• partial_accumen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    imagine wrecking your life working to advance a thing for which the ultimate end goal is to replace you entirely

    That isn’t new with AI. Non-AI Automation has been the goal (and achievement) of business for decades.

    • mitram@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Automation is great , everything should be automated as much as possible.

      IF everyone benefits from it in the form of higher wages/less working hours due to the higher productivity.

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        IF everyone benefits from it in the form of higher wages/less working hours due to the higher productivity.

        I know this is a common philosophical statement, but I haven’t yet seen a great implementation of it in reality. I’m interested if your approach is viable.

        Scenario:

        Lets say we have a 25 year old worker named Jim. Jim was hired and his job for 1 year was to log into a system, look up specific values, and populate these values into fields in an Excel spreadsheet. At the beginning of the second year, a small Bash script (computer code) was written by an engineer and set to run on a repeating daily schedule that did all of the lookups and sheet population that was Jim’s entire job. The entirely of Jim’s job has been replaced by automation.

        Result:

        Jim no longer has any work to do for the organization. There aren’t any other open positions at the company for Jim (or if there are Jim is not even remotely qualified to do those other jobs).

        • So how would you apply your philosophy to this situation?
        • Do you believe the organization should continue to employ Jim even without any work for him?
        • Should he be let go, but still paid? If so, how much, and for how long?