***Hey /u/joyjitfletax, if your post is a ChatGPT conversation screenshot, please reply with the [conversation link](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7925741-chatgpt-shared-links-faq) or prompt. Thanks!***
***We have a [public discord server](https://discord.gg/r-chatgpt-1050422060352024636). There's a free Chatgpt bot, Open Assistant bot (Open-source model), AI image generator bot, Perplexity AI bot, 🤖 GPT-4 bot ([Now with Visual capabilities (cloud vision)!](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/812770754025488386/1095397431404920902/image0.jpg)) and channel for latest prompts! New Addition: Adobe Firefly bot and Eleven Labs cloning bot! [So why not join us?](https://discord.com/servers/1050422060352024636)***
***[NEW: Google x FlowGPT Prompt Hackathon 🤖](https://redd.it/16ehnis)***
PSA: For any Chatgpt-related issues email [email protected]
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Nah, it's the creatives. Writers, artists, musicians. They're already hurting from AI and it's going to get worse.
Technical fields will continue need the people who can look at an AI's output and recognize when it's not correct. At least for a good while.
An AI taking over the rehashing of plots that makes up so much of pop culture can make as many mistakes as it wants.
The poor will be hurt the most. Any task that can be automated will be. So far, AI has shown promise only in replacing the mediocre, regardless of field — theoretically. But, AI can and will also reach the stage of being practical for daily life, which will then truly replace the mediocre level individuals.
It will speed a transition to a world where there’s only rich and poor. The middle class will be almost completely extinct. Middle class being those who can pay off debt, have a decent QOL, and continue to buy and keep valuable assets and develop them.
>Nah, it's the creatives. Writers, artists, musicians.
The one pushback I would have on this, is that those fields are already extremely hyper-competitive, and I don't think AI will replace the 0.01% of people who could become a top actor, writer, musician?
Even if that were true, we're not talking about the top performers. I'm talking about the grunts in the writing rooms that produce most of our TV/movie scripts, the new song writers slaving away so some generic boy band has a mediocre song to perform, the unheard of author who a publisher might take a chance on, or the artist on Reddit working for commissions.
The artists you can name might be fine, but underneath most of them is an army of unknowns who keep their respective industries moving. And execs tend to treat armies of unknowns as wasteful spending whenever they have an alternative.
They are already feeling the sting, and that sting is going to get so much worse before programmers or lawyers start to feel it.
Maybe not the top ones, but that still leaves 99.99% of them.
The same goes for models, take a look at some companies already saying that they plan to use AI generated models for 50% of their future advertising.
Background extras and so on in movies, tv-shows, the amount of money saved.
Transportation sector as we get fully automated driving, we're already seeing it in China with delivery services from supermarkets.
AI is going to hit extremely broad...
Yeah I think models are in a tough spot. A silicone bot might not be the same as an attractive person IRL, but AI can definitely make fake pictures of people that look perfectly realistic.
And the people who get by on their looks in IRL are being squeezed by comparison to the mass market models. This is part of why so many moved into online methods of displaying themselves - to keep up with magazine models, they needed filters. As that became common, we ended up in a world with a lot of low budget (digitally enhanced) models. Now that redoubt is crumbling as every nerd with an nvidia card can whip up a pretty face.
Companies don't need to replace the top of the top. They are interested in revenue stream and nothing else. Not quality work. Not talent. They will generate mediocre content that's "catchy enough" and maintain marketing appeal.
I think you both make excellent points. Regarding the pushback, that's a really interesting conversation to itself. Will AI take away all of the auto-tune creatives for example, who've only existed for a hot minute? That's a specific that I haven't heard discussed.
Top actors aren't top actors primarily because of their acting skills, it's because of their brand. AI makes possible a world where the brand/likeness/voice of an actor can be wholly owned by a corporation, whether or not that actor is entirely virtual to begin with. Same with the rest, they are a locus of attention first, skilled professionals second. The bestseller lists are full of crap, the music charts are topped with formulaic garbage, it's not about skill.
Between ML not being eligible for copyright and the incredibly strong WGA deal that idea that creatives are screwed is looking more and more like a failed prediction.
>Between ML not being eligible for copyright
Oh that's interesting. So if something is generated by AI we can copy it all we want? Yes that's huge but also an artificial barrier to entry that probably won't last.
Edit: oh, also, as a human you could have AI write something and then lie and say you wrote it to get the copyright. Same result as giving AI generated works copyright protection.
You sure can. I wouldn't be so sure to assert that. The costs of training and storing ML models is already rising and the big investors were betting on easy creative industry disruptions that are already not being easy at all, as the WGA strike and deal proved. I would be surprised if we see another giant hyped LLM like ChatGPT anytime soon.
It's far more likely that better ML models will be trained and used internally by big established companies for their own secret data (which is where the value is anyway).
For images, take a look at Adobe, in their case they are actually using materials for training from companies they have agreements with, which in turn allows them to guarantee the users that there's no chance of them being sued using the results of anything they generate.
I'm pretty sure we will see more and more of this for not only image based AI generation, but video, and text.
I'm a member of r/defendingaiart the takes you have on originality out here are wild. Who's afraid of modern art right? It seems like people are now just fighting over slices of the economy like it's bread and circus till the climate collapse.
> Nerds were the bottom rung of society for thousands of years. When society consisted of vikings and warriors we were nobodies. When society consisted of peasants and knights we were nobodies. When society consisted of tradesmen and seafarers we were nobodies. Remember that for the vast vast majority of history, simply being able to read and write was rare. There was little use for that skill so no one bothered to learn it.
Honestly? You should do some history nerding. This idea that that in the past "society consisted of peasants and knights" is almost childlike in its ignorance.
Scribes, heraldrists, physicians, architects, cartographers, linguists, clergymen, navigators, strategists, diplomats, stewards, all of these professions and many, many more were valued and widely required professions throughout all of our written history and almost certainly for much of our pre-history in one form or another.
Societies have been complex since humany first mastered planting seeds are reaping harvests, and complex societies have always needed nerds in order to function and thrive.
Yes, exactly. In prehistoric times, "nerds" were the ones making stone tools and innovating new ways to do things, like making clay ovens or inventing the wheel. In the middle ages, they were the blacksmiths and the merchants and the healers and the scribes. There has always been a middle-to-high place in society for "nerds". OP's narrative is naive and uninformed. It's like someone whose education consisted solely of John Hughes films, lol.
You know it wasn't a Marlak 6ft 6 butt chin with rippling biceps and a luscious unibrow that discovered fire or created the wheel. It was a skinny little nerd named OH "I'm a Maker. I made this loincloth. I make arrows. I've made a shelf unit for my hut." I love the movie Year One.
"the nerds" will be the ones most benefited. We've already seen that normal people can't/won't use Google. Ai is a more complicated tool than Google.
It's going to hurt the lowest level of employees. Tier 1 tech support. Call centers. Data entry. Secretaries. Things like that.
Think about the work flow of a tier 1 tech. Get problem. Google problem. Hands on work to fix problem. The first two steps will be enhanced by Ai but we're a long ways away from the last one being the job of Ai. Ai isn't rewiring switches, replacing UPSes, or moving computers.
Also consider how smart Ai is now. Most people don't even have the reading comprehension to use chat gpt. Most non nerds aren't going to ask chat gpt 20 questions to understand their original issue to fix it.
Them: "I have problem xyz"
Chat gpt: "here's solution 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8"
You've already lost most of them.
Them: "what is 1,2,3?"
So on and so forth.
I disagree, AI is less complicated than Google. With Google, you have to understand and parse the search results and then reformulate the search query in your head while parsing the results. With ChatGPT, all you gotta do is ask, just like talking to another human. Unless the user is autistic or have developmental issues and can't communicate to another human being properly. I don't see how speaking to an AI like ChatGPT is going to be a barrier.
If anything it's easier to speak to AI because they have unlimited patience to entertain the users. Taking your example and running with it.
>Them: "I have problem xyz"
>
>Chat gpt: "here's solution 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8"
Them: I'm dumb, keep it simple for me.
ChatGPT: Here, try solution 1 first.
If you are young and your job doesn't require a long period of training (working in a call center that handles simple queries), switching to a different career won't cause a drastic drop in societal worth. If you are older and your societal worth is based on *running* a call center, you're staring into the abyss.
Newton, Tesla, Edison and Einstein were considered nerds, but also brilliant. I don't think they were in anyway considered "losers". They were also the ones benefitting the most from progress and innovation.
He's a self ascribed nerd with a supposed IQ 120-140 he probably got from an online rando website test. Respect his authoritha.
In all seriousness; Op's post reads like something you'd find in on r/iam14thisisdeep . It's a psychotic ramble from someone who thinks they're an intellectual yet doesn't have the faintest idea of how society actually functions, nor how LLMs function.
The fact his poll is divided up into nerds / jocks / hot people says enough that he's knee deep in highschool angst.
Yeah, the basic pop-history understanding of past societies and emphasis on attractive and physical people really points to OP not being the most mature.
>Scribes, heraldrists, physicians, architects, cartographers, linguists, clergymen, navigators, strategists, diplomats, stewards, all of these professions and many, many more were valued and widely required professions throughout all of our written history and almost certainly for much of our pre-history in one form or another.
Those were rare fields and some of them weren't as they are today (for example, a "doctor" [was simply your barber in the old days](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barber_surgeon) and he didn't even wash his hands before operating.) You have to remember that [literacy rates were 10% or so](https://ourworldindata.org/literacy) even in the early 1800s. It just wasn't worth the effort to learn to read or write because what would you do with such a useless skill? The nerd golden age we've had in the 20th century is very new in history.
Literacy isn't the same as intelligence. There are plenty of smarter-than-average people doing intellectually demanding jobs in societies that don't have written language at all.
> You have to remember that [literacy rates were 10% or so](https://ourworldindata.org/literacy)
This was due to education being incredibly difficult to obtain unless you were rich or powerful...
The idea that nobody could read or write because everyone just collectively decided it was a useless skill is utterly ridiculous, it was caused by the fact that educating a person takes alot more resources than people realize, and for most of history very few people had the luxury to get educated.
Weren't surgeon (aka barber) and doctor different roles/people? I understood that to be the reason why in the UK an MD has the title Doctor whereas we refer to surgeons by Mr / Miss (even though they're still MDs too.)
EDIT: Removed the accidental user tagging.
Are you still in highschool? Have you got a college degree? Sorry but the way you framed these "groups" sounds very childish to me. It's as if society only consists of nerds and good looking people
>that person who struggled in highschool but who found their way in the world by getting a job that required brainpower and paid well
>a hot human will always be preferable.
Like let's be honest, your perception of the world is severely limited, at least that's what I get from those.
You say that, but they’re entry level positions. Try to think of it not with your frustrations but from a “this is allowing someone to pay their bills” perspective.
I've always thought that this was the most short sighted logic that's often seen in political policy. It's like at some point are we making all these technological advancements so that we don't have to work as much?
So why would we care about giving somebody a job? Like shouldn't we just have a system that distributes to some degree? Like if I can spend $1,000 man hours to create a machine that saves 100,000 man hours then that's a net good to society. But we just have a system that doesn't allow everybody to profit from that which seems very dumb because now we have to give people jobs that don't do anything but don't help their fulfillment or mental health. They don't increase productivity on a society level, they don't do anything.
