In order to work less (fewer hours or more time off), we need legislation that restricts work hours and requires companies to grant a minimum amount of time off. I agree with the sentiment that AI could free us up for more leisure, but in the absence of legislation, companies will just squeeze more productivity out of each worker without granting more leisure time.

i have been , hell go all the way back to Bertrand Russel, he does as well, see his treatise "In Praise of Idleness", famous economists like Maynard Keys projected we'd all be broking 15 hrs a week now for the same pay.

Productivity increases have gone to the very wealthy and we've voted for it, over decades, over and over and in the face of all that evidence ? we'd fuck in' do it again, Leopards Eating My Face is full of examples. Solutions ? there arent any, the world has to many hateful and stupid people easily led by physcopaths and grifters . Not just the US, it's near ubiquitous.

I am.

My dream job is being jobless in a world where everything is automated.

How could we maximize productivity if we allowed people leisure?

I guess because nobody who works closely with AI would seriously believe they can run shit by themselves.

There has never been a case of capitalism using improvements in efficiency to let people work less, use fewer resources, etc.

It's always more, more, more.

AI bros dont understand the concept of "love".

AI doesn't exist. LLMs aren't doing anyone's jobs.
They help search for stuff, like finding molecules and DNA strands in medicine. Finding a book out of an entire library. Boilerplate code. Frequently asked questions. That's all they do. Parroting, searching, and other menial tasks that can be done thanks to prediction.
People may save time thanks to them, but they still have to do their jobs.

When an "AI" appears to show any kind of competency outside of being a glorified search engine, it's because they have an underpaid human behind it actually refining the results.

Because who would provide the income tax?

They're probably not saying that because they are too busy asking the far more important question of "If Ai takes all the jobs, how can I afford to feed and shelter the family and children I love"

You do understand why people work right? Very few people work just for funsies. They work so they can afford to eat, pay rent, pay for utilities, and be able to afford essentials like clothing, health insurance, transportation.

Almost everything we need to actually live and function costs money. You primarily get money by having a job. So if someone gets laid off, they're probably very busy trying to find another source of income so they can actually keep their children alive and healthy.

See the pandemic if you're interested in knowing how much people want to spend time with their families.

We need to stop AI now. My family drive me up the wall it's why I don't live with them, crazy nutcases.

We tried that at my job, who are pushing AI down our throats.

I'm not sure how they can say with a straight face that they now expect us to do 300-700% more work (their estimate) for the same pay and the same hours as before, but they apparently can... Just capitalism things I guess.

They also ridiculed the person who asked in front of the whole company.

People have always asked that question about tech, my friend. You just weren't listening.

But AI is snake oil. It won't reduce work. It'll just fuck up things that currently work and let the billionaires get richer. Vaporware. That's it. That's why nobody asks about newfound free time. Cuz it's fake.

I've taken that position at work. Since nobody's telling me otherwise, I'm taking some of that efficiency gain for myself. Tickets are still resolved quicker, but I profit despite the job sucking now, being nothing but code review. If I don't get some of the benefits, I'm going back to doing things by hand.

That would require that it come with UBI, which... seems doubtful at best...

No technology has ever resulted in lighter workloads for the average person. Different, and sometimes less strenuous, but never less time consuming.