companies operating in democratic countries need to realize that eventually they will hit a point where the amount of workers displaced by the technology are going to be enough to negatively impact them via the legal system.
While AI might be a helpful tool, and /could/ be cost effective in a perfect world. All that means nothing if the general public starts looking at it from a negative POV and starts voting on laws that restrict or ban it.
If big companies were smart, they would be starting to advocate for something to placebo the general working class, such as a UBI or a supplement for people that were displaced by the tech. I don’t expect they will though, and eventually it’ll be a lot of money wasted developing into a tech that is likely just going to be outlawed or heavily restricted.
I guess nobody is asking what happens IF 11.7% of the workforce is replaced. It’s like sawing the branch that you’re sitting on.
“Sure we helped destroy the economic system, nobody has money to buy our products, but hey we saved 2 million last quarter!”
companies operating in democratic countries need to realize that eventually they will hit a point where the amount of workers displaced by the technology are going to be enough to negatively impact them via the legal system.
While AI might be a helpful tool, and /could/ be cost effective in a perfect world. All that means nothing if the general public starts looking at it from a negative POV and starts voting on laws that restrict or ban it.
If big companies were smart, they would be starting to advocate for something to placebo the general working class, such as a UBI or a supplement for people that were displaced by the tech. I don’t expect they will though, and eventually it’ll be a lot of money wasted developing into a tech that is likely just going to be outlawed or heavily restricted.