undefined | Better HN

0 pointsglitchc28d ago0 comments

> I think that's the key difference with AI, though. It's not like I'm losing my job, but at least I have a robot at home that cleans the house and does my laundry.

Do you though? You might be hallucinating those robots. And no, a Roomba doesn't mop the floor, wipe the countertops or clean the toilets.

> I'm OK with accepting a job that pays 10x less if the efficiencies from AI mean we're all living in abundance and life is >10x cheaper. But it's unclear if/when we'll move beyond marginal business impact, aside from in software development, I suppose.

Will it though? Your biggest cost is lodging, either rent or own, and both have consistently increased over the past millenia.

0 comments

1 comments · 1 top-level

moduspol28d ago

> Do you though? You might be hallucinating those robots.

My phrasing could have been better. The "not" applies to the rest of the sentence, not just the first clause. I'm saying it might be OK to lose my job for "progress" if I were personally getting big benefits from AI.

> Will it though? Your biggest cost is lodging, either rent or own, and both have consistently increased over the past millenia.

Lodging is typically <30% of income and housing costs are driven more by policy than market forces. That said, I see no reason why housing costs couldn't also decrease with the right applications of AI, at least in the eyes of its biggest cheerleaders.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse