16
Bill Gates calls for ‘human-reserved’ jobs in face of AI takeover
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2026
16 points (73.5% liked)
Technology
87807 readers
973 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Why give them pointless jobs? Just give them the money.
Agreed that's trying to preserve the workaround, without fixing the problem.
Problem is it doesn't matter, the reality is, demand for jobs, and people who need to survive... isn't a number guaranteed to match, and between automation, and wages falling so far behind inflation that many households need 2+ incomes just to keep the lights on, an unemployment problem is inevitable.
If AI actually can cut enough jobs, that the number of jobs available, is less than the number of people who WANT to work, then all we need to do is make it so people don't HAVE to work.
Anyone who has used one of these knows that it can't. It's all a scheme to defraud investors.
I mean, it has cut jobs already... and replaced human talent with cheap slop.
It can make "art". That art sucks, and is obvious where it's used. Everyone hates the AI ads.
It can make "music". Wouldn't be surprised if it's being used in places some people haven't noticed, but probably ads or something where we tune out.
It replaced a lot of jobs that used to have human customer service reps... Shitty jobs that are soul sucking, but also jobs that paid people's rent. And the customer service sucks more now, even worse than someone who's
But the lie the investors bought was that it'd replace human labor. And less so, it's the new "industrial age". Nah. It's like the industrial age in some respects, but for small sectors of labor where you don't give a shit that the product is worse.
I feel like people make this weird mistake inspired by scifi that, if a tech becomes possible, it automatically fulfills some sci-fi prophecies about changing humanity. I think we keep making this mistake, and end up realizing well maybe it's a bit more complicated, maybe there's a cost we didn't see, maybe there's fundamental limits to its potential we didn't see.
Just because you make a chatbot that can code doesn't mean it can improve its own code exponentially. It just hasn't, and not for the lack of their trying.
It didn't. Again, companies are cutting jobs to appease investors and make it look that way.