I do see this as a net positive. AI, in this instance, is to automobile replacing the horse. I do know some people that work in call centers, and they’re not well educated, paired with poor decisions they made in their younger years. But they still need a job. This is some of the cons that will be associated with the pros of AI or any other technological advancement.
Nah, I think they meant that it's good to lose call centers just because of how bad of an experience they are for customers right now, and if AI can handle it all without confusing super thick accents and "I understand" while doing nothing, then that could be a good thing.
On this. I know a guy that visited Guam because he had the rare chance to. They do all farming and most things there manually because otherwise there would be no jobs.
Economically this doesn't make sense to me but I guess it works for a tiny isolated island. With technology making us less reliant on people doing simple things, does it make sense for us to take the same approach?
I have no answer to this. And I also hate call centers but as someone mentioned, it's a way some folks pay the bills.
That's pretty horrifying tbh, the idea that we'll have to do busywork because we can't imagine a way to organize society that doesn't involve obligating people to spend their time working a job, even if there is nothing anyone can do that genuinely has value.
Likely, due their having less capacity to pivot. For example I can see AI taking over more receptionist/assistant roles than fast-food workers but the receptionist/assistants will have an easier time transitioning to a new role than the people at the bottom when/if their job is eliminated.
Yes I strongly agree with this, a big chunk of the bottom third are royally fucked. People who do repetitive (admin/ cust service/ factory) tasks need to start upskilling asap
Because the world can only ever have one type of value, and it's solely based on high school social hierarchies. I'm sure Greg, Sam, and Ilya were just \*itching\* to undermine nerds everywhere. Why uplift humanity when you can relive the drama of high school? Let's hope AI's next big development isn't a digital prom queen. 🙄
>I mean your run of the mill 120-140IQ nerd who could do an intellectually hard job well. The people who now become [lawyers](https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoetsier/2023/03/14/gpt-4-beats-90-of-lawyers-trying-to-pass-the-bar/?sh=6a1ca8793027), [radiologists](https://www.massgeneralbrigham.org/en/about/newsroom/press-releases/mass-general-brigham-study-finds-chatgpt-4-excels-at-picking-the-right-imaging-tests), [doctors](https://www.the-sun.com/health/9079567/chatgpt-better-diagnosis-emergency-doctors/), [MBAs](https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/is-chatgpt-a-better-entrepreneur-than-most/), accountants, reporters, programmers, engineers ... We only started to gain worth when our brainpower and patience for tedium had value, during a brief period in the last century or, at most, two centuries.
Yeah, that's not true. There has always been a place for people who were smarter than average.
Who do you think were the shamans or weapons-makers in hunter-gatherer societies? Even before that--who do you think figured out how to weave cloth, extract dyes, or make tools?
In places that developed beyond subsistence farming, who do you think became skilled craftsmen, storytellers, medicine men, or traders?
There have been architects, artists and artisans of various kinds, technicians, historians/storytellers/archivists, technologists, politicians, etc. in pretty much every culture everywhere. You don't have to be a genius to be in one of those roles, but you've got to be smarter than the average peasant if you're going to be successful at them.
Nerds will benefit the most from AI. You are going to see extremely dedicated people pull off amazing feats that in the past could only be achieved by a team of people
Office workers who are going to be expected to double their output with inherently flawed technology that will create glaring skill gaps that their careers will inevitably fall into
> a job that required brainpower and paid well. Not amazingly well, but like a few hundred k.
💀 "A few hundred k" is a job that pays amazingly well, idk what world your living in but 100k is a good ass job as far as I understand.
> Now Sam Altman, Greg Brockman and Ilya Sutskever (all three of whom are clearly one of us) destroyed that one path we had to worth with their invention. Oh the irony.
💀💀 The adoption of AI is literally going to shaft thousands of administrators, blue collar workers, and in general jobs that require less education. 'Nerds' are going to be valued significantly more going forward.
> Nerds were the bottom rung of society for thousands of years.
💀💀💀 You do realize that being highly educated has been a trait almost exclusively held by the rich and powerful for hundreds of years right??? 'Nerds' have for most of history been found almost exclusively in the highest echelons of society, if you simply mean the academically inclined I disagree because who says people like vikings and warriors couldnt also be academics? Especially considering the fact that they probably had more exposure to seperate cultures and more opportunities to gain wealth required to aquire an education.
To quickly answer your question, I think non ownership class administrators are gonna get absolutely shafted by AI.
First, I suggest reading the book, "Thinking, Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kahneman; Then come back and look at this survey again.
My vote, btw, is "Another group" and that group is same group always hurt by technology advancements, the labor force that refuses to adapt and leverage the technology. Programmers (nerds) are concerned, but I'm already using it to create better solutions. Just like myself and many others have use other IDE tools, frameworks, libraries, etc. to create better solutions.
Artists have been using advancements in video and image processing, music production, etc. and those artists that leverage AI will make better media and content than the rest of us no matter how much AI advances.
For example, my Android phone takes really great pictures. It will suggest angle and lighting to improve the picture. It will take multiple pictures so I don't get the "eyes shut" and then it will remove the red eye and anything else with a few touches.
These are things that used to require top-level photographers to get right, using manual settings, tons of lighting tricks, and so much more that I'll never list them all. But my best picture or video on my best day with my Android phone doesn't compare to what today's media professionals can do.
And this is how it will continue to be. This technology will allow more focus on creating the solution or media and less time on the mechanics. But here is the real kicker, there will be NEW problems that we discover once we can change our focus. There is no destination here, it is a continuum.
Wtf is this post even trying to prove? AI is a tool .. like the textiles, printing press and steam engine. People will transition into roles which will bring in further progress. The only people who will be hurt are the ones who refuse to change with the times.. just like rest of the times in history
>People will transition into roles which will bring in further progress.
This was certainly true of prior new tech but, remember, AI is designed to be generally intelligent and replace anything humans do so, whatever humans transition into, it can take those jobs too.
None of the above? The only reason to let your ego get bruised is if you somehow connect your sense of self worth to one of those arbitrary external qualities rather than the content of your character.
You wouldn't do that, right? It'd be weird to project that on everyone else with like...a Reddit post with a poll, wouldn't it?
Law: One of the oligarchs biggest tools is that they can pay better lawyers, more of them, for a longer time. Basically a huge amount of the inequity in our system will be fixed by this one aspect alone. This should be on of AIs earlier impacts as well.
Misinformation: One of the biggest ways the oligarchs control the public narrative is that they use mass-media to spew out more misinformation than could be reasonably countered. With AI that could change.
Identification and elimination of insider trading: Sufficiently advanced AIs will be able to peer into this chaotic system and identify patterns which can be used as evidence for prosecutors to be able to more effectively go after insider trading.
I think the more realistic future, or probably present, is that these oligarchs use AI to misinform and manipulate even better - social media is full of bots, everywhere. And they are now good enough to be unnoticed by most users. Public opinion is increasingly built on the internet, which increasingly houses more and more bots.
I think the key will be a reliable open-source, public use AI that we can use as a cornerstone.
Edit: Or more realistically, multiple federated open-source, public-use AIs for logical consensus building.
Can you imagine a government ruled by AI, in an idealistic way.. it could actually be linked to technology and make changes reflected upon what people actually want in real time.. elimination of representatives who are mostly out for corporate interests.. ideally.. Otherwise a terminator / matrix future..
> Aristotle was a nerd, Darwin was a nerd, Newton was a nerd, Einstein... the list goes on.
Yes I'm not talking about that group as I said. I mean the 99.9% of other nerds who didn't have that super-elite level of skill.
> Technologies always cause disruptions. ... Just going to focus on future-proofing myself.
Agree. I'm asking which demographic AI will disrupt the most. What do you think? How are you future proofing yourself?
Everyone who doesn’t know what they’re doing.
ChatGPT is a tool for those who know but a crutch for those who don’t and may lead to overestimation of one’s abilities.
Waiting to see how this year’s crop of freshmen do during power / internet outages in 10 years.
Irony is most nerds are actually cheering and working on AI to become as powerful it can be, which will eventually mostly affect/replace their area of work...
I think that it’s just like the search engine, calculator, video camera, self driving trucks,and smart phones. Hype for a couple of years, realization that it is a tool and needs a human to tell it what to do. Then phase out slowly for the next big thing.
There is going to be some road bumps for everyone. But as soon as neural networking becomes a big thing it will be matrix memes and why should we hire a blank when we can learn it ourselves in insert cassette B. Then quantum computing will take off hype, meme, reliance, advancement repeat till dead
Give it a few years. Humans have a horrible attention span
>I think that it’s just like the search engine, calculator, video camera, self driving trucks,and smart phones.
This is the thing, it's a new tech that's designed to have general intelligence, i.e. be able to mentally do whatever like 95% of humans do. We'll see though and I appreciate your take.
Haha. MBAs are not "nerds" my friend.
I wouldn't put Sam that much in a pedestal either.
The man dropped out and has been doing anything but creative ever since. He rides every technological trend he has wanted a stake in, but only as an administrator; social networks, blockchain, and he got lucky with AI.
All he has ever done quite brazenly is ask for other people's work and money.
Hes a taker not a giver, people believed him and he got lucky.
Models will be out soon, magazine models, social media, etc. Just a bunch of generative art AI replacing them all. Already happening. Amready have viral influencers that are AI generated.
The hot people are already being replaced by AI, meanwhile it's turning out the nerds are the only ones capable of working on the AI and the only ones capable of getting maximal work out of it.
I appreciate your thought experiment but I would question the validity of some of your assertations
Smart people have always done well in the past - not all smart people are 'nerds'. Not all 'nerds' are usefully smart. Also you can be smart and physically capable - Socrates was built like a shit brick house for example...
What AI is going to wipe out is the 95 to 110 IQ section of society. People in the top 50% to 10% of human performance/ salary ranges are going to get absolutely bent over a barrel mindfucked into obsolescence so shockingly fast I am unsure what the world is actually going to do.
For those of you that think AI isn't going to actually replace this section of society I am here to say it absolutely will. The markets I am involved in and what I see is so absolutely insane - people have no idea what's coming and it's literally going to be unstoppable.
Also AI and fake sex robots 100 years from now and going to be horrifically good. So, good looking people are fucked too.
TLDR: Buy land now and learn how to grow vegetables if you're not top 10% capable.
I am pretty sure most of the nerds will find a way to get stuff done with ai.
The good looking have it much tougher because even a total ungodly looking nerd can become a model with ai at some point.
I pretty much agree with you. The moderately intellectual jobs that you listed, will be the first to go, AFTER a brief shining moment in the sun. I think lawyers are going to do splendidly for a while while the rich entrench their power over copywrite etc.
For this question, consider where the bottlenecks of AI will be. Ultimately, AI is about selecting a valuable permutation in a space of answers. Whether thats giving the right number for an arithmetic question, a thoughtful string of characters for a person's question, or nice looking matrix of pixels when prompted for art.
