One of the salient points of the article (for me) is right at the beginning:
> The debate over whether AI is taking people’s jobs may or may not last forever. If AI takes a lot of people’s jobs, the debate will end because one side will have clearly won. But if AI doesn’t take a lot of people’s jobs, then the debate will never be resolved, because there will be a bunch of people who will still go around saying that it’s about to take everyone’s job. [..] In other words, the good scenario for the labor market is that we continue to exist in a perpetual state of anxiety about whether or not we’re all about to be made obsolete by the next generation of robots and chatbots.
Looking around just at news aggregators like HN and Reddit, the author hits the nail on the head. Everyone is convinced that if AI hasn't already taken everyone's job, then it's poised on the brink of doing and we're all just waiting for that final stroke.
> The debate over whether AI is taking people’s jobs may or may not last forever. If AI takes a lot of people’s jobs, the debate will end because one side will have clearly won. But if AI doesn’t take a lot of people’s jobs, then the debate will never be resolved, because there will be a bunch of people who will still go around saying that it’s about to take everyone’s job. [..] In other words, the good scenario for the labor market is that we continue to exist in a perpetual state of anxiety about whether or not we’re all about to be made obsolete by the next generation of robots and chatbots.
Looking around just at news aggregators like HN and Reddit, the author hits the nail on the head. Everyone is convinced that if AI hasn't already taken everyone's job, then it's poised on the brink of doing and we're all just waiting for that final stroke.