3 Comments

1. 

   @kurdi98k

   February 13, 2024 at 6:20 pm

   Probably not because automating white-collar jobs (to a significant extent) means a much lower tax revenue for the U.S. , lower consumer spending power, and in turn lower corporate revenue in aggregate.

   Reply
2. 

   @normanoro206

   February 13, 2024 at 7:04 pm

   Alec Ross’s comments are intriguing. I’m not a legal expert and he may have some proprietary knowledge of generative AI in the legal field; however, generative AI offerings currently available to the public aren’t yet able to do everything that a lawyer does. In fact, although the technology continues to advance at a breathtaking pace, there are stories of lawyers who tried to use the technology only to get burned when the AI “hallucinated” and cited cases that don’t exist. Nevertheless, AI currently is good at many things. This includes summarizing documents, which probably consumes a lot of time in law firms and within legal teams. Even this, however, probably warrants at least some caution and review of the resulting summaries just in case. I’m an AI optimist and I believe this role for AI is probably the one preferred by most currently: An aid to human capabilities rather than a replacement. Eventually, however, the point that Alec Ross made will be realized. AI will one day enable the automation of white-collar jobs. Hopefully, this is the result of a gradual evolution of the relationship between people and AI so that the labor mix within society and the skills sets people have can adjust gradually without sudden large-scale displacements within the workforce. However, I think we as a society have to be open to the other possibility: That the change will happen very rapidly, which would open the door to significant disruptions in the labor force and potentially even social unrest. Fortunately, there’s time (for now). And the companies leading the charge in developing AI have voiced a commitment to doing so responsibly. This is notable considering the powerful financial incentives to develop better and more powerful offerings, as well as the unyielding pressure placed on these companies to monetize the resulting technology. Of course, even now, many criticize instances where companies seem to fall short of the beliefs they espouse with respect to AI. However, whether it’s warranted or not, this is necessary. It’s yet another force to hold companies to their commitments while bringing other voices and stakeholders into the conversation who should be heard.

   Reply
3. 

   @nextcurve

   February 13, 2024 at 7:25 pm

   There is proof that AI can’t replace lawyers. In fact using generative AI and trusting the outputs can be very risky to a lawyer and their clients. This applies to other white collar jobs as well. They will be difficult to displace with AI of any sort. Person in the loop is important in any AI-assisted “solution” or operation.

   Reply