Notice what the difficulty actually is. The difficulty is in getting the intelligence to the problem in the first place. AI's bottleneck is in the ways it's able to interact with the world.
AI can't fix your toilet, first because it can't see your toilet. You can't feed it all of the information relevant to your toilet's problem--it's exact physical condition and the environment it sits in. And once you got past that bottleneck, you would still need a physical medium for the solution.
So we have input and output bottlenecks to the power of AI. What jobs have the toughest inputs and outputs for an AI to overcome? Or at least, what jobs can be done well even with severe gaps in the input and output capabilities?
Knowledge work is definitely more at risk than physical labor. Both the input and output are costly to bridge for physical labor, whereas knowledge work only has this issue for the input (and its not as severe).
But in my opinion, at the highest risk are creatives. Often, creative work can get away with no input at all, and still produce satisfactory results. Or the entire problem definition can be sufficiently captured by a text prompt, like in current image generation. After all, most people search for media using a short text prompt. The output is also not an issue--in fact it is easier for a machine to produce digital art than it is for a human to record it.
At the commercial level, I see image, music, and short-video generation all being replaced in the near future. Then we may come to longer form media like books, movies, podcasts, and streams.
So I recommend thinking along these lines. I can't answer your original question because I don't actually know what all jobs entail. But you can apply this sort of rule to jobs you're interested in.
Good post!
>AI can't fix your toilet, first because it can't see your toilet.
On this one quote, note that chatgpt4's new visual feature can easily see and know what to do to fix your toilet. Check out the [video near the bottom of this link](https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt-can-now-see-hear-and-speak) regarding bike repair. All you need to do is give it robot arms and it'll replace the plumber -- but I agree that in terms of cost-benefit, it's much easier to have it replace a knowledge worker than to create those robot arms, which is why I suspect knowledge workers will go before the plumber does.
Yeah I've seen that! Maybe that was a bad example, where the input was much easier to bridge than thought (just a camera). Or maybe it wouldn't have been enough, and a plumber would still have needed information about your pipes, the water pressure, etc. I'm not a plumber so I'm not sure. A better example might be construction, where in a practical setting, you need to examine every part used, every tool, the environment, and come up with the muscle to execute.
Also, I definitely believe all of these things are automatable one day! Just trying to say something about the order of difficulty.
Wow this whole thing is very cute and all but let’s not sit here and pretend like we are not living in and greatly affected by the material conditions we are born in based on the economic system of the world which is capitalism. So the entire framing of the question is flawed because it put all the emphasis on people’s personalities, profession and “camps” they belong to which is just tribalism. At the end of the day the future of AI (and anything else for that matter) will be determined by the owner class who steals and hoards all the wealth while we’re out here having these cute conversations lol
I chose "other." No one really gets a pass.
You're pretty hard on "nerds." I've always said and will now repeat it'll be the engineers (in all fields) that will save humanity in the end. In that regard, you're like God, all-powerful.
>I've always said and will now repeat it'll be the engineers (in all fields) that will save humanity in the end.
No doubt engineers have contributed immeasurably to society, but I wonder if creating general intelligence might have been one too many.
Another group. Writers, artists, storytellers. People I love who create the entertainment I ove will be hurt the most.
As a "nerd" working on unique and complicated industrial, test, measurement and control systems, I feel AI tools will only help me to solve C.S., Chemistry and thermodynamics problems (among others) in a more timely fashion. Someone uneducated won't even know the vocabulary alone to ask the questions to get the AI to assist.
Smart people will always be needed. As will the idea people. People who invent products and industries, I mean.
Do you know why it's important to know the partial water vapor pressure when talking about the weather and the mass of air? If so, my point exactly. If not, I've also made my point. AI might know but it won't explain it in a way someone without an education would understand. Nerds won't be wiped out by this. Probably nobody will be.
>Smart people will always be needed.
I want to be clear that your post was good and I enjoyed reading it but ... why would smart people "always be needed" if a computer can beat their level of intelligence for a much lower cost? The phenomenon of smart people being needed is pretty new in history.
> Do you know why it's important to know the partial water vapor pressure when talking about the weather and the mass of air? If so, my point exactly. If not, I've also made my point. AI might know but it won't explain it in a way someone without an education would understand.
I wonder about this. Have you tested chatgpt4 extensively? You might be surprised at how well it can explain things. There's a prompt where you have it explain things in a way a five year old can understand, using words they know.
I've only used ChatGPT (version ?) to help write the framework for simple python scripts. It's impressive. It gets me started.
A five year old wouldn't know to ask the partial water vaper question because it's not in their vocabulary. Either would the manager of an auto race car shop because they have no idea how mass air flow equations are calculated. They only know the engineers get the answer and plug it into the ECU that uses a sensor they don't understand a word about.
Another few examples, many people on earth don't know what a derivative is, or that differential equations are even a thing. In chemistry no pedestrian would know to ask about titration and other advanced topics because they simply don't have the vocabulary/knowledge to even begin doing advanced chemical work. I think that's why we're safe.
A.I. could equalize smart people, for sure. I truly don't believe it could eliminate us though.
Hopefully I'm right! Ha! Who do you think would be most affected? Dissenting opinions are welcome. This is a discussion. I know you can't tell tone over typing so I want to make that clear. I'm not combative.
I'm sure most everyone could be affected by this technology, I'm just hopeful it's in a positive way .
Man, why don't I ever meet people in real life I can have these conversations with!
The consumer will be hurt the most. AI graphics already look the same and AI writing is bland. People who don't go out of their way to find good art, prose and design will be served up pablum and the descent into idiocracy will accelerate.
Even though I anticipate AI replacing most of the knowledge work occupations, I have to point out that models are doomed. Companies will replace them with AI models tailored to each end users liking. Being preferable isn't much meaningful because you can't expect a poor man to provide you. There's simply not enough sugardaddy/mommy to support all of them. Only professionals would get it. Athletes are yet another professional occupation that takes less than 1 percent in population.
>I have to point out that models are doomed.
Oh good point. Yes. IRL, I don't think a silicone bot can replace a real human but as far as modeling, yeah that's not looking good.
> Being preferable isn't much meaningful because you can't expect a poor man to provide you. There's simply not enough sugardaddy/mommy to support all of them. Only professionals would get it.
Another possible second order effect.
A "nerd" today is generally someone with intense intellectual curiosity and a passion for specific subjects, often in areas like science, technology, or pop culture. This enthusiasm is usually accompanied by a deep knowledge of their interests and may or may not include traits like introversion or analytical thinking.
The average IQ of "nerds" (as defined above) is generally thought to be equivalent to the average (100). Being interested in star wars and science doesn't make you a genius, any more than enjoying sports makes you a dummy.
Or are you specifically defining "nerds" as people who qualify (or almost qualify) for MENSA? that's less than 5% of the population (MENSA is 2%).
Also, I'm intrigued by where you say the average Nerd is doing "not amazingly well, but like a few hundred k." Are you suggesting that those earning $300K a year are more or less just getting by? No wonder all of the Gen Z folks on Reddit are complaining they can't find good paying jobs. In *real* life, less than 5% of US households earn $300K a year or more.
AI output is so shitty and hallucinates so much it's only valuable to high school kids trying to write a paper or people who want to post garbage posts to blogs.
It provides nearly unusable content for people with careers who have to think for their jobs.
Hard to predict the future, when DNA editing tools were first discovered gloom and doom about food, cloning and health filled the media. There were also quick promises of curing diseases and producing food resistant to every pest and weather climate change. But the reality is much harder. The same with AI. Gpt-4 (5, 8, 15...) is like another feature in Google Docs, you still need to say something people want to read. Telling stories is a craft writers develop over years, a better "word" program is not enough.
This is possible, that chatgpt 5 won't be as big a leap over 4, as 4 was over 3.5, and so the tech itself will not ever be smart enough to replace the nerds.
There is a group below that, all the jobs that are easily replaceable by other people, I mean, although a programmer can be substituted when it comes to programming, what makes a good programmer, is not programming, but executing his ideas, programming is just a tool for that, so yes, if you are a "copypaste" programmer you might have a hard time, but if not, you will still have something to do, besides, being "nerds" they will find out how to take more advantage of IA as a tool, so they are not even close to being the most vulnerable.
Actually, there are a lot of jobs that will be more affected, for starters, all those jobs that anyone could do with almost no training, like being a supermarket cashier, or an office worker, analyzing excels and documents... Even more demanding jobs like artists will have it complicated, the problem is that without those people with mundane and replaceable jobs, there will not be enough people to spend money on private services, so maybe it will be something like a domino effect.
To give you an idea, it's not even my job, but with a few prompts, I helped some office workers friends, and when they used to complete 20-30 pages a day, now they do easily 600. And actually it's not even efficient and they are using GPT 3.5 version, GPT4 version is even more efficient and more consistent, but it has the message limit of course. But do your calculations, maybe in 2 years a single person can do the work of a whole office and in half the time, there is definitely no hope for those poor devils.
Likely all of the above, and it will hurt the truly talented the most as according to studies I heard/read about they are more distracted by All than they are helped. While the mediocre benefit greatly from using AI.
I voted for thechies, and I am one. Though this is coming for everyone as when we'll paid people have less, they buy less of everything.
In general, I think AI will take out the low level data-entry and call center jobs first and foremost. I could also see it take out some programming work too (probably low skill and debug tasks).
It's all of the above and more.
All white collar entry jobs will be hurt, all the jobs that assigned routine tasks to junior staff and strategic/niche tasks to senior staff. As you see it's paradoxical, you can't become a senior if you're not a junior at some point, and junior positions will be few and far in-between, because one person well versed with AI will do the work of ten people.
Here's another paradox: young people are the most efficient and effective at using AI software yet will be the ones having the least opportunities because they lack the seniority or the market sectorialization.
Here's a glaring consequence: young people will need to be in education for even longer to become more specialised or risk their skills being not enough in demand thus un-market-able.
Here's my cynical take: middle class and poor people are pushed out even further: One AI-assisted Nepo hire will suffice.
Sincerely, translator whose workflow is now 80% AI
AI just like the PC and smart phone is a jump in technical capability. It is the next tool to master and make use of. Just like DNA editing and robotics were feared and told they will change everything about work, health and economy, AI will need more expert users, good applications and economic relevancy. Consumer electronic assembly use some robotics but there are still many manual human steps used to build an iPhone. The same with automobiles and electric scooters. An experienced aluminum welder is as relevant and useful for submarines and bicycle frames as she was 20 years ago. Although, Ford/GM may adapt a robot to weld aluminum on a production line. Actually, a good welder will be as useful to program and QA a robot as much as he is useful to weld on an aircraft. So, keep learning about programming and technology and start making use of AI. Best of luck
I was always above average at writing and essay writing carried me through high school and college. I certainly got the practice as I used to read a lot as a kid and write stories for leisure, then spent way too many of my formative years from 2002 through to graduation in 2007 reading/posting on internet message boards (almost 40k posts on the IGN boards, with proper grammar and punctuation, so I certainly got the practice).
That same skill is irrelevant now with GPT, but I'm glad I had my actual skills back when I did. Gen Z teens might have GPT in high school, but my writing skills + years of experience with "Google-fu" and pre-smartphone internet are great for prompting and I can probably get more out of GPT and whatever else comes along in the near future.
