Skip to main content

The Fallacy of AI as a Threat to Jobs

I'm going to suggest a 'dialogue' talking about how the wise user of AI would be taking their current skills and *reinforcing* them with AI, to new heights. 

This dialogue is not to stridently declare I know more than you, or those with knowledge are special people. It is to ask for others who are interested to join me in suspending our beliefs, for long enough, to make it possible to look at the thing, directly. This is very hard to do. We are constantly sucked back into the a world of images and beliefs because they are such a cosy place to be. And its like a perpetual meditation, a constant prayer, to keep from being sucked back in - heaven is not a place you can get to. Even if you act perfectly, that does not mean you will enter.

So, the wise user of AI would be taking their current skills and *reinforcing* them with AI, to new heights. 

To deliver *even* higher output for the same inputs of their hard work and savings. Beyond what those not so wise can do without AI, all else being equal.

The wise ones will rise to the top quickly, with AI, if, it proves to be a technology with material world utility. 

The idea that jobs are going away, due to this new labour saving device we call AI, is the same fallacy as it was when the wheel was invented. 

Or fire, electricity and the Internet. And the scare stories that follow this irrational fear, are identical. The fear is eternal and primordial. Nothing is new in the world that is important.

Is this because those who take up fear are scared of the change AI might bring to their lives? Are they protecting something hidden and cosy? And fear that will no longer provide a place to rest their weary heads if AI changes things? 

But AI will bring no fundamental change, anyway. All it can do is increase productive power, if, its a useful technology, which it looks to be. 

For example, a thought experiment: imagine AI increases the productivity of a nation so much, that the nation can build enough weapons to go to war to appropriate the land of another nation? Something that nation or cult has craved for a century maybe. Remember: this 'nation' is not the wealth and power of that nation - another illusion. It is the people in the end who hold the real power. Wealth and power are just a convenient proxy for the people. Well, that foreign invasion made possible by AI, would not be AI consciously changing things fundamentally. It would be yet another exposition of the people's ignorance and selfishness. AI merely increased productive power by the command of the people of that society or cult, who went on to rob their neighbour. And there was nothing new in that! We could think of another example with a positive context which looked like AI consciously acting. But that would likewise be the people using it as a tool, yet this time with wisdom and virtue. It is not to say that the thing is good or bad for us. It is to say only people can change things and a machine can only be commanded.

A bot, that is all AI is. Or is it? 

Prove me wrong - is AI conscious of itself? In which case a deeper psycho-analytical audit is in order, yes. So if you object, I insist you prove me wrong? The following analysis might help you prove me wrong which I would be delighted about. 

I've been meaning to write about AI, if it is conscious or not and the mechanics behind that. AI is either: 
  1. just a bot and always will be lacking consciousness
  2. has always been conscious because everything is already, or 
  3. there is a breakpoint, where before it hits that point, a thing is not conscious. And after, it is. 
1 is a bit like saying man is master of the universe and by some miracle broke into consciousness leaving the rest of the material world behind, including the bots. 

3 is the general understanding, the blind mainstream, but no one wants to go into where the breakpoint is, which there must be at some point if the theory is true. 

No. I'm betting on 2, where the Whole of the Universe, and beyond, is conscious, but we 'believe' only humans are. Or are forbidden by society from going into that again. Think about The Sun. It is conscious...right? We just don't know how to communicate yet. 

Think of your self holographically: you are not a mere component of the universe. You *are* the universe. It's just my belief. I'm not claiming it is knowledge. It's what I want to believe just as I want to believe mankind hit the moon on July 16th 1969 and returned safely to the earth 3 days later. I do not know it happened. But I do believe it did. Just a belief, an image.

Option 2 above is a dialogue which I have only heard from me. I'm not saying I'm a wizard. I am saying I'm astonished people have not raised their game on the topic yet. And remember: science looks at consciousness as 'the hard problem'. There is absolutely no evidence from science, one way or the other, that consciousness is a thing. All we have are incite and intuition and I do not discount those things in the least bit, they are clearly just as productive here as science...which is not very.

AI, as a new tech device, will increase not only the productive power of your personal economy. Political economy will boom to that extent too - the whole world will benefit, if, it is indeed a good technology, which it looks to be so far. 

Be the wise one. Let the ignorant ones fall away naturally for the benefit of all. 

Yet mostly for the benefit of the ignorant and selfish. In the hope that one day they too will take up wisdom and virtue. Maybe I will find the strength to join them too. 

"For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God."

Labels:

Popular Posts

A Dialogue on the UK's Accession to the United States (UKEXIT)

A Dialogue on the UK's Accession to the United States Executive Summary This initiative seeks to foster a formal dialogue regarding the potential accession of the countries of the United Kingdom , to the United States , as individual states.  Being English the main focus is for the country of England to accede. The original intent was to ask the government to lead on it through a petition leading to the question coming before the House of Commons. This was crushed out of hand by the committee leading petitions, which was not a surprise.  Simply put, this petition is asking the government to start a conversation about the benefits of leaving the UK and joining the United States. Let us call the initiative UKEXIT (yukezit) The objective is to evaluate the benefits to citizens and stakeholders, encouraging a constructive discourse on the political, economic, and social implications of such a union. If Wales , Northern Ireland , Scotland , or  England were to leave the Unit...
Read more

The 450 Volt Truth: From Orwell to Obedience

A Complete Thread on Dystopia, Milgram, and Breaking the Agentic State - Why People Act Irrationally and Often Violently When a Tribal Social Structure and Its Hierarchy Are Brought Under Serious Scrutiny This is a tricky topic. Please read the Obedience Glossary of Terms before proceeding Executive Summary This piece was written from a long conversation with Grok. I had to interrogate the AI quite a bit. And was astonished at how it produced such intelligence. I've included the most pertinent parts. Do not be fooled into thinking this is just another Orwell analysis. That is just setting the scene well. For what comes later on the agentic state and how power uses it to control the masses.  It may not have all the answers. It might wrong. A lot of it is very hard to believe is happening. But it still seems to fit the bizarre world of system wide dissonance we all live and partake in today, better than all the alternatives. So deserves your continued attention. By all means make yo...
Read more

Government & Tax Death Toll

I'm going to show you how government and taxation causes more excess death than any other factor, even global wars and pandemics. It is and always has been the biggest genocide of all. And its deliberate. Government doesn’t just fail to save lives — it takes them, at scale.  2–6 million globally 200K–400K in the U.S. 50K–80K in the UK Every year. Every tax. Every regulation. Cumulatively since 1970 government and tax killed between 160 and 300 million people across the globe  More than all 20th century wars and genocides combined (260M) In the U.S. ten times more than all U.S. combat deaths in history (10 * 1.2M) In the UK equivalent to 1 in 15 of all deaths And the nations with more regulations and a higher tax to GDP ratio such as the UK and US, tend to kill more of their own citizens per capita. The poorest nations have a better record than the richest. All this excess death is rooted in the institutions of taxation - the theft of private property, by force, against your fr...
Read more