• Unanimous_anonymous@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s funny that I never considered it, but why would they replace the low wage workers? Capitalism would care most about replacing the high wage workers (except for the CEO and other board members. They obviously are worth every penny and are irreplaceable with ai. ~signed CEO)

    • sci@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      because robots are still 10x cheaper than the low wage workers (in developed countries at least), and low wage worker jobs are usually easier to automate.

    • Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The high earners’ jobs are already mostly replaced by technology, but companies keep employing them and paying them anyway. They mostly schedule meetings.

      • sadreality@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        the issue if you don’t employ the smart people, someone else will… and you don’t want that typa competition, it is cheaper to just pay them.

    • Poob
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s important to not call executives workers

    • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      A good AI is the ultimate CEO: tireless, ruthless, informed, fully capable of generating bullshit yet completely immune to others’ bullshit. It has no friends, no family, no property, no conflicts of interest, no ego, no drama, no childhood dreams to fulfill, no lovers to impress, and only one ambition: to maximize profit for the company it manages, by any means necessary.

      I look forward to finding out whether Wall Street’s first loyalty is to aristocracy or to money, because they will soon be forced to choose.