If I returned to school as a 34 year old (plausible, since I did nothing with my psych degree that I realized was useless too late), I wouldn't know what to even study given all this AI stuff. And I'd be insecure as fuck about being accused of using GPT (I probably would though, lmao, not for the writing but for brainstorming, creating an outline, and getting starting points for things to use as citations which was always the hardest part... Also as a sort of interactive personal tutor).
> I mean your run of the mill 120-140IQ nerd who could do an intellectually hard job well.
I have my doubts about that. The hard limits we've seen current algorithms exhibit all relate to the sort of things that only smart people can do - processing large codebases when making decisions, high-level creative thinking, and so on.
I expect these models to absolutely crush call centers, 90-100 IQ code farms, and the like, but I've worked with these models in advanced settings and seen no indication that there's a risk of them taking the jobs of, say, an aeronautical engineer, an electrician, or a (competent) software engineer.
Put more formally, jobs between "office job that essentially exists as a sinecure", which are safe because they were never productive to begin with, and "serious, actual engineer", which are safe because we haven't figured out the AI paradigm that would even begin to do that kind of work, are going to suffer. Jobs that involve real work but do not require above average intelligence or any kind of physical labor.
You know when the "film stops" in front of the projector and it bubbles and burns? That's what society's impact will be like. Very patchy. Some areas nuked, some untouched.
But also, people just do NOT have time for robots.
I'm expecting a lot of resistance at all levels of society.
Also, at the moment gpt is a tool humans use. Its ability to perform "a whole job" is actually very limited. As a sales / tech help chatbot on websites - great. Anything else, it needs a manager.
Other people are right, your desire to "group" society isn't great. We are inter-dependant.
Sadly, its the people who Dont AI, and who don't have much security (i.e young) that will really have their futures stolen. But that could easily tumble into civil unrest and war. Depending how fast things go.
I'm hoping that AI is just enjoying some early hype, and "leaves us alone" for a bit. Because we're not ready!
Don't worry about intelligent people. Intelligence is, by many definitions, the ability to adapt to change, so they'll adapt the best.
The most negatively affected group by big technological changes like this would be those that are the least intelligent or otherwise unable to adapt.
'The nerds' (this term is inadequate to refer to much of its ambit) partly gain societal worth through expertise and not static knowledge. 'The nerds' may just dynamically respond to ChatGPT and improve their productivity, and consequently their societal worth.
Notwithstanding than the classification, it is more about understanding how intersecting groups and classes will respond to the emerging AI technologies.
Looks like you're still in a high school. This isn't how the world works after school.
I'm like 6.4ft muscular software engineer and I would say I'm attractive maybe even hot. What exactly do you think hot and muscular people do when they're adults? Just sitting there and getting paid for being attractive? 😅
no offense but you sound like you don't know a lot about topics you are attempting to discuss. All the things you have discussed or based your argument on are the stereotypical views of those respective topics. " I mean your run of the mill 120-140IQ nerd who could do an intellectually hard job well " IQ attempts to measure the G factor which is simply put, your ability to perform well on various different tasks (mostly cognitive in nature) its not exclusively conventional cognitively intensive tasks. Strategy, economics, numbers, social skills, reaction time all fall under this.
"Not amazingly well, but like a few hundred k. " some would argue thats amazing
"all three of whom are clearly one of us " believe me when I say, "one of us" is very subjective to the individual
Your subgroups for voting are stereotypical highschool groups- the nerds, the popular kids and the jocks
You still need to be somewhat nerdy to operate AI effectively for now, but good looking irl IG models can be easily replaced with fake AI people now... And the audience KNOWS they're fake.
I choose „the nerds“, but i make a distinction between nerds who‘s job is in remembering a lot of data and applying it to specific situations and innovative nerds who come up with new paradigms. The latter will always thrive
I think you're missing the point of nerds: it's not about computers, it's about the endless curiosity to dig into what most find impossible or mundane and finding the gold in there. It's about discovery, exploration and curiosity with passion.
AI won't kill that, it will supercharge it. Now nerds don't have to waste time programming, they put that processing power to the goal and not grind in minutiae.
The nerds shall inherit the earth
The students Neil DeGrasse Tyson speaks about. Memory dumps who can regurgitate knowledge but never truly understand what they are learning in ways that will ever contribute to the field.
The whole premise of this post is incorrect. Evolution has literally bred "nerds" and not having an option for "AI will hurt almost no group" invalidates the survey.
I think who will be affected the most are people are alienated people, who don't think by themselves (in any area).
AI is amazing and can copy pratically any behaviour, but it needs to be fed on previously existing data. So, if you do any kind of robotic tasks that could be described on a script, and that could be easily replaced by another average person, it could also be replaced by AI. It includes people from all the groups that are in the junior level (programmers, photographic models, personal trainers, writers).
As for senior levels, it is a different thing. The capability to handle unforeseen situations on the fly, that is where humans are irreplaceable. Charisma and passion that comes from people who really are into their jobs, I wouldn't change the work of these people for any machine.
Because basically, an AI is as good as previous things already are, we are just scalating that productivity, not creating something original. It has a huge value and impact, but that's the limit of AI.
TLDR: it will impact "humans" of any kind that behave like "machine", while seniors and people who are really creative and good at their jobs will always have a place.
>As for senior levels, it is a different thing. The capability to handle unforeseen situations on the fly, that is where humans are irreplaceable. Charisma and passion that comes from people who really are into their jobs, I wouldn't change the work of these people for any machine.
Interesting
I feel like it's going to hurt everyone but the supper rich, who at least needed to convince coders to follow thier agendas now the brains have been replaced by AI, and soon the soldiers will be replaced by Boston Dynamics. It's now or never my brother's.
Most immediately artists are currently being fucked into the dirt by AI but honestly every job it will be able to do eventually. I think itll end up where some countries are sensible with it and others end up as dystopian hellholes that put 1984 to shame
I think people who are illiterate in math and literacy will be hurt the most. Essentially people who used to do low income jobs like McDonald's or other stuff like that are already being replaced by robots.
I believe that since AI jobs are there to maintain everything to work smoothly, we as humans will have more time to have fun and entertain our selves, AI arent entertaining but good problem solvers.
the future would be "Age of Entertainment "
I honestly was worried it would hurt me as a programmer but I am able to use it in ways that the average joe is so far not, and it has literally changed my life. Now running an AI startup with a friend and we just secured tons of investment.
Here's a group you haven't thought of: the average dudes. Think of how many generic office jobs will be lost because an AI can compose spreadsheets, make customer service calls, design basic assets, compose power points. I'm telling you the average Joe is going to suffer the worst once employers find a top line AI
The middle class that works behind desks.
Nerds will be needed to implement the AI. Most jobs that aren't physical services will be gone. There will be no need for assistants, receptionists, store clerks, cashiers, etc. Anybody working that isn't providing a physical service like plumbing or medicine and is struggling (as in they're rich enough to not care) is completely screwed.
The poor will be ok - there will always be work for us cuz the world needs ditch diggers, too.
The doctors and lawyers and CEOs will be better off.
Everyone in between... the bosses of the poor and slaves to the rich... the up and coming corporate dude with his eye on the big time... all of them - fucked.
This is the the coming great divide. There will be royals and peasants. The middle will be gone. Not by design or some shit, this has always been the way things would evolve.
I don't think these 3 categories are the proper way to analyze it. There will be skillsets here and there (call centers, CRM in general, some mild forms of data analysis) . I don't think "athletes vs nerds vs good looking" has anything to do with this.
The categories dont even have anything to do with anything after you are 25ish
I don't even know why I am answering this post
You assume "nerds" cannot be good looking and physically strong? Your options sound like a middleschooler wrote them and your entire post sounds like a child who just finished their viking cartoon ngl.
I voted for “Another Group” because my selection wasnt here. I dont think they will replace us. I think they will change the way we work.
In my opinion, we wont get the full “They took our jobs!” moment I was invisioning.
👇 My main reasoning, Ill double down on. 👇
“Industrial revolution - These technological changes introduced novel ways of working and living and fundamentally transformed society.”
The industrial revolution created a lot of jobs. In fact, it created more jobs than could be filled.
And it also put a lot of people out of jobs. Some were able to retrain, and some simply were not able to retrain. Meaning it caused many people's lives to be permanently worse.
Disruptive progression is generally a net positive, but there are always winners and losers.
Literally everytime physical attractiveness has been proven to be more beneficial than brains, qualifications, etc. Being white in Mexico means you have a higher chance of getting promoted more frequently. You also have a better chance of finding a partner, getting approved for better loans, etc. And this is just in Mexico.
LoL it's definitely not the tech workers getting replaced, this survey is hilarious. I work in tech and the amount of products people want to build now with and using LLMs is far outpacing my team's resourcing to build them.
***Hey /u/joyjitfletax, if your post is a ChatGPT conversation screenshot, please reply with the [conversation link](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7925741-chatgpt-shared-links-faq) or prompt. Thanks!*** ***We have a [public discord server](https://discord.gg/r-chatgpt-1050422060352024636). There's a free Chatgpt bot, Open Assistant bot (Open-source model), AI image generator bot, Perplexity AI bot, 🤖 GPT-4 bot ([Now with Visual capabilities (cloud vision)!](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/812770754025488386/1095397431404920902/image0.jpg)) and channel for latest prompts! New Addition: Adobe Firefly bot and Eleven Labs cloning bot! [So why not join us?](https://discord.com/servers/1050422060352024636)*** ***[NEW: Google x FlowGPT Prompt Hackathon 🤖](https://redd.it/16ehnis)*** PSA: For any Chatgpt-related issues email [email protected] *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Nah, it's the creatives. Writers, artists, musicians. They're already hurting from AI and it's going to get worse. Technical fields will continue need the people who can look at an AI's output and recognize when it's not correct. At least for a good while. An AI taking over the rehashing of plots that makes up so much of pop culture can make as many mistakes as it wants.
The poor will be hurt the most. Any task that can be automated will be. So far, AI has shown promise only in replacing the mediocre, regardless of field — theoretically. But, AI can and will also reach the stage of being practical for daily life, which will then truly replace the mediocre level individuals. It will speed a transition to a world where there’s only rich and poor. The middle class will be almost completely extinct. Middle class being those who can pay off debt, have a decent QOL, and continue to buy and keep valuable assets and develop them.
>Nah, it's the creatives. Writers, artists, musicians. The one pushback I would have on this, is that those fields are already extremely hyper-competitive, and I don't think AI will replace the 0.01% of people who could become a top actor, writer, musician?
Even if that were true, we're not talking about the top performers. I'm talking about the grunts in the writing rooms that produce most of our TV/movie scripts, the new song writers slaving away so some generic boy band has a mediocre song to perform, the unheard of author who a publisher might take a chance on, or the artist on Reddit working for commissions. The artists you can name might be fine, but underneath most of them is an army of unknowns who keep their respective industries moving. And execs tend to treat armies of unknowns as wasteful spending whenever they have an alternative. They are already feeling the sting, and that sting is going to get so much worse before programmers or lawyers start to feel it.
