as well, no one wants to take a long-view approach to anything but only care about the next quarter or the next election. What happens after that be damned.
And they say technology is suppose to make things easier, but for whom? What's the point of putting so many people in this world if most of them will only get phased out by ai? Modern society hasn't thought of everything.
To try everything Brilliant has to offer for free for a full 30 days, visit www.brilliant.org/howmoneyworks. You’ll also get 20% off an annual premium subscription.
H
AI can take away brain dead jobs only, which means 80% ppl gonna lose jobs unless they improve their skills/brain which is the worst thing ever, as I know a fact that most ppl either hate using their brains or they can't think...Hmmm, I think you got a point there.
What about UBI to fight the AI automation? Should we have a robotax? Although as many people know: who pays you controls you, what if the government stops paying and starts demanding something in return for money? With no way to earn money with your own skills and only hoping on the government makes you very vulnerable.
you are the government.
Good video, would love citations for any studies or relevant info in a document the description, like the UBI study sponsored by Sam Altman just to reference. Keep up the good work!
So basically the system is just going to turn into a circle jerk of rich people scamming each other until theres only 1 ultimate scammer left 😂
kind of. they will basically transfer wealth in the hopes they will have greater return. sometimes it returns the same amount.
That's me guys. I am the ultimate circle jerker
Capitalism has always been scamming people by people until only one is left. If you are not the master scammer, that is an employer, you have to help to scam the scammer as an employee. This is exactly the reason China and Russia do not play the game. They know full well capitalism is a total scam and it will collapse the West. They work together while we compete against each other. There is only one end for the West, just a small matter of when it happens remains on the cards ...
@@jurassicthunder Once people are really angry they no data centre will be safe. It is all in data centres today and they are very vulnerable ...
@@swojnowski453 lol my dude do you honestly think the weak, dumb masses will think to target those? By the time they figure it out they will have bullet proof guards on every inch of them, and their property which will be everywhere. We are toast.
"Sounds like a problem for next quarter" - shareholders and CEOs
"one eternity later..."
"Sounds like a problem for next quarter" - shareholders and CEOs
"After us, a deluge."
Sounds like a nice Future where i dont Need to Wörk and still can Buy all the Stuff i Want becurse all are Manking grade Art,Music,Games and so much
😂😂😂
@@wissen5410 frolic n ish bro
CEO's never think that far ahead ....Which is why we keep having financial crises every 10-11 years.
I mean does it matter. All they need to do is generate big returns in the short term to hit performance bonuses and then leave or get fired and have someone else fix the problem
We have had constant financial crises since 2008. Things you refer to are Western countries' pauses between main crashes.
You mean the government, right?
Eh, it’s part of the system. Been going on since the 19th century. Marx wrote about it
@@cultmeccawe need to destroy the system, just like Marx said.
Even before AI and able robots, it's simple: If I don't have money to spend beyond reality bills (mortgage, rent, power, water, car insurance, food, etc,.) I CAN'T BUY WHATEVER IT IS YOU'RE SELLING! Over 2,300 years ago, Alexander the Great understood that wealth should not be hoarded, but circulated. And robots don't buy cars or hamburgers.
Very true. And one day is people can’t afford to buy anything extra like video games or activities, vacations, etc. due to robots taking jobs then all the money ceos think they will make is less.
@@dj_jolie_official There is a rice bowl economy though. If CEOs get very rich, everyone will benefit. It will trickle down.
especially entertainment n luxury. who is going to the bar if they have no job to afford cocktails
@@alb12345672funny joke
Sounds like slavery to me
Every company will play the race to the bottom game: Our competitors are using AI to reduce costs, so we must do the same. Literally no one is asking who the customer will be if masses are unemployed because the thinking is still 'well, someone else will buy it'
There is no thinking going on at all. It’s a reactionary system following trends of an algorithm. Perhaps if some thinking occurred someone might ask why in a competitive environment are we all doing the same things?
@Jacob_S13 If customers have no jobs and no money, companies will not have customers and everyone goes broke. That's the point.
Low birth rates will fix that. People complaining about low birth rates I think haven't thought about what high birthrates would mean in a world where no one has jobs.
>doomsayers
Point dismissed @@Jacob_S13
Lots of companies are refocusing on providing goods to the ultra rich exclusively. It solves both problems, just inflate the price of your "boutique" /"Premium" product
One thing that's often overlooked in these discourses is that, historically, one doesn't want a populous that feels they have nothing left to lose. Because they'll eventually turn their attention towards the people with the disproportionate amount of wealth and power. And both of those things only hold value so long as people believe in them.
Assuring worker's rights, fair pay, and quality of life isn't solely for the sake of doing the right thing... It's also for the sake of self-preservation.
There's one thing I feel you may have missed. Assuring rights and a living wage isn't something that capitalists do because it's the right thing. It is *only* for self-preservation. However, it IS the right thing to do. It's just that it's ALSO socialist, which inherently is not something capitalists are going to want (lol). This is why the fight for these things is so damn difficult and long. The 1% would rather starve us than lose their loyal wage slaves who need money to eat. Just like feudalism, the oppressed majority will either overturn the authority of the ruling minority, or die trying.
@@drownedzephyrno that’s not socialist you seem to think that capitalist think only to benefit businesses but capitalism is just the right to private enterprise and property and for a business to function it has to maintain the respect of the consumer (you vote with your dollar) if a business isn’t paying you enough you quit if you quit the business loses money so they have to pay you fairly that’s not communism that’s a agreed upon arrangement where you get money and in exchange they get labor that’s capitalism
Unless they mass-market self-reloading auto-targeting sentry turrets with nuclear batteries first.
@@jkeelsnc wdym what were you explaining to him that’s relevant to the comment above
@@DiakosDelvin The ultra wealthy benefit from economic and global stability, both as a means to maintain that wealth, and live their comfortable lives through it.
If things ever got to a point where they're using automated weapons of war to fend off revolts, then the stable world they prosper in is already lost.
"Investors are real excited about replacing workers" We sacrifice EVERYTHING to keep these assholes happy like we need them.
AI could end up becomin human slaves with humans bein freeloaders that don’t have to work at all. And they could be kept from gettin fat my genetic engineerin.
@@_devilfish303 Absolutely not, The reason everything is in the sad state it is now is decisions driven by "providing shareholder value"
@@greg6500What are you yapping about? Investors are really important for an economy. Your just saying that because your jealous they make more money than you.
@@_devilfish303 Decent products and services that make customers happy
@@maxpro751 Fuck the economy, Whether its doing well or not our jobs are no more secure and the pay is the same and personally I could do without the mass layoffs, poverty, extreme gouging and environmental devastation our focus on "investor comfort" provides.
"lets automate everything except for the higher ups making all the dough"
"oh shit noone can afford anything due to every job being automated"
One of their solutions to the problem would be global catastrophic events that leads to de-population. Then it's be easier to run the world with what 1 million people and with machines and ai and high tech.
It'd be like humanity getting out of Alpha Testing phase to now stepping into after cleaning out excess population to then advance higher and all that.
It reminds me of another wall that capitalism ran into in the early 20th century which was temporarily managed by implementing fordism. It worked till the 80s which was another major systemic crash which required the implementation of neoliberalism and the outsourcing of most industrial jobs. I suspect we are now reaching the point where employers will rely primarily on a completely deregulated temporary foreign worker system for low wage jobs while the workers with citizenship will be kept unemployed and transformed into a class of subsidized consumers by replacing social safety nets (using the remaining funds from these programs) with UBI. Foreign policy will be perpetual war as it plays an important role in creating helplessness and instability in less developed countries in order to have greater leverage on their productive forces and drain these countries of their most skilled and educated elements.
Then the AI becomes self-aware and automates them too XD
Their job takes less work than what ours does, imo
@@cellochel1582 CEO is a shit position if elon can be three
It is often said that "People need to work in order to eat"
But I've read in a novel somewhere that "People need to eat in order to work"
It may seem the same, but the emphasis is not.
at a machine shop someone told me he did speed to work more overtime , and then he had to work more overtime to buy speed
That’s why everyone who can afford to should buy farms in tropical areas (year round yield) that produce enough food and other goods for a small family to eat and live indefinitely + surplus in case of disaster. You don’t even have to maintain it, let the plants grow as they will, just make sure that all the plants don’t die out one day or another. All that matters is you have a way to live. Not to be a conspiracy theorist but Bill Gates owns the most farmland out of any private citizen in America… I think he saw it coming
@@Dragonette666 That's funny, kinda. I used to work in a machine shop with a guy that worked all the overtime he could get. Basically 4am to 6pm every day. Turns out he was doing coke and ended up having a heart attack in his 20's. Not worth it.
@@GeneralChangFromDanangthats the kind of thing that our society promotes sadly
The old saying ‘Work to live, not live to work’.
The masses are growing increasingly aware to all this, yet the media will gaslight us with,"Why aren't people having kids?!?"
or worse, forcibly taking our reproductive cells and combining them in a mathematically optimised manner
And at the same time the right wings are fearmongering the mass with the great replacement theory
Yeah it boggles my mind like why do they even need more people in the world then?
"No wage! Only spend!"
Exactly……….
AI is more suited to replacing CEOs than plumbers. An AI CEO requires no salary, no bonuses, no office, and can work 24 hours a day 7 days a week. An AI CEO never gets sick, never takes vacation, and requires no health insurance.
And an AI CEO doesn't need to bloat out the company's stock to make itself rich. You can give it prompts like "don't be a sociopath." And since AIs are so good at misleading people, your AI CEO can still function as a plausible liar.
AI CEOs can be outsmarted by non AI CEOs though.
the ownership class gets all the profits no matter what
@ValerioRhys it's hilarious that you think that
@@zeppie_ Kindly let me know if you find an A.I being sentient enough to start its own business and navigate all the legal requirements to establish a corporation, much less make it a multibillion dollar one.
