Paper: https://www.nber. org/books-and-chapters/economics-transformative-ai/we-wont-be-missed-work-and-growth-era-agi

If you are perplexed about the AI future, I recommend this: https://www.amazon.com/Surviva...

Here's a compelling novel framing that helps rethink our economic system: https://x.com/IntuitMachine/st...

@IntuitMachine I agree with many things on that paper, but I disagree with this proposition "It's capped by one thing: the cost of the computational resources needed to do your job instead of you". People don't think way and that will have a profound effect. Let's assume the compute to educate

@IntuitMachine What should we be planning for then? Keen to hear all thoughts.

@IntuitMachine What you (or the paper?) call "accessory work", aren't task that are not worth the electricity to automate, they are the very purpose of existing. I don't know how your brains got that fucked. The dream is to have AI do all the standard jobs that can be automated,...

@IntuitMachine Yes. I’ve run this scenario in my head a few times . You come up with neo-feudalism where a small number of people are trillionaires and the rest live on ubi at the whims of these people. I do think at some point we probably have to ban AI because I don’t think having 98% of a

@IntuitMachine When tractors decimated ag jobs. There were phrases like “who will eat all the food, the tractors?” If all the owners of compute have insane ability to produce and compete against each other. The margin cost of what they produce plummets. I don’t see in this article that being

@IntuitMachine This "paper" like so many others is thinking INSIDE the current box defined by the coordinates (work, money, profit). But there is life outside of that box. Surprisingly, more and more meaningful life. You just need to think and act outside of it. I dare you! 🥂🖖🇨🇦 (All

@IntuitMachine if you’re going to summarize a paper about AI replacing us, could you at least read it and summarize it yourself instead of…having AI do it?

@IntuitMachine I think the biggest problem AGI has is that we are not sure if it is working in our interest. Would you trust AGI to dial your grandma's morphine drip, tweaking doses on "pain prediction" from her vitals?

@IntuitMachine Anyone who thinks that humanity is going to sit idly by and allow themselves to be replaced has not been paying attention to human history. This will cause war, not one but many wars.

@IntuitMachine Accessory work done by humans will shrink to nothing as well. Anything done by humans will eventually cost less to do with AI. The only reason that it might not go all the way to zero, is not because of cost, but of human preference - human-to-human interactions.

@IntuitMachine This model assumes AGI can seamlessly automate all bottleneck tasks at declining compute costs, which is already quite the assumption. It then overlooks the irreplaceable human elements in innovation, such as creativity, judgment, and intuition, that drive breakthroughs beyond

@IntuitMachine An "everyone unemployed" scenario means a world where literally everything that could be done has been done. It's by definition a world of abundance. The worrisome outcome would be 10% unemployed, or 20% unemployed temporarily but long enough to cause problems.

@IntuitMachine This just suggests techno-communism is the future, because any society based on material differences that actually have no real basis other than the (effectively arbitrary) initial allocation of capital will be overthrown basically immediately.

@IntuitMachine Interesting. I wonder what the most compute heavy jobs end up being, has anyone made a list? I see a lot of people saying trade but I think Optimus etc will fully replace those. Same with surgeons, and clearly any analytical job.

@IntuitMachine Interesting… I’ve been saying this all along. Hopefully, we can get current taxation and democratic processes fixed, elect highly socialist governments into power and direct the distribution of enough wealth to the accessory class to live comfortably… but I’m not optimistic

@IntuitMachine This paper is not found in his works at Yale. Can you please provide a link to your source? Here are his works at Yale: https://campuspress.yale.edu/p...

@IntuitMachine People talking like this don’t understand exponential progress. Yes for a brief time AI will cause Jevon’s Paradox. More supply will create more demand. But infinite demand is a fallacy. Markets can’t tolerate 100,000x more supply. Ultimately the value of all human labor is zero.

@IntuitMachine I think we may find that the portion of work/jobs that require accountability, empathy, improvisation, negotiation, intuition, negotiation and other exclusively human capabilities will be larger than we anticipated. Automation will streamline a lot of tasks that are definable

@IntuitMachine Let's history check this on the industrial revolution. Checks notes.. it checks out. Meaning throughput of economic value due to industry is insane. Think about an operation of say just gardening green beans and the distribution of them to the grocery store both nationally and

@IntuitMachine Interesting and useful, but you left out the punch line, which is, "This is why EVERYBODY should own a lot of shares in a low-cost S&P 500 index fund, because if you do, you will share in the profits from all this".

@IntuitMachine This is why Universal Compute needs to be an enforced human right. Otherwise.. things could get ugly.

@IntuitMachine I think in the not so distant future, work will become optional and people will find meaning in experiences, arts, exploration. At some point UBI will have to be established to meet basic needs and some level of consumption, otherwise without consumers, there’s no need for the

@IntuitMachine Thanks for the share. Quite an interesting take and given todays economic decision-making, sounds plausible - like a Logan’s Run theme. Yet there’s one dystopian catch.

@IntuitMachine I am happy that an economist wrote his thoughts about the situation. but I have two problems. one! this is an ordinary blog post, or a tweet, where you can easily find similar content and reference it, while writing it an holy scientific format, that passed its bureaucratic

@IntuitMachine How does this paper address the fact that in order for this hyper-efficient economy to actually work, people (those pesky labourers) need to have enough income to actually buy what it produces? Because if they don't, we end up needing a new post-labour economic model...

@swombat I agree, we need to re-imagine a new model. https://medium.com/p/e9637b0be...

@IntuitMachine The structure of the economy will change dramatically with cheap AI and Robots. Everyone who has a car today will have dozens of Agents and robots at their command. Individuals will simultaneously be farmers, entrepreneurs, politicians, and self educated in very idiosyncratic

@MatthewEGunter decision-quality? isn't that also being automated (see: agentic AI) as we speak?

@IntuitMachine This is what happened in America. American companies' line for years was "Do it or we'll find someone who will." @elonmusk had people sleep in the Twitter office and threatened bankruptcy at SpaceX if people didn't work on Thanksgiving (and Christmas???)

@IntuitMachine Yes. We’re racing toward $0 wage for many jobs.

@IntuitMachine Who is putting up the trillions in capital, and who will own the services?

@IntuitMachine Are we looking at deflation that goes nearly exponential ? Prices are driven down to almost nothing and labor follows. So, are products still purchased or allocated ??