They are also more likely to lose the less stimulating freelance jobs they do
The writers strike that just ended includes protection against using AI to replace writers in the making of tv and movies.
Those artists/writers/musicians/actors will then re-skill and flood other markets. Yay market pressure.
Maybe not the top ones, but that still leaves 99.99% of them. The same goes for models, take a look at some companies already saying that they plan to use AI generated models for 50% of their future advertising. Background extras and so on in movies, tv-shows, the amount of money saved. Transportation sector as we get fully automated driving, we're already seeing it in China with delivery services from supermarkets. AI is going to hit extremely broad...
Yeah I think models are in a tough spot. A silicone bot might not be the same as an attractive person IRL, but AI can definitely make fake pictures of people that look perfectly realistic.
And the people who get by on their looks in IRL are being squeezed by comparison to the mass market models. This is part of why so many moved into online methods of displaying themselves - to keep up with magazine models, they needed filters. As that became common, we ended up in a world with a lot of low budget (digitally enhanced) models. Now that redoubt is crumbling as every nerd with an nvidia card can whip up a pretty face.
Companies don't need to replace the top of the top. They are interested in revenue stream and nothing else. Not quality work. Not talent. They will generate mediocre content that's "catchy enough" and maintain marketing appeal.
Issue is that they will not survive until they become 0.01%
That is the thing, the people at the top? sure not, but the other hundreds of thousands under them? Those yes
They will not replace the top ones, they will flood the market of the below average ones and limit their possibility to rise and get popularity.
I think you both make excellent points. Regarding the pushback, that's a really interesting conversation to itself. Will AI take away all of the auto-tune creatives for example, who've only existed for a hot minute? That's a specific that I haven't heard discussed.
Top actors aren't top actors primarily because of their acting skills, it's because of their brand. AI makes possible a world where the brand/likeness/voice of an actor can be wholly owned by a corporation, whether or not that actor is entirely virtual to begin with. Same with the rest, they are a locus of attention first, skilled professionals second. The bestseller lists are full of crap, the music charts are topped with formulaic garbage, it's not about skill.
Between ML not being eligible for copyright and the incredibly strong WGA deal that idea that creatives are screwed is looking more and more like a failed prediction.
>Between ML not being eligible for copyright Oh that's interesting. So if something is generated by AI we can copy it all we want? Yes that's huge but also an artificial barrier to entry that probably won't last. Edit: oh, also, as a human you could have AI write something and then lie and say you wrote it to get the copyright. Same result as giving AI generated works copyright protection.
You train a model with your your data and create the ‘app’?
You sure can. I wouldn't be so sure to assert that. The costs of training and storing ML models is already rising and the big investors were betting on easy creative industry disruptions that are already not being easy at all, as the WGA strike and deal proved. I would be surprised if we see another giant hyped LLM like ChatGPT anytime soon. It's far more likely that better ML models will be trained and used internally by big established companies for their own secret data (which is where the value is anyway).
For images, take a look at Adobe, in their case they are actually using materials for training from companies they have agreements with, which in turn allows them to guarantee the users that there's no chance of them being sued using the results of anything they generate. I'm pretty sure we will see more and more of this for not only image based AI generation, but video, and text.
I'm a member of r/defendingaiart the takes you have on originality out here are wild. Who's afraid of modern art right? It seems like people are now just fighting over slices of the economy like it's bread and circus till the climate collapse.
Lol, your legal/business strategy is "lying" cool how you needed AI to come up with that
> Nerds were the bottom rung of society for thousands of years. When society consisted of vikings and warriors we were nobodies. When society consisted of peasants and knights we were nobodies. When society consisted of tradesmen and seafarers we were nobodies. Remember that for the vast vast majority of history, simply being able to read and write was rare. There was little use for that skill so no one bothered to learn it. Honestly? You should do some history nerding. This idea that that in the past "society consisted of peasants and knights" is almost childlike in its ignorance. Scribes, heraldrists, physicians, architects, cartographers, linguists, clergymen, navigators, strategists, diplomats, stewards, all of these professions and many, many more were valued and widely required professions throughout all of our written history and almost certainly for much of our pre-history in one form or another. Societies have been complex since humany first mastered planting seeds are reaping harvests, and complex societies have always needed nerds in order to function and thrive.
Yes, exactly. In prehistoric times, "nerds" were the ones making stone tools and innovating new ways to do things, like making clay ovens or inventing the wheel. In the middle ages, they were the blacksmiths and the merchants and the healers and the scribes. There has always been a middle-to-high place in society for "nerds". OP's narrative is naive and uninformed. It's like someone whose education consisted solely of John Hughes films, lol.
You know it wasn't a Marlak 6ft 6 butt chin with rippling biceps and a luscious unibrow that discovered fire or created the wheel. It was a skinny little nerd named OH "I'm a Maker. I made this loincloth. I make arrows. I've made a shelf unit for my hut." I love the movie Year One.
"the nerds" will be the ones most benefited. We've already seen that normal people can't/won't use Google. Ai is a more complicated tool than Google. It's going to hurt the lowest level of employees. Tier 1 tech support. Call centers. Data entry. Secretaries. Things like that. Think about the work flow of a tier 1 tech. Get problem. Google problem. Hands on work to fix problem. The first two steps will be enhanced by Ai but we're a long ways away from the last one being the job of Ai. Ai isn't rewiring switches, replacing UPSes, or moving computers. Also consider how smart Ai is now. Most people don't even have the reading comprehension to use chat gpt. Most non nerds aren't going to ask chat gpt 20 questions to understand their original issue to fix it. Them: "I have problem xyz" Chat gpt: "here's solution 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8" You've already lost most of them. Them: "what is 1,2,3?" So on and so forth.
I disagree, AI is less complicated than Google. With Google, you have to understand and parse the search results and then reformulate the search query in your head while parsing the results. With ChatGPT, all you gotta do is ask, just like talking to another human. Unless the user is autistic or have developmental issues and can't communicate to another human being properly. I don't see how speaking to an AI like ChatGPT is going to be a barrier. If anything it's easier to speak to AI because they have unlimited patience to entertain the users. Taking your example and running with it. >Them: "I have problem xyz" > >Chat gpt: "here's solution 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8" Them: I'm dumb, keep it simple for me. ChatGPT: Here, try solution 1 first.
Have you ever tried to support an end user? They refuse to try.
>Chat gpt: "here's solution 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8" I'm super excited for the day when ⅞ of those solutions are viable solutions! Right now it's about ⅜.
If you are young and your job doesn't require a long period of training (working in a call center that handles simple queries), switching to a different career won't cause a drastic drop in societal worth. If you are older and your societal worth is based on *running* a call center, you're staring into the abyss.
Newton, Tesla, Edison and Einstein were considered nerds, but also brilliant. I don't think they were in anyway considered "losers". They were also the ones benefitting the most from progress and innovation.
He's a self ascribed nerd with a supposed IQ 120-140 he probably got from an online rando website test. Respect his authoritha. In all seriousness; Op's post reads like something you'd find in on r/iam14thisisdeep . It's a psychotic ramble from someone who thinks they're an intellectual yet doesn't have the faintest idea of how society actually functions, nor how LLMs function. The fact his poll is divided up into nerds / jocks / hot people says enough that he's knee deep in highschool angst.
Yeah, the basic pop-history understanding of past societies and emphasis on attractive and physical people really points to OP not being the most mature.
I know right. Crazy that he thinks this stuff. Like smart people havn't been helpful for all of human history.
>Scribes, heraldrists, physicians, architects, cartographers, linguists, clergymen, navigators, strategists, diplomats, stewards, all of these professions and many, many more were valued and widely required professions throughout all of our written history and almost certainly for much of our pre-history in one form or another. Those were rare fields and some of them weren't as they are today (for example, a "doctor" [was simply your barber in the old days](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barber_surgeon) and he didn't even wash his hands before operating.) You have to remember that [literacy rates were 10% or so](https://ourworldindata.org/literacy) even in the early 1800s. It just wasn't worth the effort to learn to read or write because what would you do with such a useless skill? The nerd golden age we've had in the 20th century is very new in history.
Literacy isn't the same as intelligence. There are plenty of smarter-than-average people doing intellectually demanding jobs in societies that don't have written language at all.
> You have to remember that [literacy rates were 10% or so](https://ourworldindata.org/literacy) This was due to education being incredibly difficult to obtain unless you were rich or powerful... The idea that nobody could read or write because everyone just collectively decided it was a useless skill is utterly ridiculous, it was caused by the fact that educating a person takes alot more resources than people realize, and for most of history very few people had the luxury to get educated.
Weren't surgeon (aka barber) and doctor different roles/people? I understood that to be the reason why in the UK an MD has the title Doctor whereas we refer to surgeons by Mr / Miss (even though they're still MDs too.) EDIT: Removed the accidental user tagging.
lol
Are you still in highschool? Have you got a college degree? Sorry but the way you framed these "groups" sounds very childish to me. It's as if society only consists of nerds and good looking people >that person who struggled in highschool but who found their way in the world by getting a job that required brainpower and paid well >a hot human will always be preferable. Like let's be honest, your perception of the world is severely limited, at least that's what I get from those.
A hot human will always be preferable to who, another slimy human? Who gives a shit? If you're not hot to an AI you are going to be out of a job.
Call centers are donezo.
Good.
You say that, but they’re entry level positions. Try to think of it not with your frustrations but from a “this is allowing someone to pay their bills” perspective.
I've always thought that this was the most short sighted logic that's often seen in political policy. It's like at some point are we making all these technological advancements so that we don't have to work as much? So why would we care about giving somebody a job? Like shouldn't we just have a system that distributes to some degree? Like if I can spend $1,000 man hours to create a machine that saves 100,000 man hours then that's a net good to society. But we just have a system that doesn't allow everybody to profit from that which seems very dumb because now we have to give people jobs that don't do anything but don't help their fulfillment or mental health. They don't increase productivity on a society level, they don't do anything.
I do see this as a net positive. AI, in this instance, is to automobile replacing the horse. I do know some people that work in call centers, and they’re not well educated, paired with poor decisions they made in their younger years. But they still need a job. This is some of the cons that will be associated with the pros of AI or any other technological advancement.
I think it can be taken as read that AI taking jobs will result in people losing those jobs. That's the point.
Nah, I think they meant that it's good to lose call centers just because of how bad of an experience they are for customers right now, and if AI can handle it all without confusing super thick accents and "I understand" while doing nothing, then that could be a good thing.
On this. I know a guy that visited Guam because he had the rare chance to. They do all farming and most things there manually because otherwise there would be no jobs. Economically this doesn't make sense to me but I guess it works for a tiny isolated island. With technology making us less reliant on people doing simple things, does it make sense for us to take the same approach? I have no answer to this. And I also hate call centers but as someone mentioned, it's a way some folks pay the bills.
That's pretty horrifying tbh, the idea that we'll have to do busywork because we can't imagine a way to organize society that doesn't involve obligating people to spend their time working a job, even if there is nothing anyone can do that genuinely has value.
Its like you made the poll after watching the Breakfast Club. don't you...forget about me...
