You literally cannot start something in a funnier way than this
@jsbarretto
Someone needs to sit the economists down
Task theory of value
@jonny Coincidentally, $30 T was my back-of-the-envelope number for the amount that the US stock market is overinflated by the AI bubble and the amount of value I expect to see wiped out when it bursts.
(Real economists have estimates between $15 T and $40 T, so I’m probably not too far off)
He tasks me; he heaps me; I see in him outrageous strength, with an inscrutable malice sinewing it.
I don't even need to tell jokes they are just already in the text
No dumbass the economy is clearly made of rectangles
@jonny The economy goes in the square hole!
Sure, yeah, assuming perfect substitution of AI and human labor for a task such that the only place they differ is their price is a totally fair assumption
What the fuck, they have this "Ideas" term that is there to like "make the economy go up as it does like normal without any AI term" that is a multiplier in the "value of human labor" term. but then that term is modeled as a proportion of total GDP, which goes up tautologically by introducing AI, so there's an implicit feedback that buffers unemployment?? That would theoretically be ... Increased research funding???
Oh awesome here we go, this is the parameter I was looking for - the reinstatement ratio is the proportion of new tasks that are created by automation, so at 1, every automated task creates a new labor task (which can then be automated over time). The automation share is constant that controls how many tasks are automated (assigned to AI entirely) vs "augmented," where the task is performed by some mix if labor and AI. Its so awesome how in the scenario where AI makes the economy go hogwild it just causes no problems and there is no additional labor needed at all to clean up after it.
This assumption rules:
In this case [of automation] we assume that AI raises capital’s productivity to the point where
capital, rented at the no-AI rate supplies the instance at unit cost that is, 𝑎_{i,t} log points below labor’s unit cost without AI, where bars mark the no-AI path.
So like, automation is always possible and we fix the cost of it so it is always cheaper because ai is magic and makes the capital pricing term disappear.
Well sure if you construct a model where AI uniformly improves the efficiency of producing an output that is assumed to be totally replaceable and defined to never cause more new work than it automates, and capital is basically free and there are no resource constraints, then yeah the future sounds great.
So their moderate scenario assumes 30% of all tasks can be done by AI by 2030, 40% of those will be done by AI, with 50/50 automation/augmentation.
So the underlying claim they are making is that within 3 and a quarter years, AI will be doing 12% of everything. Not just what the call "cognitive tasks," all tasks period.
(The ceiling of the maximum tasks that can be done by AI with perfect substition is explicitly claimed as "all the cognitive tasks" which they claim is 62.4% because... That's the proportion of people who work in the "cognitive professions" )
"Our capital pricing term leans towards a value that means it can more or less be built on demand because compute is easy to build and we can build all the compute capacity we need for a given period with a two year lag"
You had better fucking believe that citation of "1.6x productivity gain estimated by conversations with Claude" is referencing when anthropic asked Claude to estimate how long each task that someone used Claude for would take without Claude. You know, the same frontier LLM that has a sense of time that makes it routinely say things like adding an api endpoint will take months, and is constantly telling me to go to bed in the middle of the day
@jonny Wow, this is so embarrassing. Why don't they just ask Claude about this problem and publish that instead then?
@jonny series of tubes
@jonny seize the means of task
@jonny everything demands the Homer Simpson internal voice
@jonny Dear god, STEM major humanities minor courses desperately need to come back