I have proven that I am responsible for the vehicle I am in. There are many others (you included) will blame any problems on anything or anyone else. Ride along in your ignorant bliss.

The point is the jobs are no longer there and the people performing that labor didn't have enough resources to adapt. If manufacturing didn't leave the country, why is a majority of things purchased imported? For a country to be productive it needs to produce something. Ideas are just that until translated into something tangible.

All good questions, and ones that I believe should be answered locally.

I expect the fruits of my own productive virtues to be eventually looted by failed human beings who have more votes or government power than I do and AI will help them do it because neither has any morals. With that said, I am in the winter of my lifespan and may be gone before the big loot takes hold.

New tech over the past 200 years has created far more jobs and opportunities than it has replaced, but the same can't be said for what seems to be trending now. Tech is being used to get rid of jobs, especially low level jobs that can be filled by high school graduates that can barely write their name or balance a checkbook or college level kids that can't find America on a globe. At least now the former (useless high school graduate) can be trained to put a screw in a widget and the latter (useless college graduate) can be trained to pretend to be in charge of a group of the former.

An interesting experience I had was as a contractor bringing a factory on line in China I was specifically told to not automate it too much because it was better to have manual jobs to keep people in the factories at a small wage than it was to have them becoming criminals on the street or wards of the state in some way. The Chinese philosophy then and there was people needed something useful to do. Not happening here.

And how much of this is pure posturing by a venture capitalist trying to round up more funding (that isn't his) for the next project?

It's an interesting article, but I have call BS on the entire thing.

First, I think there is a ridiculous notion that AI is really "intelligent" about what it does. They are at best mutations of the existing based on massive input sets. And they get lucky when they actually work out. Most of them are trained based on such leftist datasets that they have to be shut down - as evidenced by at least one AI which started threatening to kill its users.

What is AI really good at? Trying to make sense of massive data sets. That's it. It's not going to invent new machines. It's not going to invent new products unless they are simply minor modifications of existing things. AI isn't going to produce truly novel ideas. And if you think that about AI, I strongly suggest you do more reading. Can it take an existing idea, parse through its vast stores, and then write up documentation about that in a compelling fashion? Sure, because it has such a huge trove of real literature to mimic. But is AI going to be writing the next Harry Potter or Game of Thrones franchise? Not going to happen.

Second is the claim that within 25 years AI is going to do 80% of the jobs we currently do. That claim is just outright preposterous. It can probably take over the 10% of jobs which shouldn't even exist in the first place (like government bureaucrats) but it's never going to be able to replace anything that moves. Heavy construction? I can go on and on.

But the bigger thing which neither the article nor this bloviating VC touch on is exactly what portion of the world's people AI is going to benefit nor what those who get displaced by AI are going to do. No one should be fooled for a minute into believing that AI is going to replace subsistence farming in Africa. Nor should we be deluded into believing that the people who get replaced by AI are going to suddenly make a living doing ... nothing.

"The simple truth is that knowledge acquired in the past by those who aimed to be doctors, accountants, and all sorts of other professions, will not be relevant in the future."

What a tremendous LIE. Knowledge is ALWAYS important. Anyone who believes this tripe is willing away their own purpose and existence.

Federal Government yes, Local Government NO

In fact I firmly believe that local government should be solely in control of education. This way the parents have the proper level of input and can have some control by using their vote to control their children's education.

Yes!!! All education privately owned, non-unionized, non-government funded, and non-government regulated!

As a high school math teacher I can safely state that the current generation of students aren't learning the math. When I attempt to teach something that is "on level" they look at me as if I am speaking in a mishmash of 5 or 6 different foreign languages. The vast majority of my students are between 5 and 8 grade levels below their supposed grade level. I teach senior math to students who cannot add or subtract without the aid of a calculator. This doesn't even consider that they supposedly completed Algebra II last year and have all of the prerequisite math skills to be in senior math. If I fail them as I rightly should. My school takes a hit for its quality score and I won't be renewed for my job in the coming school year. If I pass them, I am the hero math teacher that got the students across the stage. Yes, I know that the students are not prepared for life and will be someone else's burden later. Either a college professor, employer or some other entity but what other choice do I have? I have spent years holding the line and not passing those students unless they had mastered the content. Those years I would have to move schools at the end of the year and administration would just change the grades, other years I have passed students no matter what. There is no good answer but I still require a job and a paycheck. So you can guess what I am currently doing.

Without that quality education would we even be able to recognize the train?

who is envious of who

The question becomes "What is essential work and how has one acquired the skills to perform it"? Quality education will always be needed to develop skills whether it be in logic, thinking, reading, and crafting, then molding that into creativity. (producing something) While AI is a tool that can make lives easier, a vast majority of the estimated 80% of that workforce will become nonproductive. One only needs to remember recent history. Look at America's rust belt, the vacant/desolate manufacturing strongholds in the Midwest, communities still trying to recover. Those facilities were only moved overseas. Imagine that on a global scale.

Hackers.....both AI and human....

I want to explode when I see these automobile commercials where a driver sits back with a smug look on his/her face and file their nails while AI drives the car. How long will it be before the AI realizes this and decides to fuck with the stupid human.

So if education becomes truly irrelevant. How will we maintain the equipment that enables all of these great advancements. Yes, I understand that we can make machines that will replicate or build other machines and that that could go on ad infinetum but unless AI actually does reach the Singularity and we trust it to manage literally EVERYTHING. We must have at least some individuals with education to maintain/ repair/ improve the systems that would then run our lives.

"They don't know that any compromise between food and poison is for the benefit of death" Yes, as Rand pointed out.

It seems we have been reduced to a choice of reasoned revolution or submission. We have the philosophical train for justification - Aristotle to Aquinas to Locke to the Founders to Rand to initiate said revolution. What we lack is the will and organizational abilities to move the train out of the station.