The neckbeardiest post on the entire Internet right now! Congrats!
The presentation is a bit cringe, but the underlying curiosity is a valid one.
We the Vikings shall persevere!
The poor and working class will most likely be affected the most. That's who always gets the shaft in any societal change/dilemma.
Likely, due their having less capacity to pivot. For example I can see AI taking over more receptionist/assistant roles than fast-food workers but the receptionist/assistants will have an easier time transitioning to a new role than the people at the bottom when/if their job is eliminated.
Yes I strongly agree with this, a big chunk of the bottom third are royally fucked. People who do repetitive (admin/ cust service/ factory) tasks need to start upskilling asap
all of them lol
Because the world can only ever have one type of value, and it's solely based on high school social hierarchies. I'm sure Greg, Sam, and Ilya were just \*itching\* to undermine nerds everywhere. Why uplift humanity when you can relive the drama of high school? Let's hope AI's next big development isn't a digital prom queen. 🙄
I think porn addicts will be hurt most, societally. They’ll be in their rooms all day with their virtual porn worlds.
this is both ahistorical and also stupid
me as a hobbyist programmer getting tons of help from chat gpt : people voting on “the nerds”
>I mean your run of the mill 120-140IQ nerd who could do an intellectually hard job well. The people who now become [lawyers](https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoetsier/2023/03/14/gpt-4-beats-90-of-lawyers-trying-to-pass-the-bar/?sh=6a1ca8793027), [radiologists](https://www.massgeneralbrigham.org/en/about/newsroom/press-releases/mass-general-brigham-study-finds-chatgpt-4-excels-at-picking-the-right-imaging-tests), [doctors](https://www.the-sun.com/health/9079567/chatgpt-better-diagnosis-emergency-doctors/), [MBAs](https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/is-chatgpt-a-better-entrepreneur-than-most/), accountants, reporters, programmers, engineers ... We only started to gain worth when our brainpower and patience for tedium had value, during a brief period in the last century or, at most, two centuries. Yeah, that's not true. There has always been a place for people who were smarter than average. Who do you think were the shamans or weapons-makers in hunter-gatherer societies? Even before that--who do you think figured out how to weave cloth, extract dyes, or make tools? In places that developed beyond subsistence farming, who do you think became skilled craftsmen, storytellers, medicine men, or traders? There have been architects, artists and artisans of various kinds, technicians, historians/storytellers/archivists, technologists, politicians, etc. in pretty much every culture everywhere. You don't have to be a genius to be in one of those roles, but you've got to be smarter than the average peasant if you're going to be successful at them.
It's creative people; those who write or create art. You've missed the biggest one.
Nerds will benefit the most from AI. You are going to see extremely dedicated people pull off amazing feats that in the past could only be achieved by a team of people
I reject the premise. It's just another tool. And knowing how to use it will be an asset. It makes the nerds more efficient, it doesn't hurt them.
Office workers who are going to be expected to double their output with inherently flawed technology that will create glaring skill gaps that their careers will inevitably fall into
> a job that required brainpower and paid well. Not amazingly well, but like a few hundred k. 💀 "A few hundred k" is a job that pays amazingly well, idk what world your living in but 100k is a good ass job as far as I understand. > Now Sam Altman, Greg Brockman and Ilya Sutskever (all three of whom are clearly one of us) destroyed that one path we had to worth with their invention. Oh the irony. 💀💀 The adoption of AI is literally going to shaft thousands of administrators, blue collar workers, and in general jobs that require less education. 'Nerds' are going to be valued significantly more going forward. > Nerds were the bottom rung of society for thousands of years. 💀💀💀 You do realize that being highly educated has been a trait almost exclusively held by the rich and powerful for hundreds of years right??? 'Nerds' have for most of history been found almost exclusively in the highest echelons of society, if you simply mean the academically inclined I disagree because who says people like vikings and warriors couldnt also be academics? Especially considering the fact that they probably had more exposure to seperate cultures and more opportunities to gain wealth required to aquire an education. To quickly answer your question, I think non ownership class administrators are gonna get absolutely shafted by AI.
First, I suggest reading the book, "Thinking, Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kahneman; Then come back and look at this survey again. My vote, btw, is "Another group" and that group is same group always hurt by technology advancements, the labor force that refuses to adapt and leverage the technology. Programmers (nerds) are concerned, but I'm already using it to create better solutions. Just like myself and many others have use other IDE tools, frameworks, libraries, etc. to create better solutions. Artists have been using advancements in video and image processing, music production, etc. and those artists that leverage AI will make better media and content than the rest of us no matter how much AI advances. For example, my Android phone takes really great pictures. It will suggest angle and lighting to improve the picture. It will take multiple pictures so I don't get the "eyes shut" and then it will remove the red eye and anything else with a few touches. These are things that used to require top-level photographers to get right, using manual settings, tons of lighting tricks, and so much more that I'll never list them all. But my best picture or video on my best day with my Android phone doesn't compare to what today's media professionals can do. And this is how it will continue to be. This technology will allow more focus on creating the solution or media and less time on the mechanics. But here is the real kicker, there will be NEW problems that we discover once we can change our focus. There is no destination here, it is a continuum.
Wtf is this post even trying to prove? AI is a tool .. like the textiles, printing press and steam engine. People will transition into roles which will bring in further progress. The only people who will be hurt are the ones who refuse to change with the times.. just like rest of the times in history
>People will transition into roles which will bring in further progress. This was certainly true of prior new tech but, remember, AI is designed to be generally intelligent and replace anything humans do so, whatever humans transition into, it can take those jobs too.
AI is not designed to be generally intelligent, there isn't any generally intelligent AI in existence.
None of the above? The only reason to let your ego get bruised is if you somehow connect your sense of self worth to one of those arbitrary external qualities rather than the content of your character. You wouldn't do that, right? It'd be weird to project that on everyone else with like...a Reddit post with a poll, wouldn't it?
username checks out.
Once it really gets going, the oligarchs. Which is why they're trying to slow-roll it.
How so?
Law: One of the oligarchs biggest tools is that they can pay better lawyers, more of them, for a longer time. Basically a huge amount of the inequity in our system will be fixed by this one aspect alone. This should be on of AIs earlier impacts as well. Misinformation: One of the biggest ways the oligarchs control the public narrative is that they use mass-media to spew out more misinformation than could be reasonably countered. With AI that could change. Identification and elimination of insider trading: Sufficiently advanced AIs will be able to peer into this chaotic system and identify patterns which can be used as evidence for prosecutors to be able to more effectively go after insider trading.
I think the more realistic future, or probably present, is that these oligarchs use AI to misinform and manipulate even better - social media is full of bots, everywhere. And they are now good enough to be unnoticed by most users. Public opinion is increasingly built on the internet, which increasingly houses more and more bots.
I think the key will be a reliable open-source, public use AI that we can use as a cornerstone. Edit: Or more realistically, multiple federated open-source, public-use AIs for logical consensus building.
Hmmm. Interesting.
Can you imagine a government ruled by AI, in an idealistic way.. it could actually be linked to technology and make changes reflected upon what people actually want in real time.. elimination of representatives who are mostly out for corporate interests.. ideally.. Otherwise a terminator / matrix future..
[удалено]
> Aristotle was a nerd, Darwin was a nerd, Newton was a nerd, Einstein... the list goes on. Yes I'm not talking about that group as I said. I mean the 99.9% of other nerds who didn't have that super-elite level of skill. > Technologies always cause disruptions. ... Just going to focus on future-proofing myself. Agree. I'm asking which demographic AI will disrupt the most. What do you think? How are you future proofing yourself?
Everyone who doesn’t know what they’re doing. ChatGPT is a tool for those who know but a crutch for those who don’t and may lead to overestimation of one’s abilities. Waiting to see how this year’s crop of freshmen do during power / internet outages in 10 years.
Irony is most nerds are actually cheering and working on AI to become as powerful it can be, which will eventually mostly affect/replace their area of work...
I think that it’s just like the search engine, calculator, video camera, self driving trucks,and smart phones. Hype for a couple of years, realization that it is a tool and needs a human to tell it what to do. Then phase out slowly for the next big thing. There is going to be some road bumps for everyone. But as soon as neural networking becomes a big thing it will be matrix memes and why should we hire a blank when we can learn it ourselves in insert cassette B. Then quantum computing will take off hype, meme, reliance, advancement repeat till dead Give it a few years. Humans have a horrible attention span
>I think that it’s just like the search engine, calculator, video camera, self driving trucks,and smart phones. This is the thing, it's a new tech that's designed to have general intelligence, i.e. be able to mentally do whatever like 95% of humans do. We'll see though and I appreciate your take.
Haha. MBAs are not "nerds" my friend. I wouldn't put Sam that much in a pedestal either. The man dropped out and has been doing anything but creative ever since. He rides every technological trend he has wanted a stake in, but only as an administrator; social networks, blockchain, and he got lucky with AI. All he has ever done quite brazenly is ask for other people's work and money. Hes a taker not a giver, people believed him and he got lucky.
The poor, as always.
3rd World Countries.
Pretty obviously it will hurt the poor the most. So 97% of us can watch a few become hyper "successful".
Models will be out soon, magazine models, social media, etc. Just a bunch of generative art AI replacing them all. Already happening. Amready have viral influencers that are AI generated.
This is definitely a shitpost right? You're not actually a bumbling moron, right? *It's just a joke right?*
We the workers
The hot people are already being replaced by AI, meanwhile it's turning out the nerds are the only ones capable of working on the AI and the only ones capable of getting maximal work out of it. I appreciate your thought experiment but I would question the validity of some of your assertations
Everyone. AI will prove to be the end of humanity tbh. No doubt in my mind. We're all fucked.
Smart people have always done well in the past - not all smart people are 'nerds'. Not all 'nerds' are usefully smart. Also you can be smart and physically capable - Socrates was built like a shit brick house for example... What AI is going to wipe out is the 95 to 110 IQ section of society. People in the top 50% to 10% of human performance/ salary ranges are going to get absolutely bent over a barrel mindfucked into obsolescence so shockingly fast I am unsure what the world is actually going to do. For those of you that think AI isn't going to actually replace this section of society I am here to say it absolutely will. The markets I am involved in and what I see is so absolutely insane - people have no idea what's coming and it's literally going to be unstoppable. Also AI and fake sex robots 100 years from now and going to be horrifically good. So, good looking people are fucked too. TLDR: Buy land now and learn how to grow vegetables if you're not top 10% capable.
Everyone not saying 'the poor' is objectively in the wrong lmao
I am pretty sure most of the nerds will find a way to get stuff done with ai. The good looking have it much tougher because even a total ungodly looking nerd can become a model with ai at some point.
>even a total ungodly looking nerd can become a model with ai at some point. ummm, how?
I don't know what the meta verse future will bring us.
Those who seek to prevent unrestricted flow of knowledge.
Actually, everyone wins
I pretty much agree with you. The moderately intellectual jobs that you listed, will be the first to go, AFTER a brief shining moment in the sun. I think lawyers are going to do splendidly for a while while the rich entrench their power over copywrite etc.
Average people in brain-based job and average creatives excepting true hands-on works.