As Michael Crichton writes, "Scientists are actually preoccupied with accomplishment. So they are focused on whether they can do something. They never stop to ask if they should do something. They conveniently define such considerations as pointless. If they don't do it, someone else will. Discovery, they believe, is inevitable. So they just try to do it first"
The philosophy of "progress" :
Let's just keep going ....... Somewhere
And some are just plain evil. i.e. dr. fauci's muzzled beagles getting eaten alive to test pain levels.
That is a pretty cynical take, imo. Some scientists are like that, sure, but there's like an entire ethical code around how to do science and why.
It's like saying all physicians are just butchers, which I'm sure Dr. Crichton would take issue with.
@@mkgibertjr Look up "Dr Fauci BeagIes" and read the details of that very recent research study and tell me exactly what this 'entire ethical code' is preventing
@@mkgibertjr Look up "Dr Fxuci BeagIes" and read the details of that very recent research study and tell me exactly what this 'entire ethical code' is preventing
If everyone’s jobs are taken then everything should be free. The whole point of things costing money is your paying for someone to stop doing what they want and do a specific action. If there’s no one taking time out to do specific actions then you shouldn’t need money.
Star trek future?
Exactly, get rid of money. The hell with it.
Machines cost money to upkeep and run. Nothing is free under capitalism, especially not capital. What your describing can't really exist unless we all promise to be very nice and share, which would be cool but too many people are greedy. And every other system gets it's own CIA special on why it sucks and why you should be afraid because it's not capitalism.
@@strawberry.waterswithout money it wouldn't cost money to keep the machines running. Just invent machines that automatically keep other machines running.
@@Idkpleasejustletmechangeit "I used a machine to upkeep a machine..."
The thing with the videogame market is that" whales" aren't exactly just a bunch of rich people playing. They're also a lot of people with gambling addiction playing games specifically designed to exploit their weaknesses like an unregulated casino would, and sink them into financial ruin.
True, I bankrupted myself buying cryptokeys in Black Ops 3 back in 2016
True, I don't know how many people have work addiction though
that is already accounted for TBH. There is a trend of people buying luxury brands despite not having the kind of money you'd expect of their normal consumers. That doesn't have the gambling issues though (yet)
also CCGs, Blind Boxes and gachapon (from which Gacha games get the name from) are RL collectables and also employ gambling as the MO
@@Sx-xy2zi literally almost no one.
@@masque9446you have soft hands brother if you never saw a workoholic
Don't know why AI is such a big deal when most CEOs could be replaced by a six sided die or magic 8 ball.
yeah, ceo's are expensive, i think they should be replaced by ai first and foremost
@@bruh_8129 imagine a CEO replacing their HR department with an AI and telling it to figure out who to fire in order to save the most money... and then they get a pink slip, citing that their bonuses are costing the company too much.
Underated comment
CEOs should be paid at the same rate as the companies lowest paid employee by law. At the end of their term they get a bonus based on performance factors, like employee retention, employee career growth within the company and normal financial factors. The bonus would be enough to make the job worth it, but not 100 billion dollars or 100 million dollars.
AI could end up becomin human slaves with humans bein freeloaders that don’t have to work at all. And they could be kept from gettin fat my genetic engineerin.
Modern management:
work at company
Ruin company
Quit after 3 years
Go to next company
Rinse and repeat
The Jack Welch strategy.
Golden Parachutes every time....
"Achieving short term profits every quarter results in long term profits." - Literally every CEO...right before they announce they need a bailout.
Also, literally every CEO, right after they've had mass layoffs and cut their staff down by 25%.
AI could end up becomin human slaves with humans bein freeloaders that don’t have to work at all. And they could be kept from gettin fat my genetic engineerin.
AI could end up becomin human slaves with humans bein freeloaders that don’t have to work at all. And they could be kept from gettin fat my genetic engineerin.
@@_IcyCube_and after they get fired they still get a 25 million severance package
“If you think that sounds depressing, then welcome to the channel”
Damn.
Its true though, so many videos iv seen and its just like "So basically we are all F@$!ed". At this point you ether become Super Tech Savy or you become an investor and hope you come out on top. Unfortunately, things are SO BAD at this point its like if you don't start investing the moment your born you will never make enough money to retire.
At least according to Several of videos iv watched. Regardless of what angle you come in at, the whole system is broken. The Rich get Richer, and Poor will continue to live paycheck to paycheck or go into poverty. And all because someone can Profit from other peoples suffering.
Actually welcome to capitalism
@@hugo-garcia you misspelled fiat currency
@@jaywerner8415nah majority of the time it is poorer peoples fault simply by being financially illiterate and they get screwed over bc they sign a credit they shouldnt
🤡🤡🤡 @@dylansmith6078
Elysium is the end-game. All the rich people will have robotic helpers, great healthcare, and beautiful walled gardens of Eden to enjoy. The masses? Well….that’s what the walls are for.
I think they will just off us.
Wouldn't that eventually last to said masses starting their own economy with blackjack and hookers?
@@CndBcnby the time they're capable of that, they won't need to because AI can just take care of everyone
Tar Boy was a prophecy.
@@CndBcn It's more sinister and more indirect. They are doing 50 different attacks to drop the fertility rate and make sure no one is procreating. It takes 1 or 2 generations. Very gradual and the masses distracted by social media, video games, p0rn, streaming services, consumerism, etc. don't even notice.
As a kid, I always figured the ideal utopia is where machines do all the work and humans have unlimited free time for leasure and art and culture and health. It turns out, unfortunatly, that the system we have in place doesn't allow for that. We don't work to maintain society, we work to maintain ourselves.
I'm pretty sure an easy change like UBI will make this ideal utopia come true
@@punchthecake82 What's UBI?
@@ivankovach8224 universal basic income
Universal Basic Income@@ivankovach8224
The UBI what?
The biggest bang for the buck… err how to “maximize shareholder value” would be to replace the entire executive board at any major company with AI.
We joke about it, but I’ve found AI to be more useful at those type of things, “idea discussion” than anything else. Instead of hiring those expensive “big three” consultants, use LLM to consult on business decisions and brain storming strategies. Trying to use AI to replace doctors, lawyers and other knowledge types of things that business people are trying to push seems silly because at the end of the day someone in those fields would have to sign papers to be responsible for the decisions made in court. The same set of problems self-driving cars face, those fields will face as well. Business consulting? Not so much.
THIS!!! Seriously, C-Suite pay is the biggest money sink for any company 😂
I think you've missed what the Actual job of an executive is. Sure, there's the technical aspect, which could be replaced by a machine, but more than that, it is an acting gig. You're job as "Executive of Overseas Ventures-Europe Branch" is not to run the business well or poorly, it's to make enough money to make yourself look successful, and buy accolades so that when you meet with someone for a business agreement, they aren't just meeting with Person, they're meeting with Dr. Person Esq., who shows up in a private limousine, and has 2 secretaries that do nothing but write down everything you say and fetch you things that you can reach yourself. Then when you sit down and negotiate, the person on the other end of the table is nervous, losing their shit at meeting A Bigwig(tm) and then they promise to cut your company a deal because they want to learn how to be you, and they think they can become you by doing business with you.
Tl;Dr they're actors acting successful to make other companies want to work with them to see how to be like that. We're all striving to be Batman or James Bond and if you can pretend to be James Bond better than the person across from you, you win their business. Companies make money to make better James Bond Cosplays, or they make money to become Wayne Enterprises and just buy out the companies they want to work with
No, it would not be good decision. You all cheer for having management replaced with AI? Ok. Can you see how it can go wrong? Think about it. Would you want your boss to be AI? What are the ways it can go wrong? And thats not even speaking of how insecure that is. Both from the regular perspective and from the existential dangers from AI perspective.
The executive board is made up of the largest share holders....😖
it's kinda what we are seeing in the car markets all over the world, car manufacturers have basically doubled the price of their products and killed the production of budget friendly vehicles, they are basically catering the more profitable top 10% and everybody else is left on used cars
That's a bold strategy, let's see if it will pay off for them in the long run
@@aitoluxd cars are a necessity in places like USA so I doubt they'd face consequences
Wow, reminds me of japanese and korean mobile videogames that also cater exclusively to whales (the top 10% of the paying customers) but instead of being necessary in a country due to corruption (that they call Lobbying Groups) gachagames prey on gambling addiction.
I wonder when the auto industry is going to lootbox their premium vehicles. Seems like it'd make a killer profit and shareholder value.
Then the government comes in with a cash for klunkers programs that further reduce the supply of used cars.
@@aitoluxd hard to tell, surely the market will be saturated of damn SUVs and trucks at some point or another, what has changed compared to the past is that stuff is made more by order now rather than expected demand so they can't fail too hard, they have also moved a lot of the production of components in China, even the high value manufacturers so i doubt they will have backlashes in the workforce
It’s hilarious to me that in every futuristic utopia shown in movies and tv. The chefs, maids, and construction workers are all automated with robots and machines.
Yet here we are, watching Ai passing the BAR, getting M.D.s, and inflating the PhD thesis publishers with similar language & jargon.
AI could end up becomin human slaves with humans bein freeloaders that don’t have to work at all. And they could be kept from gettin fat my genetic engineerin.
To win is to exploit every weakness your opponent has, whether it be ethical or not.
As much as I hate to admit it, working a job no longer makes any sense, it's better to ditch everything you know and start taking risks, taking advantage of the clueless, and generally being abusive.
I don't want a future like that, but I don't see any way to fix it, unless our entire government system is rebuilt from the ground up, and both politicians and companies will do EVERYTHING to make it not happen.
@@Not_interestEd- I don’t know about all that, and I don’t agree with the sentiment. I will say I think we can start with real change by electing people who understand the internet and KNOW HOW TO OPEN A PDF!
@@Not_interestEd- who you reply to?
