this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2025
377 points (90.9% liked)

Technology

76415 readers
3523 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I came across this article in another Lemmy community that dislikes AI. I'm reposting instead of cross posting so that we could have a conversation about how "work" might be changing with advancements in technology.

The headline is clickbaity because Altman was referring to how farmers who lived decades ago might perceive that the work "you and I do today" (including Altman himself), doesn't look like work.

The fact is that most of us work far abstracted from human survival by many levels. Very few of us are farming, building shelters, protecting our families from wildlife, or doing the back breaking labor jobs that humans were forced to do generations ago.

In my first job, which was IT support, the concept was not lost on me that all day long I pushed buttons to make computers beep in more friendly ways. There was no physical result to see, no produce to harvest, no pile of wood being transitioned from a natural to a chopped state, nothing tangible to step back and enjoy at the end of the day.

Bankers, fashion designers, artists, video game testers, software developers and countless other professions experience something quite similar. Yet, all of these jobs do in some way add value to the human experience.

As humanity's core needs have been met with technology requiring fewer human inputs, our focus has been able to shift to creating value in less tangible, but perhaps not less meaningful ways. This has created a more dynamic and rich life experience than any of those previous farming generations could have imagined. So while it doesn't seem like the work those farmers were accustomed to, humanity has been able to shift its attention to other types of work for the benefit of many.

I postulate that AI - as we know it now - is merely another technological tool that will allow new layers of abstraction. At one time bookkeepers had to write in books, now software automatically encodes accounting transactions as they're made. At one time software developers might spend days setting up the framework of a new project, and now an LLM can do the bulk of the work in minutes.

These days we have fewer bookkeepers - most companies don't need armies of clerks anymore. But now we have more data analysts who work to understand the information and make important decisions. In the future we may need fewer software coders, and in turn, there will be many more software projects that seek to solve new problems in new ways.

How do I know this? I think history shows us that innovations in technology always bring new problems to be solved. There is an endless reservoir of challenges to be worked on that previous generations didn't have time to think about. We are going to free minds from tasks that can be automated, and many of those minds will move on to the next level of abstraction.

At the end of the day, I suspect we humans are biologically wired with a deep desire to output rewarding and meaningful work, and much of the results of our abstracted work is hard to see and touch. Perhaps this is why I enjoy mowing my lawn so much, no matter how advanced robotic lawn mowing machines become.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

If Sam got wiped out he would even be a real man anyway

[–] maleable@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

This was a great comment to the article. You have true expression in your words, my friend. It was a joy reading.

[–] FauxPseudo@lemmy.world 14 points 4 days ago

He doesn't know Jobs was wiped out by cancer?

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Why do people still listen to this grifter piece of shit? I really don't get it.

[–] 1984@lemmy.today 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

The guys name is too perfect.

Altman. Alternative man.

Just not a good alternative.

After his extreamly creepy interview with Tucker Carlsson about that whistleblower who died, I know he is not right in the head.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 11 points 4 days ago (2 children)

I agree with the sentiment, as bad as it feels to agree with Altman about anything.

I'm working as a software developer, working on the backend of the website/loyalty app of some large retailer.

My job is entirely useless. I mean, I'm doing a decent job keeping the show running, but (a) management shifts priorities all the time and about 2/3 of all the "super urgent" things I work on get cancelled before then get released and (b) if our whole department would instantly disappear and the app and webside would just be gone, nobody would care. Like, literally. We have an app and a website because everyone has to have one, not because there's a real benefit to anyone.

The same is true for most of the jobs I worked in, and about most jobs in large corporations.

So if AI could somehow replace all these jobs (which it can't), nothing of value would be lost, apart from the fact that our society requires everyone to have a job, bullshit or not. And these bullshit jobs even tend to be the better-paid ones.

So AI doing the bullshit jobs isn't the problem, but people having to do bullshit jobs to get paid is.

If we all get a really good universal basic income or something, I don't think most people would mind that they don't have to go warm a seat in an office anymore. But since we don't and we likely won't in the future, losing a job is a real problem, which makes Altman's comment extremely insensitive.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 10 points 4 days ago

I am starting to dislike Altman spam more than Elmo spam.

Regarding the philosophical points, there is some truth to the arguments, but one thing is absolutely certain (you can have zero knowledge of "AI" services to know that), you can't trust Americans in such matters.

[–] DrFistington@lemmy.world 14 points 4 days ago (2 children)

They're not real until your bullshit factory falls apart without them, fucktard

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 7 points 4 days ago

Apart from questionable quality of the result, a big issue to me about LLMs is the way it substitutes human interaction with other humans. Which is one of the most fundamental way humans learn, innovate and express themselves.

No technological innovation replaced human interaction with a facsimile, that way before.

[–] Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org 8 points 4 days ago (1 children)

...and still they are throwing money at him, as fast as they can.

Mistake of the century.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Vandals_handle@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

Is this where they get rid of the telephone sanitizers and middle managers?

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

"Real job" is often an anti-intellectualist code word for hard manual labor.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nutsack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 days ago

ah ok thank you sir

[–] xxce2AAb@feddit.dk 8 points 4 days ago

That's rich coming from the leader in the field of manufacturing demand out of whole cloth.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›