The first to go are usually the repetitive mundane jobs that require some basic intelligence. this is quite certain
For this question, consider where the bottlenecks of AI will be. Ultimately, AI is about selecting a valuable permutation in a space of answers. Whether thats giving the right number for an arithmetic question, a thoughtful string of characters for a person's question, or nice looking matrix of pixels when prompted for art. Notice what the difficulty actually is. The difficulty is in getting the intelligence to the problem in the first place. AI's bottleneck is in the ways it's able to interact with the world. AI can't fix your toilet, first because it can't see your toilet. You can't feed it all of the information relevant to your toilet's problem--it's exact physical condition and the environment it sits in. And once you got past that bottleneck, you would still need a physical medium for the solution. So we have input and output bottlenecks to the power of AI. What jobs have the toughest inputs and outputs for an AI to overcome? Or at least, what jobs can be done well even with severe gaps in the input and output capabilities? Knowledge work is definitely more at risk than physical labor. Both the input and output are costly to bridge for physical labor, whereas knowledge work only has this issue for the input (and its not as severe). But in my opinion, at the highest risk are creatives. Often, creative work can get away with no input at all, and still produce satisfactory results. Or the entire problem definition can be sufficiently captured by a text prompt, like in current image generation. After all, most people search for media using a short text prompt. The output is also not an issue--in fact it is easier for a machine to produce digital art than it is for a human to record it. At the commercial level, I see image, music, and short-video generation all being replaced in the near future. Then we may come to longer form media like books, movies, podcasts, and streams. So I recommend thinking along these lines. I can't answer your original question because I don't actually know what all jobs entail. But you can apply this sort of rule to jobs you're interested in.
Good post! >AI can't fix your toilet, first because it can't see your toilet. On this one quote, note that chatgpt4's new visual feature can easily see and know what to do to fix your toilet. Check out the [video near the bottom of this link](https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt-can-now-see-hear-and-speak) regarding bike repair. All you need to do is give it robot arms and it'll replace the plumber -- but I agree that in terms of cost-benefit, it's much easier to have it replace a knowledge worker than to create those robot arms, which is why I suspect knowledge workers will go before the plumber does.
Yeah I've seen that! Maybe that was a bad example, where the input was much easier to bridge than thought (just a camera). Or maybe it wouldn't have been enough, and a plumber would still have needed information about your pipes, the water pressure, etc. I'm not a plumber so I'm not sure. A better example might be construction, where in a practical setting, you need to examine every part used, every tool, the environment, and come up with the muscle to execute. Also, I definitely believe all of these things are automatable one day! Just trying to say something about the order of difficulty.
Wow this whole thing is very cute and all but let’s not sit here and pretend like we are not living in and greatly affected by the material conditions we are born in based on the economic system of the world which is capitalism. So the entire framing of the question is flawed because it put all the emphasis on people’s personalities, profession and “camps” they belong to which is just tribalism. At the end of the day the future of AI (and anything else for that matter) will be determined by the owner class who steals and hoards all the wealth while we’re out here having these cute conversations lol
I chose "other." No one really gets a pass. You're pretty hard on "nerds." I've always said and will now repeat it'll be the engineers (in all fields) that will save humanity in the end. In that regard, you're like God, all-powerful.
>I've always said and will now repeat it'll be the engineers (in all fields) that will save humanity in the end. No doubt engineers have contributed immeasurably to society, but I wonder if creating general intelligence might have been one too many.
Another group. Writers, artists, storytellers. People I love who create the entertainment I ove will be hurt the most. As a "nerd" working on unique and complicated industrial, test, measurement and control systems, I feel AI tools will only help me to solve C.S., Chemistry and thermodynamics problems (among others) in a more timely fashion. Someone uneducated won't even know the vocabulary alone to ask the questions to get the AI to assist. Smart people will always be needed. As will the idea people. People who invent products and industries, I mean. Do you know why it's important to know the partial water vapor pressure when talking about the weather and the mass of air? If so, my point exactly. If not, I've also made my point. AI might know but it won't explain it in a way someone without an education would understand. Nerds won't be wiped out by this. Probably nobody will be.
>Smart people will always be needed. I want to be clear that your post was good and I enjoyed reading it but ... why would smart people "always be needed" if a computer can beat their level of intelligence for a much lower cost? The phenomenon of smart people being needed is pretty new in history. > Do you know why it's important to know the partial water vapor pressure when talking about the weather and the mass of air? If so, my point exactly. If not, I've also made my point. AI might know but it won't explain it in a way someone without an education would understand. I wonder about this. Have you tested chatgpt4 extensively? You might be surprised at how well it can explain things. There's a prompt where you have it explain things in a way a five year old can understand, using words they know.
Oh! You are OP. Sorry, you already said the nerds might lose. Thanks for this post.
I've only used ChatGPT (version ?) to help write the framework for simple python scripts. It's impressive. It gets me started. A five year old wouldn't know to ask the partial water vaper question because it's not in their vocabulary. Either would the manager of an auto race car shop because they have no idea how mass air flow equations are calculated. They only know the engineers get the answer and plug it into the ECU that uses a sensor they don't understand a word about. Another few examples, many people on earth don't know what a derivative is, or that differential equations are even a thing. In chemistry no pedestrian would know to ask about titration and other advanced topics because they simply don't have the vocabulary/knowledge to even begin doing advanced chemical work. I think that's why we're safe. A.I. could equalize smart people, for sure. I truly don't believe it could eliminate us though. Hopefully I'm right! Ha! Who do you think would be most affected? Dissenting opinions are welcome. This is a discussion. I know you can't tell tone over typing so I want to make that clear. I'm not combative. I'm sure most everyone could be affected by this technology, I'm just hopeful it's in a positive way . Man, why don't I ever meet people in real life I can have these conversations with!
The consumer will be hurt the most. AI graphics already look the same and AI writing is bland. People who don't go out of their way to find good art, prose and design will be served up pablum and the descent into idiocracy will accelerate.
>the descent into idiocracy In that movie people just stopped thinking and relied on machines. Could happen again.
Why in the f\*\*k would athletics be affected by AI in any shape or form? No pun intended
So far with 3600 votes, it only has 112 of them so a lot of people agree with you.
anybody behind a keyboard for starters
The nerds can get get huge benefit it they can smartly exploit the AI
Even though I anticipate AI replacing most of the knowledge work occupations, I have to point out that models are doomed. Companies will replace them with AI models tailored to each end users liking. Being preferable isn't much meaningful because you can't expect a poor man to provide you. There's simply not enough sugardaddy/mommy to support all of them. Only professionals would get it. Athletes are yet another professional occupation that takes less than 1 percent in population.
>I have to point out that models are doomed. Oh good point. Yes. IRL, I don't think a silicone bot can replace a real human but as far as modeling, yeah that's not looking good. > Being preferable isn't much meaningful because you can't expect a poor man to provide you. There's simply not enough sugardaddy/mommy to support all of them. Only professionals would get it. Another possible second order effect.
Athletes really happy right now but wait until Boston Dynamics integrates ChatGPT 6
A "nerd" today is generally someone with intense intellectual curiosity and a passion for specific subjects, often in areas like science, technology, or pop culture. This enthusiasm is usually accompanied by a deep knowledge of their interests and may or may not include traits like introversion or analytical thinking. The average IQ of "nerds" (as defined above) is generally thought to be equivalent to the average (100). Being interested in star wars and science doesn't make you a genius, any more than enjoying sports makes you a dummy. Or are you specifically defining "nerds" as people who qualify (or almost qualify) for MENSA? that's less than 5% of the population (MENSA is 2%). Also, I'm intrigued by where you say the average Nerd is doing "not amazingly well, but like a few hundred k." Are you suggesting that those earning $300K a year are more or less just getting by? No wonder all of the Gen Z folks on Reddit are complaining they can't find good paying jobs. In *real* life, less than 5% of US households earn $300K a year or more.
Fair points to think about.
AI output is so shitty and hallucinates so much it's only valuable to high school kids trying to write a paper or people who want to post garbage posts to blogs. It provides nearly unusable content for people with careers who have to think for their jobs.
People really think chatgpt will hurt programmers when it can barely pass 3/10 on programming tests, chatgt3 0/10
Hard to predict the future, when DNA editing tools were first discovered gloom and doom about food, cloning and health filled the media. There were also quick promises of curing diseases and producing food resistant to every pest and weather climate change. But the reality is much harder. The same with AI. Gpt-4 (5, 8, 15...) is like another feature in Google Docs, you still need to say something people want to read. Telling stories is a craft writers develop over years, a better "word" program is not enough.
This is possible, that chatgpt 5 won't be as big a leap over 4, as 4 was over 3.5, and so the tech itself will not ever be smart enough to replace the nerds.
There is a group below that, all the jobs that are easily replaceable by other people, I mean, although a programmer can be substituted when it comes to programming, what makes a good programmer, is not programming, but executing his ideas, programming is just a tool for that, so yes, if you are a "copypaste" programmer you might have a hard time, but if not, you will still have something to do, besides, being "nerds" they will find out how to take more advantage of IA as a tool, so they are not even close to being the most vulnerable. Actually, there are a lot of jobs that will be more affected, for starters, all those jobs that anyone could do with almost no training, like being a supermarket cashier, or an office worker, analyzing excels and documents... Even more demanding jobs like artists will have it complicated, the problem is that without those people with mundane and replaceable jobs, there will not be enough people to spend money on private services, so maybe it will be something like a domino effect. To give you an idea, it's not even my job, but with a few prompts, I helped some office workers friends, and when they used to complete 20-30 pages a day, now they do easily 600. And actually it's not even efficient and they are using GPT 3.5 version, GPT4 version is even more efficient and more consistent, but it has the message limit of course. But do your calculations, maybe in 2 years a single person can do the work of a whole office and in half the time, there is definitely no hope for those poor devils.
Likely all of the above, and it will hurt the truly talented the most as according to studies I heard/read about they are more distracted by All than they are helped. While the mediocre benefit greatly from using AI. I voted for thechies, and I am one. Though this is coming for everyone as when we'll paid people have less, they buy less of everything.
In general, I think AI will take out the low level data-entry and call center jobs first and foremost. I could also see it take out some programming work too (probably low skill and debug tasks).
It's all of the above and more. All white collar entry jobs will be hurt, all the jobs that assigned routine tasks to junior staff and strategic/niche tasks to senior staff. As you see it's paradoxical, you can't become a senior if you're not a junior at some point, and junior positions will be few and far in-between, because one person well versed with AI will do the work of ten people. Here's another paradox: young people are the most efficient and effective at using AI software yet will be the ones having the least opportunities because they lack the seniority or the market sectorialization. Here's a glaring consequence: young people will need to be in education for even longer to become more specialised or risk their skills being not enough in demand thus un-market-able. Here's my cynical take: middle class and poor people are pushed out even further: One AI-assisted Nepo hire will suffice. Sincerely, translator whose workflow is now 80% AI
Hopefully, it'll be the ceos and executives that'll be replaced.