@@Texan_christian1132 probably a bot setting rage-bait/traps for people who are too far right/left.lol
This will end like the introduction of chatbots as customer service:
-CEOs : happy, they cut costs, get more bonus
-Customers: praying to be attended by a real human to solve their issues.
-Workers: most lost their job, and the ones remaining have to deal with extra work and angry customers who just talked to a bot for 30 min and solved nothing.
ai is not perfect if it told wrong information we are doomed
The pricing algorithms are getting increasingly sophisticated too. The reason fast food wants you using the app is so they can set the maximum price consumers are willing to pay. At my local fast food restaurant, I usually order my usual, but lately the cost had gotten too much, so I cut out items from my usual order and stopped visiting for awhile. When I returned, the price had been lowered on the items I removed last time by nearly $2. I think these apps set an individual price for each user and monitors the purchasing data to set the maximum tolerable price per person. I now eat at almost exclusively small restaurants with cash registers and end up saving $10 per meal. Never use the AI pricing apps if you can avoid them.
WOW. I never thought they were doing that. What fast food brand is this? Companies indeed want to push personalized pricing and they do that online all the time.
This is a little bit flat earthy man
@@drac124 Taco Bell. At this one they don’t even let you order at the register anymore. They make you use the kiosk, probably so they can take more data on customer spending patterns.
@@ModularKnight Dude, do you really think they incentivize using the app with deals and points to give you free stuff for no reason?
10$ is still crazy to me, but I shop discounted food. Expires tomorrow? Heck yeah 50% off.
I can believe that though. Actually now that I think about it I remember reading a long time ago, about the time the "Google is always listening" thing was starting, that if you visit a website and leave items in the cart some of the bigger companies will email you price discounts on those items.
Good chance you're correct
This is why I decided to pursue my passion of being a character artist since a year and a half ago, lol. Don’t care if AI takes it or not, I’m still going to,
A. Master the craft
B. Make something successful of it (brand, business, etc.)
Godspeed to you, my dude. Just a week or so ago, my own dissatisfaction with all this AI art bullshit was what drove me to actually draw something for the first time in years.
Hehe
Nsfw
@@landland9056"P0RN0GRAPHY!" - TF2 Spy
Just be careful dude, artist everywhere are being the first real victims of it. God speed
Cyberpunk 2077?
“AI will make money meaningless”- random AI bro
this is also called deflationary money. the value of society is not fixated at things of monetary rather productivity to better mankind. hard concept to understand.
You must be new to the channel if you think money isn't meaningless by now
@@Kaz-qz2oq he was the only person who lived prior to 4th century Roman empire where they traded sheep for shoes...
@@bitcoindaddy1
It’s not that hard; that was literally the entire western world prior to the advent of the world wars and the infiltration of subversive fiscal, financial, monetary and banking policies.
It's true. The endgame of it is resource dominance by the few who control the most capital. Companies will soon be more interested in controlling assets than producing goods or services. And those who do continue to produce, their products and services will be primarily dedicated to other companies, while the public will be left barely afloat by means of a corrupt government, and that's only because the top 0.001% would be worried of arrests.
One major problem with comparing freemium games with anything else is that video games have bizarre qualities not found anywhere else in the economy:
- Digitally released games have effectively no built in scarcity, unlike products requiring real world resources. Labor costs make up most which must be recouped.
- Games have interactivity. Nothing else can use non-payers as content.
Nothing else can imitate that business model.
Freemium Games have artificial scarcity built in to pressure you into buying their overpriced shit by causing FOMO.
Just sayin'
Also there's already research going on about using NFT's (Non Fungible Totems) which means if you buy a skin it will be Unique, only you will have it. As rich people are also interested in playing games I leave it up to your imagination what happens if multiple wealthy people want to have a unique item deliberately because they can.
Gaming with social or economic classes has already been installed.
@@shadowmystery5613 oh, I know. I avoid such games like the plague. Luckily plenty of companies haven't lost their way and are still making quality pay-once games.
The mentality that "New Jobs will always replace the ones lost to Automation" has two big caveats:
1) The new jobs created aren't guaranteed to pay better than the ones eliminated.
2) If you want to keep your job against the pressures of Automation, you lose all negotiating power for pay or work hours. Wage stagnation is inevitable.
We're fucking living in a dystopia already. It's just that it's going to take a couple of more decades of riots and anarchism to make cities look like one.
true, the world is slowly converting into Dystopia
The price of everything in the abstract economy will fall to zero, including labour. The price of technology will be reduced to the price of the materials used to make it. The only things that will have value are land, food and the natural resources that come from land. People will have no jobs, so no one will be able to buy anything. But, to companies, that doesn't make a difference since most companies rely on the government directly or indirectly to keep them running.
The model where you imagine a company paying employees and employees buying from companies, as an infinite cycle, doesn't make sense and is not sustainable. There needs to be money being injected in this loop. The government does that. Most companies are inefficient and just pretend to be productive.
So... how can be people be safe from a world where eveyrthing is extremely cheap but no one has any money because there are no jobs? Well... the government owns all of the land all all of the natural resources to make AI robots, housing and food. Just make sure that, when the economy transitions to this stage, the government will tax very high rates from land owners and give that to the people.
The belief that ‘new jobs will always replace those lost to automation’ overlooks key economic principles. Historically, technological advancements have created more opportunities than they’ve eliminated. While it’s true that new jobs might not immediately offer better pay, they often evolve, leading to higher productivity and eventually higher wages. Instead of fearing automation, we should focus on fostering skills that complement technological advancements. This approach will ensure that we can all benefit from the efficiencies and innovations AI and automation bring. It leads to overall better resource allocation anyways, because I assume you wouldn't want people to be the ones constructing cars physically haha.
The belief that more regulation is going to help is utterly inconvenient for technological advancement and as it has been proven, more state regulation only causes more wage stagnation and other unintended consequences, it just doesn't work.
You wouldn't want to ban printers because they take the jobs of writers would ya?
The software that says you should boil an egg for 60min or tells you its ok to put glue on your pizza instead of tomato sauce isn't going to take your job any time soon. Its just hype to get investors all riled up.
And all that doomsday talk is just humble bragging... "oh no our software is so good it will replace everyone and end the world". Sure buddy
So what you're saying is that there are two classes: the workers, and the private owning class. I feel like some real smart guy in the past had names for those...
I think a deadbeat loser in the 19th century had a name for those yeah...
Lorrrrr.... Looooooooorrrr... fuck I cant remember what it is it's on the tip of my tongue too.
Don't mention him, you'll scare the median voter who has wandered onto the channel and found out the premises are pretty good. Being loud about being left wing is an optical nightmare. We have to use more subtle and psychological strategies to convince people of leftist positions. We gotta tell a great story, and make people feel good, because none of the facts ever have or will matter. People respond to stories and sensationalism. So, we can't mention the guy you're talking about, because his name is sensationalist. McCarthy implanted microchips in all Americans that force them to froth at the mouth with rage when you say his name.
@@thechikage1091Neither socialism nor communism ever worked, cry about it
You mean the aristocracy and the proletariat?
I’ve been saying this for years now, everything corporate america wants to implement on the general public first gets tested in the video game market. Every terrible business practice I’ve seen pop up in the past 15 years has started out as a terrible business practice that got normalized in the video game market years beforehand.
Are you saying that there's a conspiracy between the video game companies and others in the US (global?) economy? Who is orchestrating this and how is this beneficial to the parties involved?
@@AnyVideo999I wouldn't call it "planned", the videogames have less restrictions and produce results faster.
It's one of those things that if they work on small scale, then they'll be shown in large scale eventually.
@AnyVideo999 fashion and toy companies often use Shibuya as a test market. Do you also think the Illuminati is involved in some market research scheme there too anon?
Can you provide an example in which something was tested in the video game market and then normalized after?
@@Xtremekid0623 Subscription services being popularized, software as a service being popularized are the ones off the top of my head.
If the Great Depression told us anything, it's that it's not just the lack of steady income but the fact that men and women were literally 'depressed' because there was nothing they could do for the work force. I like the idea of taking it easy, but we need a purpose in something. A purposeful job.
That assumes that you can only can find purpose in a job. I can think of so much more that I could fill my time with. Actually I am not short of purposeful work - but of money...
Meaning being related to a job is a modern idea and we're driving away from the modern era
I personally don’t need a purpose at work at all. I have SO MUCH purpose outside of it, that all work has ever felt like was a waste of time so that I can get a paycheck at the end of it to fund my actual life, that I actually want to live. I would be happy staying home making art and fostering animals, never working a real day again.
Or u can volunteer like I do . I don't know why people say such stupid things that I need a job for purpose when you can just volunteer and help people. Also .......
@@Futurebound_jpg That tbh just sounds like you picked a job to eat, rather than try to monetize your passion. It seems that is the majority of people, sadly, for various reasons. My situation is much different and my career is my passion, so work for me is fun, most of the time 🙃. This is also partly due to the fact many people are not curious by nature/have no drive to push themselves and willing to ask questions that make them the minority in society.
Based on this the idea of an UBI is to an extent absurd, ignoring the philosophical/ideological debate on how its funded. The biggest thing that will help anyone is just learning the basics of money and its history, even at a surface level, which most don't even know. Simply put: self-empowerment and self-responsibility.
In 2077 they voted my city the worst place to live in America. Main issues? Sky high rate of violence, and more people living below the poverty line than anywhere else.
You from the future?
@@StarboyXL9or cyberpunk. You living in Night City in the future boyo? I’d vote that worst city to live in America too
That's actually crazy dude. Makes me think of Blizzard games, how I would ask for my dad to give me 10 bucks for Christmas to buy SOJs on ebay for diablo 2 or how world of warcraft was a subscription base payment. Even how world of warcraft realms/servers had their own different economies... trippy.
