AI Job Displacement: A Necessity not a Threat, Argues London Futurist Host Calum Chace
Summary:
Calum Chace, author and co-host of the London Futurist podcast, at the Beneficial Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) Summit, disputed five prevalent misconceptions about AI's impact on jobs, arguing that technological unemployment isn't necessarily detrimental. He drew parallels between AI's rise and the industrial revolution, evidenced by Klarna's AI assistant replacing 700 jobs. Chace voiced skepticism on UBI as a solution for AI-induced unemployment. However, he predicted a sudden shift to mass automation, with implications for future warfare.
Calum Chace, notable author and London Futurist podcast co-host, anticipates significant job displacement due to artificial intelligence, while disputing that this inevitability spells doom. Addressing attendees at the Beneficial Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) Summit in Panama, Chace tackled five prevalent misconceptions about AI's influence on employment's future trajectory.
Chace challenged the first fallacy that AI's total usurpation of jobs is an impossibility. He noted parallels between AI's rise and the industrial revolution, which replaced manual labor jobs. Now, "cognitive jobs" are under similar threat. A recent illustration is financial services firm, Klarna, which introduced an AI-powered assistant able to execute the duties of 700 customer service agents.
Yet, Chace contends that AI's job displacement, dubbed as "technological unemployment," is not necessarily detrimental to society. He argued that a world sans mandatory employment could be liberating, dispelling the belief that a jobless existence equates to a meaningless one. However, panelist James Barrat, an AI commentator and filmmaker, disagreed citing personal examples of retirement leading to feelings of insignificance.
Chace voiced skepticism on universal basic income (UBI), an often-advocated solution for AI-induced unemployment, deeming it impractical. He challenged the feasibility of UBI, asserting it to be untenable if useful and inadequate if affordable. James Hughes, Ethics Associate Professor at the University of Massachusetts, contradicted Chace, touting UBI as a necessitated remedy for AI-triggered disparities among workers and generations.
The last of the misconceptions Chace pointed out was that AI-caused Unemployment would have a linear, manageable progression. He rejected this belief, projecting a sudden shift where most jobs concurrently become automated. Rutgers University-Camden Sociology Professor, Ted Goertzel, introduced a different perspective, comparing current AI fears with historically unfounded worries such as nuclear war, while acknowledging AI as a tool in future warfare.
Published At
2/29/2024 5:42:04 AM
Disclaimer: Algoine does not endorse any content or product on this page. Readers should conduct their own research before taking any actions related to the asset, company, or any information in this article and assume full responsibility for their decisions. This article should not be considered as investment advice. Our news is prepared with AI support.
Do you suspect this content may be misleading, incomplete, or inappropriate in any way, requiring modification or removal?
We appreciate your report.