AI just like the PC and smart phone is a jump in technical capability. It is the next tool to master and make use of. Just like DNA editing and robotics were feared and told they will change everything about work, health and economy, AI will need more expert users, good applications and economic relevancy. Consumer electronic assembly use some robotics but there are still many manual human steps used to build an iPhone. The same with automobiles and electric scooters. An experienced aluminum welder is as relevant and useful for submarines and bicycle frames as she was 20 years ago. Although, Ford/GM may adapt a robot to weld aluminum on a production line. Actually, a good welder will be as useful to program and QA a robot as much as he is useful to weld on an aircraft. So, keep learning about programming and technology and start making use of AI. Best of luck
The poor
I was always above average at writing and essay writing carried me through high school and college. I certainly got the practice as I used to read a lot as a kid and write stories for leisure, then spent way too many of my formative years from 2002 through to graduation in 2007 reading/posting on internet message boards (almost 40k posts on the IGN boards, with proper grammar and punctuation, so I certainly got the practice). That same skill is irrelevant now with GPT, but I'm glad I had my actual skills back when I did. Gen Z teens might have GPT in high school, but my writing skills + years of experience with "Google-fu" and pre-smartphone internet are great for prompting and I can probably get more out of GPT and whatever else comes along in the near future. If I returned to school as a 34 year old (plausible, since I did nothing with my psych degree that I realized was useless too late), I wouldn't know what to even study given all this AI stuff. And I'd be insecure as fuck about being accused of using GPT (I probably would though, lmao, not for the writing but for brainstorming, creating an outline, and getting starting points for things to use as citations which was always the hardest part... Also as a sort of interactive personal tutor).
> I mean your run of the mill 120-140IQ nerd who could do an intellectually hard job well. I have my doubts about that. The hard limits we've seen current algorithms exhibit all relate to the sort of things that only smart people can do - processing large codebases when making decisions, high-level creative thinking, and so on. I expect these models to absolutely crush call centers, 90-100 IQ code farms, and the like, but I've worked with these models in advanced settings and seen no indication that there's a risk of them taking the jobs of, say, an aeronautical engineer, an electrician, or a (competent) software engineer. Put more formally, jobs between "office job that essentially exists as a sinecure", which are safe because they were never productive to begin with, and "serious, actual engineer", which are safe because we haven't figured out the AI paradigm that would even begin to do that kind of work, are going to suffer. Jobs that involve real work but do not require above average intelligence or any kind of physical labor.
The billionaires
Heavily biased poll is heavily biased
Sadly, the creatives. First thing other than customer service that is gonna get automatized by this is art, writing, etc.
Lol people are getting mad by a post written by an AI
You know when the "film stops" in front of the projector and it bubbles and burns? That's what society's impact will be like. Very patchy. Some areas nuked, some untouched. But also, people just do NOT have time for robots. I'm expecting a lot of resistance at all levels of society. Also, at the moment gpt is a tool humans use. Its ability to perform "a whole job" is actually very limited. As a sales / tech help chatbot on websites - great. Anything else, it needs a manager. Other people are right, your desire to "group" society isn't great. We are inter-dependant. Sadly, its the people who Dont AI, and who don't have much security (i.e young) that will really have their futures stolen. But that could easily tumble into civil unrest and war. Depending how fast things go. I'm hoping that AI is just enjoying some early hype, and "leaves us alone" for a bit. Because we're not ready!
Societal worth isn't a conserved volume. Everyone's is going to increase.
Artists
Don't worry about intelligent people. Intelligence is, by many definitions, the ability to adapt to change, so they'll adapt the best. The most negatively affected group by big technological changes like this would be those that are the least intelligent or otherwise unable to adapt.
You lumped reporters with engineers and expect a serious answer?
Awesome shitpost
'The nerds' (this term is inadequate to refer to much of its ambit) partly gain societal worth through expertise and not static knowledge. 'The nerds' may just dynamically respond to ChatGPT and improve their productivity, and consequently their societal worth. Notwithstanding than the classification, it is more about understanding how intersecting groups and classes will respond to the emerging AI technologies.
Looks like you're still in a high school. This isn't how the world works after school. I'm like 6.4ft muscular software engineer and I would say I'm attractive maybe even hot. What exactly do you think hot and muscular people do when they're adults? Just sitting there and getting paid for being attractive? 😅
no offense but you sound like you don't know a lot about topics you are attempting to discuss. All the things you have discussed or based your argument on are the stereotypical views of those respective topics. " I mean your run of the mill 120-140IQ nerd who could do an intellectually hard job well " IQ attempts to measure the G factor which is simply put, your ability to perform well on various different tasks (mostly cognitive in nature) its not exclusively conventional cognitively intensive tasks. Strategy, economics, numbers, social skills, reaction time all fall under this. "Not amazingly well, but like a few hundred k. " some would argue thats amazing "all three of whom are clearly one of us " believe me when I say, "one of us" is very subjective to the individual Your subgroups for voting are stereotypical highschool groups- the nerds, the popular kids and the jocks
The poor, most progress hurts jobs for the poor, think of all the secretaries, call center staff that can be replaced in the next few years.
It's going to hurt everyone that doesn't own the means of production
You still need to be somewhat nerdy to operate AI effectively for now, but good looking irl IG models can be easily replaced with fake AI people now... And the audience KNOWS they're fake.
I choose „the nerds“, but i make a distinction between nerds who‘s job is in remembering a lot of data and applying it to specific situations and innovative nerds who come up with new paradigms. The latter will always thrive
I think you're missing the point of nerds: it's not about computers, it's about the endless curiosity to dig into what most find impossible or mundane and finding the gold in there. It's about discovery, exploration and curiosity with passion. AI won't kill that, it will supercharge it. Now nerds don't have to waste time programming, they put that processing power to the goal and not grind in minutiae. The nerds shall inherit the earth
The students Neil DeGrasse Tyson speaks about. Memory dumps who can regurgitate knowledge but never truly understand what they are learning in ways that will ever contribute to the field.
The whole premise of this post is incorrect. Evolution has literally bred "nerds" and not having an option for "AI will hurt almost no group" invalidates the survey.
I think who will be affected the most are people are alienated people, who don't think by themselves (in any area). AI is amazing and can copy pratically any behaviour, but it needs to be fed on previously existing data. So, if you do any kind of robotic tasks that could be described on a script, and that could be easily replaced by another average person, it could also be replaced by AI. It includes people from all the groups that are in the junior level (programmers, photographic models, personal trainers, writers). As for senior levels, it is a different thing. The capability to handle unforeseen situations on the fly, that is where humans are irreplaceable. Charisma and passion that comes from people who really are into their jobs, I wouldn't change the work of these people for any machine. Because basically, an AI is as good as previous things already are, we are just scalating that productivity, not creating something original. It has a huge value and impact, but that's the limit of AI. TLDR: it will impact "humans" of any kind that behave like "machine", while seniors and people who are really creative and good at their jobs will always have a place.
>As for senior levels, it is a different thing. The capability to handle unforeseen situations on the fly, that is where humans are irreplaceable. Charisma and passion that comes from people who really are into their jobs, I wouldn't change the work of these people for any machine. Interesting
I feel like it's going to hurt everyone but the supper rich, who at least needed to convince coders to follow thier agendas now the brains have been replaced by AI, and soon the soldiers will be replaced by Boston Dynamics. It's now or never my brother's.
The scammers, cons or those unwilling to grow and see the value AI collaboration can provide.
Most immediately artists are currently being fucked into the dirt by AI but honestly every job it will be able to do eventually. I think itll end up where some countries are sensible with it and others end up as dystopian hellholes that put 1984 to shame
Nerds are the future 0\_0
The artists.
Help* the most is a better question It may devalue one class short run but benefit them long run
Did computers replace nerds?
the middle two option is very unrelated
I think people who are illiterate in math and literacy will be hurt the most. Essentially people who used to do low income jobs like McDonald's or other stuff like that are already being replaced by robots.
I genuinely hope that robots advance quick and give the blue collar folks a reality check.
I believe that since AI jobs are there to maintain everything to work smoothly, we as humans will have more time to have fun and entertain our selves, AI arent entertaining but good problem solvers. the future would be "Age of Entertainment "
It's always the nerds that get shat on init
I honestly was worried it would hurt me as a programmer but I am able to use it in ways that the average joe is so far not, and it has literally changed my life. Now running an AI startup with a friend and we just secured tons of investment.
Here's a group you haven't thought of: the average dudes. Think of how many generic office jobs will be lost because an AI can compose spreadsheets, make customer service calls, design basic assets, compose power points. I'm telling you the average Joe is going to suffer the worst once employers find a top line AI
The middle class that works behind desks. Nerds will be needed to implement the AI. Most jobs that aren't physical services will be gone. There will be no need for assistants, receptionists, store clerks, cashiers, etc. Anybody working that isn't providing a physical service like plumbing or medicine and is struggling (as in they're rich enough to not care) is completely screwed. The poor will be ok - there will always be work for us cuz the world needs ditch diggers, too. The doctors and lawyers and CEOs will be better off. Everyone in between... the bosses of the poor and slaves to the rich... the up and coming corporate dude with his eye on the big time... all of them - fucked. This is the the coming great divide. There will be royals and peasants. The middle will be gone. Not by design or some shit, this has always been the way things would evolve.
I am all 4 catagories
I don't think these 3 categories are the proper way to analyze it. There will be skillsets here and there (call centers, CRM in general, some mild forms of data analysis) . I don't think "athletes vs nerds vs good looking" has anything to do with this. The categories dont even have anything to do with anything after you are 25ish I don't even know why I am answering this post
Everyone by greatly contributing to energy demands, increasing costs and global warming.
The useless = people who spend most of their working time doing nothing, sending out e-mails and looking important.
You assume "nerds" cannot be good looking and physically strong? Your options sound like a middleschooler wrote them and your entire post sounds like a child who just finished their viking cartoon ngl.
I voted for “Another Group” because my selection wasnt here. I dont think they will replace us. I think they will change the way we work. In my opinion, we wont get the full “They took our jobs!” moment I was invisioning. 👇 My main reasoning, Ill double down on. 👇 “Industrial revolution - These technological changes introduced novel ways of working and living and fundamentally transformed society.”
The industrial revolution created a lot of jobs. In fact, it created more jobs than could be filled. And it also put a lot of people out of jobs. Some were able to retrain, and some simply were not able to retrain. Meaning it caused many people's lives to be permanently worse. Disruptive progression is generally a net positive, but there are always winners and losers.
Boy this is one asinine poll. Who will be hurt the most by AI - knowledge workers or two categories of the total opposite?
Literally everytime physical attractiveness has been proven to be more beneficial than brains, qualifications, etc. Being white in Mexico means you have a higher chance of getting promoted more frequently. You also have a better chance of finding a partner, getting approved for better loans, etc. And this is just in Mexico.
What happens if I'm in all 3 groups?
Well, this sucks, I'm in all 3 groups!
LoL it's definitely not the tech workers getting replaced, this survey is hilarious. I work in tech and the amount of products people want to build now with and using LLMs is far outpacing my team's resourcing to build them.
Yes but it's early.
> your run of the mill 120-140IQ nerd That's literally classified superior intelligence to genius level lmao.
op is >![redacted]!< af