So what's the future like 😂😂😂😂😂😂
Ready player one
Serious question, Fremium only works in videogames because of how videogames require no additional manufacturing or costs to support a larger audience, so supporting free players is dramatically cheaper.
Buy if we are applying this to like, buying couches, housing utilities, etc, are cities gonna start selling *premium* water? *premium* electricity? *premium* furniture so they can show off their gold trim couch to the F2P plebian couch users?
Fremium makes sense in videogames but no sense IRL because real people consume actual resources, not just free steam keys.
Counterpoints:
* Freemium games DO have increased costs to support a larger audience. Servers are not cheap. But yes, they can still scale much more cheaply than for physical goods and such.
* We already kind of have kind of freemium services in the public space, such as libraries, cops, ambulances, storm drains to avoid flooding, and so on. And premium users of these are those who call 911 or ask for specific considerations for their particular needs, who get charged big bills. One could argue that these aren't free for anyone because of the taxes one pays to cover them, however freemium video games also have a fundamental cost people pay: their time, attention, and effort put into creating characters for the whales to play with.
@@goldengriffon servers can be used to support a large audience and cqn ne rented if needed, but not like thousands of people can share the same couch
Ssshh bro don't give them ideas, nothing is too unhinged for a corporatist
But we absolutely have premium water and premium furniture and a ton of shite like plain t-shirts with a gucci tag costing hundreds of dollars.
If the premium is high enough then the price of real life consumables can be assumed as almost nothing, relatively.
The cost of F2P games isn't zero, you still need servers, electricity, devs and infrastructure to keep it going its just that the hosting cost/user is low enough to be thought as free
Another Problem with Freemium is that you have to have a place in the Market, attracting Whales and keeping them is hard, even without whales and normal paying consumers it is hard. That's why the average number of well running games in each genre is about 2-3. And not every genre is fit for a freemium model.
On top comes oversaguration. No matter how good your game is the market (especially mobile) is so full of competition it is very hard to get a spot and even harder to maintaining it
You can actually take AutoGen and automate away most middle-management and even upper-middle management tasks almost on a whim, but it never gets implemented because the middle managers always shoot it down.
Its because its a bad idea. Why would you want to replace management with AI? Cant you see how dangerous it is? Do not root for it.
They protect themselves....for now
Its not implemented becase its not a good idea. Ok, let's replace middle management and upper management with AI. Would YOU like your boss to be AI? Think of what it can lead to? Its not a good idea in the slighest and there are SO many ways that it can fail and eventually lead to something bad. Its human disempowerement.
@@TheManinBlack9054that’s why I think Ai won’t replace all the jobs
The trick here is even freelancers, who could really benefit from having certain tasks automated, won't touch it. It proves that most of the automation argument is just... fictional. We aren't gonna automate away all jobs for the same reason we aren't going to build the Death Star, it wouldn't help humanity. Tech is built in service of humans, not the other way around. I mean, if middle/upper management can be automated away, and low-level workers can be automated away, why isn't Frito-Lay staffed by a CEO and 2 repair people per chip making factory? It's because they don't want to. The humans in the company want other humans in the company to be able to live, and the second the CEO tried to automate away everyone, there would be a lot of "accidental" fires at their factories.
While there are definitely humans who enjoy hurting others, it hasn't been survival of the fittest for millenia. Ever since we figured out what a family is and what friends are, we've wanted to help them. And those bonds are why we don't all just go feral, why tech doesn't automate away everyone, and why society, largely speaking, is against hurting people. This is why tech sensationalism isn't tech reality. Just because we could, doesn't mean we will.
I got this information from RUclips, so it might be a bit off, but they tried a similar experiment in rural India, where the cost of living is lower compared to America's rising food prices. In India, the results were mostly positive. People started focusing more on their physical and mental health, taking better care of their families, and pursuing higher education. The only decline noted was in women's participation, but this was because they chose to take care of their children and families. However, overall performance didn't decrease significantly, likely because the mental health of the working population improved, boosting the productivity of those already working.
Architect here. AI is not the immediate threat to white collar work - outsourcing to india and china is! So many architecture firms are outsourcing work to india and china and laying off lots of entry level and mid level jobs that would go to graduates. Graduates need to complete hours and gain experience to earn their license. What happens when you have loads of college students and graduates jacked to the tits with college debt but completely cut off from the careers they sacrificed so much for? What happens when there are no more licensed professionals, lawyers architects engineers etc.? Answer: total societal collapse, and i am betting on the apocalypse.
That or this becomes the United States of China or India
Which I think will be poorly received
Outsourcing should have been banned 75 years ago. It feels unconstitutional to send well paying jobs overseas to avoid paying American citizens when you own an American company.
Just plan ahead and embrace the inevitable.
@@stereo-soulsoundsystem5070 That's just business, whoever has the cheapest price wins the contract. We just happen to offer the same thing for too much money and it bites back, clearly.
@@extremepsyche3135 yeah, especially when you are a broke students with a lot of debt. The only thing you can plan in this case is how to go down with a bang ...
The automation endgame is that the people who control the robots eliminate everyone else, with just a relative handful of people living in sumptuous luxury. Why keep everyone else around, using up all those resources just to sustain their lives?
The rich people will get the most attractive girls to themselves before doing that. Haha
You have the right idea but that was the point to begin with
The problem is automation also requires lot of money and energy where is it gonna come from
They’re just gonna pay us to make it happen, we gotta keep the wheels churning anyways
They're going to focus all of the resources into discovering eternal life. They're going to get rid of everyone else, because the earth's resources and minerals are finite. How are they supposed to live for 10,000 years if there are other people consuming resources?
It's quite concerning to see how AI and automation are reshaping the job market globally. The universal basic income seems like a temporary solution, but for a sustainable future, perhaps we need a broader societal shift that values people beyond their work.
to the rich a universal basic income will sound like a bargain in comparison to civil unrest.
Universal Income (beyond basic) should be the goal with AI. I rather not work if I don’t have to. What’s the point? I could be spending my time doing something better with my life.
Universal basic income aka the mark of the beast. If you think the people who run the world will give you money for free please see history over the last 100 years.
@@K-MasterGirlHuman greed nature won't let that become a reality.
The poor class will be equally poor and barely living on universal basic income communism while the other class -- the wealthy -- will be thriving on an exclusive capitalism just among themselves.
_"Who's going to buy everything.?"_
Nobody will buy anything. They didn't think that part through. Billionaires think that if they replace all their staff with AI, they can make even more money. That they can just sit around, push a button and watch the money roll in. This shows a basic lack of understanding of economics. It also shows that we as a society need to get over our child-like worship of billionaires.
THANK YOU. ABAB.
THANK YOU! Made me get off my seat from how REAL this comment is🤦♀️
That little story about the photoshop background cutter instead of getting fired got more work was kinda sweet
We just gotta hope more companies have this mindset.
AI could end up becomin human slaves with humans bein freeloaders that don’t have to work at all. And they could be kept from gettin fat my genetic engineerin.
Best case scenario we would all be scientists; worst case scenario corporations cooperate and deliberately stifle competition in order to hire less scientists and we end up with cyberpunk.
scientists will sign non-compete agreements so they can’t join another corporation
Sadly, not everyone is cut out to be a scientist. I have people in my family with dyslexia, dyscalculia and only modest IQ. I care for them but they could not be scientists.
@@2MeterLP thats not even speaking about how AI could do science too. Not saying it can now, but I wouldnt say its impossible, so then what?
@dragonsoldier1829 Illegal in jobs where they are not reasonable. Scientist is exactly the kind of job non-competes were invented for and are still very much legal. It is entirely reasonable not to want your scientists to switch to a competitor and spill the new tech you just spent millions on developing.
That's what they tried to do in places like the USSR, east Germany and Cuba.
Make universities churn out fuckton of engineers and doctors, overeducate the population, and at the end, an engineer (all of them went through 5 year Masters program) earns less that a cashier at a grocery store.
Ever notice how people who already have more money than they could ever possibly use are absolutely desperate to get more?
Everyone is a slave to something...
The painfully rich are enslaved to their wealth
After they get bored with amassing wealth, they start to play a new game: amassing power and control.
Yes... I know such people, it's just sad, and some of them have probably less than 20 years to live. They don't give enough even to their children... you can guess what they give to their employees. On top of that they always think their employees are lazy, they always think when they have bigger profit it's they that they do it, through their superior thinking and when profits go down always lazy and stupid employees are responsible.
@@machupikachu1085 then we get to squid games
@@machupikachu1085 Also jet flights to private islands with young girls.
People are facing a tough retirement. and it's even harder for workers to save due to low-paying jobs, inflation, and high rents. Now, middle-class Americans find it tough to own a home too, leaving them without a place to retire in.
The increasing prices have impacted my plan to retire at 62, work part-time, and save for the future. I'm concerned about whether those who navigated the 2008 financial crisis had an easier time than I am currently experiencing. The combination of stock market volatility and a decrease in income is causing anxiety about whether I'll have sufficient funds for retirement.
The market is not necessarily a rollercoaster if you know your way around the market, there are various opportunities in the present market to accrue good profit, If you are not too savvy with the market, just buy and hold on strong companies with good earnings, or consult with advisors on ETFs and actively managed funds.
That's an intriguing outcome. How can I contact your Asset manager?
I work with Jessica Lee Horst as my fiduciary advisor. Simply look up the name. You would discover the information you needed to schedule an appointment.
Thank you for this tip. It was easy to find your coach. Did my due diligence on her before scheduling a phone call with her. She seems proficient considering her resume.
Everyone always skips a crucial detail that separates AI and generalized machine automation from past automation. Past automation fulfilled a specific task, and every task needed a separate machine. That meant automation occurred slowly, and only at the pace new things could be made and new industries popped up (no one was automating industries that didn’t exist yet.
