I'm adding to the text jungle on the 'AI taking over jobs' debate, because my mulling continues. Here are two aspects that I find myself filing my musings under:

• Given supply side abundance of services courtesy AI automation, what happens to the demand for people's input labour/intelligence, a.k.a jobs:

  • I resonate with most of Patty McCormick's phrasing of this dilemma. I you can read only 1 article on the topic, read this. Instead of 'Will I lose my job', the question could be: 'What would I do with superabundant intelligence?'. It links to studies and historical analogies of how the very nature of demand for services changes when production becomes superabundant. (Disclaimer: I realise this assumes the privilege of not being faced with dire financial/survival conditions)

  • Another fun read for those of you in academia/research: Choose Your Weapon: Survival Strategies for Depressed AI Academics

• What even is value? I've an itch that makes me uncomfortable with how we measure and thus optimise for value. What we think the dividends to our labour should be, profit, etc. I shall reserve this thought deepdive for future. In the interim, I recommend listening to Steve Keen's meditations on economics in Lex Fridman Podcast #303 (or tune into the 8.55 & 51.29 time stamps for 'labour theory of value')

Where do I stand in the AI threatens our jobs Q? I am on the optimistic side.
Where do I think future opportunity/demand for skills lie? Given space constraints on this atomic essay, reserving this for a future piece. However, my underlying beliefs are:

• The value of human ingenuity, knowledge, empathy will not turn us redundant.

• AI will change the nature of work & how we push ourselves to innovate, differentiate

• I hope it pushes us to re-evaluate what we consider important, & how to reprioritise certain aspects of nature & human life that are devalued in today's constant hyper-consumerism, hyperfinancialisation and chase for higher economic growth.