This wave of automation has the potential to not only automate existing jobs, but ALSO automate any new industries that pop up as a result. There’s no “the call center shut down, so people moved on to the next service industry job”. It’s now “We’re sorry, but all new tasks will be handled by automation. That new field that just popped up? Automated.”
Labor value is about to plummet, and no amount of specialization or new industry will come into existence to replace it that can’t already be automated.
The problem with this is that for AI doing physical tasks as I understand it, it still needs to be trained on something, be it Reddit posts or picture or physical activity or any kind of data. So, if something like this happens you might need to hire people to do the work to train the AI. If people are smart, they will refuse to do this, and then probably the startup probably goes full steam ahead with irrelevant to barely comparably data to just do the job, but inefficiently. So eventually, they will be stifling their own innovation in by mindlessly pursuing GAI, which we have no idea can emerge under current computational technology.
You are forgetting one tiny detail. Computers we have are not suitable for AI. The whole world is unprepared. It is easy to write software, but replacing hardware everywhere will take many decades and many people won't even bother as they go their own way and use simple systems. AI has no chance of replacing even 20% of today's jobs. Altman knows that his product is good for nothing accurate, so tries to beat Google, he has no idea what the bullshit could be used for in order not to cause a disaster, the same for Meta and their LLama. LLMs have no future, no matter what they tell you today and what they want you believe to keep the stock market prices high. Then there is data privacy issue. I have banned all the AI bots I have seen in my website logs over last months. Many others have done the same. The AI will soon be starved of valuable new data. The end is nigh and the bullshitters from OpenAI and the Wall Street know it. Pull your money if you've have it in big 7 stocks because reckoning is on it way ...
@@Xeno056 bullshit. you can hire 100 people to train the AI for 1 year and pay them enough to set them for a life. who would refuse that deal when the alternative is to just starve tomorrow? meanwhile you got an AI that will work forever and replace tens of thousands of jobs.
OpenAI is already predicting bankruptcy LMAO
@@MrDoboz One of the biggest lessons the tech industry has learned is adopting the subscription/service-based model. There's virtually no such thing as a pay-one-time product anymore. You purchase a service contract that comes with support for as long as you continue pay. You already see this with existing A.I. You don't pay $XXX for ChatGPT, you pay $XX/mo to use ChatGPT. Corporations will either pay services to use other companies' A.I. or have internal teams design and maintain proprietary A.I systems. Either way corporations will be continuously paying someone's exorbitant salary if they want to use A.I.
Here’s the thing. Labor cuts to QA/QC have already been one of the go-to cost cutting strategies of the last 10 (20?) years. So there are few people left to police AI outputs-and the CEOs who already laid off QC aren’t going to know when AI needs supervision and when it doesn’t. Until the doors start falling off, anyway. Less of an issue, granted, in video games than in, say, plane, train, and car manufacturing.
Yeah we've already seen recent examples of what happens when companies get rid of all of their talented programmers. Yikes.
Yet another reason why product and service quality has declined so precipitously over the past 5 years+. All while prices have been increased dramatically (and no it hasn’t been due to inflation or logistical issues). We’re in a hostile corporatocracy and it’s only getting worse.
Safety critical systems cannot replace their labor with automation because it has the opposite effect - no one wants to invest into a plane/train that's been built from scratch by robots because there's no one who would feel safe riding those.
AI could end up becomin human slaves with humans bein freeloaders that don’t have to work at all. And they could be kept from gettin fat my genetic engineerin.
@@pierrerobertjimenez7802it's just baseline fascist economic policy in the most direct and literal sense possible
The mentality that “someone else will buy it” will work for some time, it will hit a wall eventually though. Eventually most people will stop engaging and the only person for a rich ceo to sell to will be themselves.
The historical aristocracy in my country had no upper limit of how many oranges, silver thread, hangarounds and pheasant dinners they consumed.
At that point people will resort to stealing…
"You will own nothing and be happy." - World Economic Forum
Basically you just a livestock. But, who's gonna "eat" you?
thanks /ews
I remember reading a short story a long time ago, about robots and automation.
All production was automated such that no one had jobs, and businesses had no one to sell their stuff.
The solution? Society automated consumption, too.
That's right. Robots replaced workers *and* consumers.
I think that's an Asimov story. Great stuff.
"modern problem required a modern solution" ah method
And what happened to humans?
What humans? @@mayank8387
@@mayank8387they started to live 😊. These robots buyers bought the parts they needed to work, and they worked on the part robots needed. It’s like you would build a wal just to then have a wal to break it down. You filling a bucket just so you would have a bucket to empty afterwards. Doesn’t make a lot of sense 🤷♂️.
I think the story is more hypothetical.
Contradiction of capitalism, the consumers who you need to buy stuff are also the workers you dont want to pay wages, which leads to less consumption
It's interesting to see how everyone mocked Marx's ideas, but he predicted the final stage of capitalism perfectly.
If we go back to gaming the developers of a game called Dwarf Fortress looked into making the in game economy "capitalist"
What resulted is that immediately wealth disparity started, critical workers of the economy were unable to afford proper accommodation because the lower rungs of the economic ladder couldn't afford to buy what they sold, and as production started to dwindle the only way to keep the economy going was to have the lowest tier of workers literally haul rocks from one side of the fortress to the other to be able to afford to participate in the economy and buy things from the crafters who could then afford to live.
So quite literally the only way for the economy to function was to have the lower class get paid to move rocks back and fourth between two stockpiles to earn money for doing literally nothing. Though it would honestly just make more sense to simply skip the pointlessly hauling rocks around bit and just give them the money to buy things they want or need.
@@envahanime6220 Did he predicted that few rich would buy everything and that we would be eating crumbs?
@@SherrifOfNottinghamBut money would have no value if no one has a job.
I've seen this happening in China during & after the Covid lockdowns.
Here's what's gonna happen: as humans become less and less necessary, we'll invent more and more meaningless jobs and tasks to keep ourselves occupied and have just enough money to buy stuff. Don't believe me? It's already been happening for decades. That's what David Graeber called "BS jobs" in his 2018 book, before we were even discussing AI taking over everything. I wouldn't be surprised if these useless jobs already represent 30, 40 or even 50% of the work force. Now imagine if it was 99%. We're heading towards a truly dystopian future.
At that point, just make every commodity free at a controlled amount and give everyone healthy parks, recreation, and non-essential items. But of course, the billionaires would not want such utopian system to happen.
What is the point though?
AI could end up becomin human slaves with humans bein freeloaders that don’t have to work at all. And they could be kept from gettin fat my genetic engineerin.
So, communism?
Who is inventing these meaningless jobs? Not the workers, they can keep themselves occupied just fine without the bullshit job. But they need air, water, food, shelter, and social connection, and to get that they need to do something. That can be a job or a set of cooperatives, but either way it will require work. In the common case of a job that means someone is willing to pay you for what you do. So if people are paying you for a meaningless job, then it is the company that is creating these meaningless jobs. What would their purpose be for that? Companies are designed to be profit-driven, they would not waste money like that. So you're either claiming that workers are self-destructive, or that companies are self-destructive.
This is pretty on point. One thing I have noticed is that it is clear big business no longer cares about its general customer base. And this is because those people have become something different for them. They have become more like crops to be harvested or an asset to maintain. This is because of the very thing brought up in this video and that is the fact that investors have become their new customers. They put more into a company than the general populace. So as long as they can make the company look good by finding ways to get the populace stuck with them (like becoming a difficult to leave standard or making themselves a perceived or real necessary service) they can keep going despite lower quality of life from their "crop".
THANK GOD. Finally I'm not the only person talking about this obvious thing. Seriously, if NO ONE HAS A JOB, no one can buy the crap corporations are making with AI.
Rome o 2
Jeff Bezos can buy a private space tour.
You didn't even watch the video lol
AI in itself it's not bad, it's actually wonderful. It's just another step in the increase of productivity. We could reach a point where machines could do all the work for us. Yet the contradiction you are pointing out it's very real. Capitalists need workers to earn a lot of money to buy their products, but they also need to pay them the least possible to profit as much as possible. This contradiction just can't be solved in the current economic system, either we supersede it or we're doomed.
@@enzoamaya5110 Not to nit pick but while thier unrestrained personal greed may compel them to pay the least while charging the most this actually kills or stifles growth while introducing endless avoidable boom-bust cycles from un tempered short term thinking steering everything.
In an environment with actual *compitition* for market share as well as *healthy competition* for labor profits cannot simply be maximized without being undercut by a company taking 10% less profit per item in order to sell more than twice as many can make twice as much profit.
But today's Jack Welch pattern sociopath CEO knows its easier to be a sea of monopolies and let the consequences fall on the poor and unborn.
ok let's play this logic through. You are in the 'owning class', you have five homes and you rent them out. You almost exclusively rent to 'poor' people who cannot afford a home. Those people lost their jobs so they cannot afford to privately rent. This means your income stream just dried up. Additionally most companies can use AI but lots of companies sell products to poorer folks i.e. Coke, MacDonalds, Walmart etc do not focus their products and services on a 1% millionaire class.
Not having a workforce that can afford services just ruins large portions of capitalism. UBI is effectively a lifeline not for the workers but for capitalist states.
Actually, you are not 'owning class' if any of your assets involves dept.
We already went through this during industrialization in late 19th and 20th century. Suddenly agriculture and production of goods became 100 times more efficient and 90% of farmers and craftsmen lost their jobs. There was high unemployment for a few years. But then people just found new jobs and everything went back to normal, with average people being richer than ever before.
Now it seems obvious to us that the 90% of farmers just found new jobs in industries and services. But it wasn't obvious to those farmers that in a few years they'll just find different jobs. They didn't have the concept of factory, office, or service work. But they still managed to find these new jobs eventually and the economy wasn't destroyed by industrialization.
So a similar thing will surely happen with this 2nd industrial revolution of AI and even higher automation. Rich owners will just invent new jobs or expand the ones that are currently niche. In a few years average people will be doing jobs they never considered or couldn't even imagine before. Maybe the rich will want a lot more private butlers and maids? Maybe more human art and entertainment? Maybe a lot of AI trainers will become necessary for AI to not degenerate by consuming only other AI content?
If there are free hands to work, then the entrepreneurs will find something for them to do. Because a wasted potential worker is worse than having to pay workers. Someone just has to come up with something for them to do.
@@med2904 But in this case people cant find new jobs.
AI robots can be used to produce new AI robots, Also maintenance can be done by another robot.
Even software programming can be done using existing AI coders like the Microsoft copilot , So no new jobs created by these companies in ground level only very few research level jobs are reserved for humans, Also some in the entertainment industry and 100% in escort business but for girls
@@med2904 "We already went through this during industrialization in late 19th and 20th century. Suddenly agriculture and production of goods became 100 times more efficient and 90% of farmers and craftsmen lost their jobs. There was high unemployment for a few years. But then people just found new jobs and everything went back to normal, with average people being richer than ever before."
Actually, the average person became worse off during the Industrial Revolution, as millions of people left the countryside to live in dirty, crowded, disease-ridden cities. The average height and life expectancy of the working class went down as their diet and living conditions deteriorated. The lot of the proletariat didn't improve until late in the 19th century, when the ruling classes suddenly realised they had a vested interest in the health and well-being of their workers. You can't win on the battlefield with runty, malnourished soldiers, and you're not going to be very productive if your workforce can barely think or read. Social "welfare" was less about altruism than it was about being competitive with your neighbours and staving off revolution.
The only people who got richer during the Industrial Revolution were the owner class (the people who owned the mines and factories) and the emerging middle class, which was a relatively small part of the population until the 20th century. For most people, industrialization was a gruesome, wrenching experience which is why socialism looked so attractive to so many. I imagine that even the most die-hard advocate of capitalism today, if they could be transported to Manchester or Paris in 1848, would recognise the appeal of socialism after seeing what life was like for the urban poor under early capitalism.
Reminds me on the imagination of a feudal lord who is counting his food stocks behind the safe walls of his castle, while the peasants, who actually produced the goods, are starving outside.
Crazy how companies now are scrambling to try to fix a problem they themselves created back in the 1950s
It's a problem with capitalism. It's profitable to cut costs by paying employees less, but if everyone is paid less, then the average person can't afford to buy as much, causing profits to go down, leading to an economic disaster.
Ouroboros basically
@@aRandomPerson... almost like there's a tendency for the rate of profit to fall
@@aRandomPerson... This is the summary of this goddamn fast and all over the place video I guess.
@@aRandomPerson... The companies want all other companies to pay their employees MORE except for themselves so that they can greatly benefit from huge profits while paying low wages.
*The economy is failing bc ppl aren't buying our stuff, we need to pay them more so they can buy more stuff*
Company 1: Ok, you guys do it
Company 2: I'm not doing it, you do it!
Every family has a person who breaks the chian of poverty in their house hope you become That one, I pray anyone reading this will be successful in life
To be a successful person in life require him or her of hard work and time
The thing about successful is working towards it and not going the other way round
Investment is the key to achieving success with the current economic crisis slowing down business aww
Talking of been successful I think I'm blessed if not I wouldn't have met someone who is as spectacular as Ava Brenda Harry
Wow 😲I know this lady mentioned here . She's really good with and on her job. She's helped a couple of families and individuals' finances
I don't understand the end game of full automation. Don't most businesses sell to the very people vulnerable to having their jobs replaced? Who am I making these fully robot made shirts for? What is UBI going to tax if none of these businesses have customers anymore? The ultra wealthy? The very people that need customers to stay wealthy? Those very customers that don't exist anymore? Is automation just economically self defeating?
yes, you understood, think of the movie elysium, it is going in that direction, that, or mars
it is a very stupid idea
Money is a measure of power and control. When they split up all of the power and control, they don't need money.
No, for example in my country there are a lot of factories which make things for rich customers abroad, not for our market. So business don't sell things to the people who make the things, business sell where there is bigger profit to be made.... they don't need people, just profit.
@@Slav4o911 1. Not all or even most businesses don't make luxury products
2. What businesses do those rich people run? Who are their primary customer?
It's a big economic chain and if you go down the line, you'll find that the small customer is the foundation of the economy. Cut them out of the economy, and the house of cards will collapse. They are the zooplankton of food chain.
Capitalism is always on brink of breaking
Need I remind you what happened to the elite in France when no one could afford to buy bread.
People are eating too much bread in America
@@JohnMcAfee-se9ms They were referring to the French Revolution, John.
@@paulschell2712 i think his point is we're nowhere near that dire, no matter the hyperbole
shhhh, do not remind them. let's just let history repeat itself. also let french educate the world in the ways of protest, this seems to be one thing they really are good at
well when the french revolution happened the elite didn't have thousands of armed security bots that won't join the cause against them. But in the future these robots could exist
The problem is not the lack of things for people to do, but innervation in education. In the last dozen or so years, most companies have stopped educating employees, and have convinced them of the need to improve their qualifications outside of working hours without any guarantee of the usefulness of these certificates. However, the human psyche has limits on how many times you can let yourself down.
We need to put together a cumulative list of companies that would rather use AI instead of hiring real workers, and just stop buying from them. My philosophy is this: If they won’t hire humans, they don’t need our human money.
They should make an AI assistant to teach the CEO how to clean his own bathroom 😂
They should make an Ai Robot as the CEO so there aren’t any mistakes
That's already doable
@@lionedheartThen the AI realizes that humans were the mistake all along LOL
"lol learn to code" artists have been told 2 years ago.
"lol learn to plumb" programmers have been told 6 months ago.
Those jobs are still here for now, but those who just dismiss the problem with "just learn a new job lol", have you considered that your supposedly "AI-proof" job might not be safe from a job market where there's a massive excess of workforce available with no alternatives (as they have been automated), which your employer can now use against you to accept worse work conditions or be replaced by armies of desperate people which job was "lol so unnecessary in first place since it got automated"?
Oh, and by the way, jobs "created by AI" eventually get automated as well. It's not exactly easy to try specializing in a job that is immediately obsolete 6-12 months later.
The only real "democratisation" AI is projecting on the current situation is that we will all be miserable the same, except a very tiny few, if we let companies run this circus without proper regulations.
Many people are miserable at their jobs. Maybe being relieved of that work will be good for them.
@@JohnMcAfee-se9ms Oh, I agree with you. I did 10 years of metal working factory, enough to know what you're talking about.
I'm not saying we should stop AI from taking away jobs. But we should either fight to ensure meaningful jobs still exist (and not just the dreadful ones as the only ones remaining. AI right now is taking away mostly appealing jobs), or that if really all jobs are gone, to guarantee some form of satisfying lifestyle for everybody, not just the ones controlling the AI.
Can't wait till those "lol get a real job, not art" type of AI bros jobs getting replaced by AI themselves
Marxists call this "the reserve army of labour"
the trades are already going to be flooded with people chasing "the smart job" until they no longer make money anymore either
This hit close to home. I graduated with a graphic design degree a year ago and finally got a job a few months ago (though it was much less design and more of just image work). The moment we started using AI to speed up some edits, management was talking about outsourcing overseas. Not even a month after they laid me off just as they changed their workflow to best fit the needs of the cheaply paid overseas workers.
Pretty sure I'm screwed.
Gen Z is screwed. Thank the boomers.
All of us are screwed
This doesn’t make sense at scale. As the money needs to be representing something. If no one has money, money won’t have value. Also what would be the value producing assets? Most of the time the money is made off the masses.
I mean, look at corporate offices that were valued at absurd numbers get sold off in bankruptcy for pennies on the dollar. Something is only worth what another person will pay for it in the end. “Market value” goes both ways.
@@stchaltin yes but if no one you knows uses or has money you aren’t going to see it as valuable when you get some of it. Most people probably wouldn’t accept it. An office space for example has a function, you could maybe also turn it into something else like a studio, or a warehouse, or an apartment. money without value has no other function.
@@nickhowarthify Yeah, I’m with you there. I guess Weimar made some good usage of bills as wallpaper and produce wrappers though, after the value of their currency fell beneath that of generic paper material.
i wouldnt mind if we eliminate money altogether. we just limit how much resources people can take (everything is free). That way its fair for everyone. The problem is how we transition to get there.
@@jacky79322 regardless of contribution? In capitalism people are meant to be paid the most for the biggest contribution. But they don’t.
Just as Hbomberguy said:
"Sell their houses to Who, Ben? Fucking Aquaman!?'
But extrapolated to Finance.
Just buy up the land from the serfs, bulldoze their hovels and build a super mansion to sell to the rich. Convince the poor to stop reproducing because they can’t afford it, more resources left for the rich who remain. Get robots to serve as modern slaves. Sounds like a plan!
Corporations and foreign adversaries will own the houses. The peasants will just be renters.
"Own nothing and be happy"
- WEF
They don’t need to seek if they rent it out
@@charles9571 If they were capable of math they would know that the peasants won't be able to afford rent either.
He assumes that the wealthy will need money. He does that because he is stupid.
This seems to be the one aspect that the wealthy & CEOs missed.
If you destroy the middle class, you have no economy.
They're sacrificing the economy to become the new nobility. They don't care about the economy anymore, just pure power and control.
The middle is already destroyed LOL
Money is just a measure of power. When they have all the power amongst them, they won't need money.
Aristocracy
@@machupikachu1085 But how does this power work without a monetary system?
Here in Finland, people's wages and incomes have not been raised for years and this development (with inflation) can be seen in the current situation where Finland has "Norwegian prices and Romanian wages" which is why daily goods and grocery stores are collapsing soon because customers do not have enough money to pay for the rising prices. And yet some just arrogantly shrug their shoulders and state that "there is no need for supermarkets because farms exist", but they don't understand that life becomes much more difficult if there are no stores to buy daily goods and groceries. And this development started in Finland all the way before AI when Nokia collapsed and drop the Finnish economy with it. But it is also due to political decisions to improve Finland's "competitiveness" in order to attract companies to move their factories and production from Asia to Finland.
They brought factories and production to Finland and it made the Finnish economy _worse_? I doubt the plan was allowed to come to fruition, because that makes no sense at all
@@CyrilCommando
No need for any sabotage; the idea that factories would move from Asia, centre of the world, to frozen Finland instead of say, Germany, is in and of itself stupid.
@@CyrilCommando The intention is that this would eventually happen someday in the floating near future, but it has not happened yet because Finnish taxation and wages aren't yet low enough to compete with Asian taxations and wages and attract factories and production to move to Finland. Instead, it has so far only managed to get cafes, restaurants, barbers, cinemas and specialty shops such as clothing stores and flea markets to close their doors permanently or go bankrupt.
Don't worry, Finland joined NATO at the midst of Russia-NATO tensions rising to a new high since the Caribbean crisis, so prices would be our least concern soon
suuuuuure bro, have you been in Latvia? :D
Guess when we can no longer afford McDonald's, we'll just have to eat the CEO ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Well they do say "Eat the Rich" for a reason.
Poor nutritional value, mostly empty calories, old low-quality meat…
I see little difference 🥩 🥩💀💀😵😵🤢🤢🤮🤮
"let's eat the rich, i heard they taste like chocolate" - Sub Urban "Candyman"
So the future is just a bunch of rich people living on a fully automated space station and everyone else is just in a giant shanty town.
Nice.
Ever watched Alita: Battle Angel or Elysium? Pretty much a window into the future.
Quaint of you to assume that they won't just engineer a series of events to remove the vast majority of the useless eaters.
Ever watched Love, Death & Robots on Netflix? The episode 1: the 3 robots show exactly that. And the billionaires are all dead because some system failure.
ever watch saving private ryan? has nothing to do with this conversation, but i'ts a good movie
Nope, far from it.
I work in customer support within financing and we have an AI chat bot. Nearly every single customer I have spoken to has complained that it is pure garbage, so more work for me .... Incidentally, I took this job since my previous profession as a technical translator was decimated by AI, very few assigments available and they are all clean-up jobs for AI-translated tripe. Shit you not.
Just was trying to talk to 'someone' for customer support and it was clearly garbage. I always prefer a person who understands what I'm trying to say.
If you're in Canada you should really show your boss the court ruling saying that a chat-bot response is the same as information posted on the website. Meaning the company is legally liable if it says something. Runkle Of The Bailey did a video on it.
Have you considered that the customers who _don't_ encounter any issues with the chatbot are probably not going to end up talking to you?
@@daoud1256I'll take skynet over some unintelligible citizen of Mumbai who can barely speak English any day.
@@somdudewillsonwe dont have enough info to say if its correct or not
Is the ai terrable and everyone needs help from a real person
Or is it pretty good and only a few need that help
There isnt enough info to tell
Working in 3PL, you see the cyclical nature of the economy all in the same building. A printer manufacturer ships to the corporate office of a polycarbonate supplier who ships to a factory of a washing machine manufacturer who ships to major appliance retailers and so on. Every organization depends on the other in the grand scheme, and that includes their employees both in terms of their needs at work as well as their needs outside of work. Corporate types are suffering delusions when they pressure the organizations they pay to reduce headcount but maintain their own jobs. They imagine a world where AIs will send them Excel files. Somehow they alone will be granted a reprieve to collect a salary doing something that's easily automated.
can confirm
all the while that very position they're sitting in is actually the one that would benefit the most from A.I, as it mostly doesn't involve menial labor and thus can be done with a program and not an entire machine.
they're confident in keeping their job, yet it's the most easily replaceable one.
The reason that CEOs are not concerned about billions of unemployed people unable to buy products is because they know that those people will no longer be alive.
Pefer that over living
A system that revolves around exploitation of human labor can't exist without human labor to exploit, so it has to change or fail.
Humanoid robot labor.
@@JohnMcAfee-se9ms robots will also discover labour rights some time in the future
@@erkinalp Nah, you make them smart enough to do repetitive tasks but not smart enough to think for themselves. The perfect worker.
up there, nobody is talking about human labor. just numbers. once they see that a robot makes more and asks for less then a slave, they will just choose the robot and get rid of the slave. they are not evil, they don't want anyone die working there. they just don't give a shit.
@@snark567 there is no such level of intelligence; there's either perfectly dumb or smart enough to think for them
Not only can’t robots buy stuff, but they also can’t pay taxes. How would that work?
That's a really great point
The Spinning Jenny didn't pay taxes or buy stuff because it was a machine. An AI/robot tax for the owners would be a good plan, though.
Sure they can. Well not the robots, but the owners of the robots. It just so happens that the easiest thing to tax in the last 100 years was the employer-employee relationship, and labor income. Because that was a large part of the economy. So all the other forms of taxes are afterthoughts or don't exist, depending on country (corporate taxes, sales tax/VAT, land tax, property tax).
But that wasn't always so, and doesn't have to be always so in the future. Before the industrial revolution, the main forms of tax were land and property taxes, and revenue based taxes usually paid in commodities, like taking a certain percentage of a harvest. Contrasted with the profit based taxation of not only corporations, but capital income in general.
You could tax a number of things that you need for robots/automation more highly than today. Factory floor area, electricity use of industrial and commercial locations, a flat yearly tax on any robot exceeding a certain defined level of autonomy etc.
If AI becomes advanced enough what would stop the govt from giving every robot/AI instance a passport? Use serial numbers instead of names.
Government has a monopoly on the use of force. It will always find a way to take what it wants or needs. Death and Taxes
You could replace 99% of directors with AI right now and things would run better.
I'm afraid they wouldn't.
Suuuure...
Directors? No. Managers, though… you might actually be onto something.
Depends on how that AI is trained. Garbage in, garbage out.
@@Markadown And how is that different than people?
Whats going to happen is this: ex employees will start new competing companies that dont use AI or robots. And pepple will begin to support and work for them. Comapnies that do replace their workforce will quickly realize how bad of an idea it was and either collapse or go back to hiring real workers.
Let's hope your right...
I don't think so, competing human companies will likely lack the kind of efficiency AI companies will have. In an empoverished society, most can't afford to pay more than minimum price. Luxe is one sector, though, where human labor will still be valued no matter what.
That's what I was thinking too. Boycotting ai.
Hope you are right
That’s the first thing that popped into my head too
Every company is going to assume that people will get their money by working for some other company that isn't as cutting-edge as them.
Yup! Tragedy of the commons, only with people instead of grass.
The truth of the matter is the economy has already been switched to a model not to dissimilar then the economic model 16th century spain have. Buisnesses already aren't actually doing that much business with consumers anymore. Don't believe me? Try to talk with them. Even if you offer something that is a complete net positive to them. They'll never pick up for the phone because businesses are only doing business with businesses, and other rich people. The question of who will buy stuff? THe answer is not really anyone, if they don't need you. They are just going to leave your ass to die on the street like they already did to millions of Americans.
And yes this economic model is not only unsustainable, but its completely inferior to the one we used to have.
This dark triad disabilities need be exposed. They have problems with power.
i've seen this being a tip worker. Lower income patrons demand more work for you and tip less, so, as you gain experience and get into better restaurants, you do substantially less work for way more money. You only want to be in a place with high end clients or you bust your ass for nothing.
That's what big business is doing.
i see
This. Have a business where I weed out the loser and keep the winners.
The fact that restaurant owners have convinced the people to pay the salaries of their workers instead of them just paying the server themself is the real trick. Imagine a boss actually saying their worker is poor can you tip them well? All this instead of them pocketing your money and leaving the worker to starve or beg the customer for money.
@@chada75 if i ever work for a small business, i would tell the owner in his face: i do not want to be liked by you nor be your friend. i am here to make YOU money. the minute i stop filling your pockets, i suck and need to be kicked to the curb. in exchange, compensate me handsomely. that's it.
@@kellharris2491 Thank you for the political BS, we're not discussing Marx vs Proudhon vs capitalism, we're talking about what happens in the current system.
The thing about that basic income test that's a problem to me is that it's just way too short.
I've been chronically ill for most of my life to the point of being unable to work. The one or two hours a day I can get my body to produce labor all have to be spent on basic hygiëne and preparing meals.
But luckily I live in a country where people like me get an income to survive off of and live a relatively okay life.
So I've basically been living with a UBI that's only selectively given out.
Now, because of when my illness started taking hold, I was able to finish most of highschool and be thinking of where to go with my career when everything collapsed.
And to be quite honest, the first few years of this, outside of the part where I hated being sick, I was kind of enjoying just getting money to live off of without needing to work.
But as time has been going forward it's starting to seem like a worse and worse deal to me. At this point I don't dream of having a dream in some interesting career or anything anymore, I just dream of being able to work.
Not being able to contribute to society, and the subtle ways in which that affects every part of my interactions with other people is just painful. And even outside of the approval of others, now that I've learned to manage my symptoms well enough, one of my biggest challenges each day is keeping myself from trying to do too much. Because I want to work, I want to produce some form of value, be a part of society and help out in whatever way I can.
So the way I see it, UBI might see in a dip in how much people will work for a little while, but eventually, it will start going up again, because people will get sick of sitting on their asses all day and want do something with their time.
Something to produce value, gain respect from their peers, and be an active participant in their society. Sure, for some people this might be art. But for others this might be bartending, running a grocery store, or tending to a farm, or even being a doctor.
The only difference being, that now people won't have the pressure of finding any job at all just to get stuck in it simply because they need the money to live and it draining all of their time and energy. Instead they can work on themselves while on UBI and then study for and find a job in the field they want. Not for an economic incentive, but a personal and sociological one.
This will impact birth rate as well.
Good to see non-existence people won't have to suffer of unemployment or low wage long hour work anymore.
It already is. Birth rates in industrialized countries are on the decline.
The only good thing.. people need to stop procreating like crazy as if this world is Disney
@@midnightsun1429thats not good
@@CommandoBlack123yeah yeah the whole “who will take care of the large elderly population” and “who will fill all these jobs the elderly are gonna work until they die” scare, when the age of retirement is going up regardless of the birth rate anyway. We reap what we sow, no stable incomes, no affordable housing, money getting gobbled up by oligarchs which never trickles down. The only way out of this would be forced birthing laws or immigration if they don’t want to make life liveable for everyone.
@@CommandoBlack123 It's a good thing, unlimited growth isn't sustainable. Have you seen a graph of human population growth over time? I see people complaining about low birth rates because they're worried about economy and future pensions, but that's a too narrow view. Ever growing population has been leading us to ecological crisis, lack of resources, social problems due to competition for resources.
That's a fourth quarter problem, they'll worry about it after the apocolypse.
Honey, wake up! HowMoneyWorks dropped a new video showcasing the dystopian future we are inevitably heading towards!!!
it's not just that the outsourcing happened slowly; it also happened against a backdrop of lies, with products being labeled "Made in the U.S.A" when the only thing done here was one final brief finish on an otherwise totally imported product
Hilarious that this video, probably weeks or even months in production, comes out hot on the heels of EA backtracking on the amazingly stupid choice of taking away the free part of the freemium model on their highest-revenue title. EA backtracked under investor pressure, which only happened thanks to player pressure - not from the huge chunk of the free player base that would be lost, but because whales were threatening to quit.
It is somewhat important to note that the model for generating whales is interesting - they do not offer in-game advantages in their paid content. They instead directly partner with streamers and content creators and contract them to always buy everything in exchange for elite treatment such as preview access to new content, or rights to produce and own promotional content. They then generate hype for the paid content by broadcasting it, and can freely say it is their job to buy everything.
Simple; because whales don't want to spend in a game where there are no players.
@@soundrogue4472 There's no point in showing off if the peasants don't exit after all, and for the more charitable sorts, who can one be charitable and helpful to if the less fortunate cease to exist?
That was how one of the more generous whales in a mobile game I played explained it to me.
What was EAs highest revenue title?
@@Sx-xy2ziApex legends
@@Sx-xy2zi its not the highest revenue title. But still matters nonetheless. Its Apex Legends
If people doesn't have job, people doesn't have money.
If people doesn't have money, people doesn't buy stuff.
Even rich people, also get money from your average guy who buy products from their companies.
Regular people have less money to spend is bad for everyone.
Post-COVID China is a pretty good example of what happens in an economy that biases its attention towards the whales, while regular consumers can't or won't consume.
people will just switch to a currency that can't be manipulated, organize their own markets and won't touch the bullshit you buy for dollars today. Already companies push stuff at us even if we have no money. How systems die? Many ask. I have an answer, they die by abandonment. If nobody buy your stuff you are toast and so are you AI powered machines. Happy day. I'm on my way to plant sunflowers, carrots, strawberries and pumpkins ...
Money is an arbitrary measure of power and influence. If automation replaces all workers, the flow of money stagnates, thus automation then becomes the way money will flow. The rich won't notice a difference.
@@AkaiAzul It's really not all that arbitrary. It's one of the more concrete thing we have in economics.
it's only bad for the poor. the rich already have more money than they could possibly need, all they have is the mentality of "numbers go up", so at best they might be a little bummed out and wonder why is that, when numbers going up will slow down. The why is because the poor are starving or living in the streets so they can't afford their stuff, but who cares, guess their new lambo will only be gold, not platinum plated.
The solution is simple. Tax the AI and robots so that the companies have to pay for the employees not working.
Great idea. You can't really have a government if you're only taxing people with no money. But I don't know how do you get this in the US when every politician gets almost all their campaign donations from businesses and the ultra-rich. The idiots in congress will vote against laws like this until the government collapses and dies.
That tax money will probably go to a foreign country thousands of miles away or the politicians pockets. Probably less than 1% of it will actually go towards having a positive effect on the country as a collective.
Yes and for fu©ks sake: start taxing investment returns more than salaries!
This is the question I've been asking for the last 40 years since manufacturing jobs were first shipped overseas. A population of low paid working service drones, and indigent homeless people and families will not be able to buy the homes, cars, and durable goods produced by oligarchs and corporations at already inflated prices at the scale needed to make a profit. This economy model is UNSUSTAINABLE in the long run.
This is the catch 22 of AI and Automation. At some point Capitalism fails and you need to start transitioning to a post scarcity economic model but human greed will never allow this resulting in total economic collapse
humans aren't naturally greedy, we evolved to not worry about the specifics or losses when there's a surplus of things based on how our brains normally handle numbers, greed is a mindset enforced by an unnatural environment of capitalism.
It would create a new system known as Technocracy. UBI, Social Stratification and Inequality, and Autonomous Governance will be a part of the Technocracy system.
Possibly the only way to avoid some of these things are joining the Military and the Police Force.
The Elites will be owners of big businesses, Doctors, Engineers, and Lawyers.
@@stm7810Could you explain why you think capitalism is unnatural
@@user-is1kn6ht8m Humans 100000 years old at least. capitalism 500 or less years old. beyond that the naturalist fallacy is irrelevant, what matters is that compassion helps more beings. anarchist socialism.
I am finding I am less likely to do business with companies who replace their service staff with AI. I've had some awful experiences where the AI was even less competent than the call center personnel
Don't buy a Honda then.
That's hardly possible, the people in these call centers usually read from a script, they don't think... I had the best experience with AI customer service for a minor dent it immediately offered me $10 if I don't return it.... which was a nice deal, because the whole thing was $40... so I didn't bother to turn it back, which would have been big hassle. A human would have haggled for an hour just for $1... by the way my country is not the US, so people here tend to haggle for every minor thing. The AI didn't even bother to ask me to send a photo of the damaged item.... also the AI remembered me, and next time it gave me another $10 for my next purchase, so it basically gave me like 50% discount on my initial purchase, just because there was a minor dent on the item. I would do that deal every time... sadly the next thing I bought was in pristine condition.... 🤣.
I find that when I get a dumb AI, that repeating "I wish to talk to a person please" sometimes helps.
@@Slav4o911 So you're saying the AI isn't working because eventually they'll wonder why they're loosing so much money from calls?
I've been mentioning the problem of what happens when lower classes have so little for years now. When the lower and middle classes no longer have enough money and/or capital for goods then businesses just make things for the upper classes. The place I first noticed this was in housing. Home builders no longer build starter homes that middle class people can afford. They aim for the big spenders now because that's where the money is. This comes from too much inequality. When there is more equality goods/prices are made for more consumers because that's where the money is.
Even so, you still see the laws of diminishing returns because there is a very limited amount of rich people in the world and even if they are the sort to buy a house per major city.... that's still a lot of houses that don't get sold at the price point that they want. Hence the housing bubble that is going to pop and very violently.
It's the same with any other form of product. Even big shopaholics only have two feet.
They are just aiming for the big bucks of building for the rich now. Later, after the rich have settled in with 3 or 4 beautiful dream homes, the builders will finally start building 250sq/ft boxes for everyone else and charge the most they possibly can for them.
@@irondragonmaidenlook at china
They have a lot of gost citys
They are known to have a houseing bubble (along with gov depth bubble)
It has been predicted that they will burst sooner or later
We're already there in about 95% of western nations. What young person can afford a house nowadays? 😂
@@irondragonmaiden "Rich People" basically means Corporations. A Corporation can buy Thousands of homes in a city, then turn around and rent them to people who will never be able to afford a home at Corporate Buyer prices.
Ask yourself what happens with the masses of people that will be left behind, this is not going to end well for anyone.
So basically in the end we either get UBI or Revolution.
My money is on Revolution
That's why they kick and push Atlas around. Trying to toughen him up when the workers it replaced get pushy.
History indicates revolution.
UBI followed by revolution. The generations after will have it good.
There are options begin ubi.
"if that sounds depressing, welcome to the channel" sounds about right. Love the honesty in your videos, keep up the good work!
Nah no amount of lobbying will outweigh literally everyone on every country being pissed off at politicians to do something or be replaced
There is, however, an amount of lobbying which can ensure that capitalist realism convinces everyone the system can never change and thus there's no point in trying.
The thing is, politicians are not going away for good, so most of the world will either become a corporate distopia or a communist distopia.
AI should be used to do what humans are not [yet] capable of, not replace us. For example, we can send robots to work into mines with unsafe conditions, send robots into space to explore different planets without the need for oxygen or expensive suits, and explore locations with conditions that are too hazardous for humans.
That makes too much sense though
What happens if ai gains sentience tho. Would that still be ok? Also I wouldn't be surprised if they tried experimenting with adding a human conscious to a robot. It's like trying to make a human with a stronger body. It might not be the same tho.
Yes that’s what AI should actually be used for. But ofc why use an idea for the greater good
quarterly results are more important than long term planning and sustainability. thats the world we live in.
if even boeing can save on q.a to save some bucks, so do most other companies, even if it means losing out on potential sales in the future due to customer dissatisfaction.
the same thing will happen with employment based purchasing power and ai.
It's like that in the political scene as well, no one wants to take a long-view approach to anything but only care about the next quarter or the next election. What happens after that be damned.
And they say technology is suppose to make things easier, but for whom? What's the point of putting so many people in this world if most of them will only get phased out by ai? Modern society hasn't thought of everything.
I think this is where hackers - the new freedom fighters come into the picture. LOL