Unburdened by the bias of employment/investment in or general prostration to the industry likely leads them to conclude that the invention that exists primarily to replace labor has begun to replace labor.
I take minor issue with your "the invention" framing rather than "an invention" framing, since the AI we have today is just another manifestation of automation, like the steam engine, printing press, plow, abacus...
It's just more leverage on human time.
I agree with GP that the true source of these peoples angst isn't what AI is or will do, but the emotions incepted into them by the attention economy, which by nature optimizes for what gets people's attention: not what's true, but what's novel and upsetting.
Edit: I'll go a step further and acknowledge another source of angst is that we are in the late stages of a monetary economy cycle (USD gold standard -> floating petrodollar) and a system that by design accrues the benefits of automation into the value of assets (which disproportionately rewards those who leverage assets to buy more assets). If automation increases efficiency by 10%, and the central bank aims at 2% inflation, then it will pull levers to increase money supply such that prices of consumption goods increase 2%, but all the assets not being consumed (not measured by inflation indicators), increase far faster than 2%.
So the problem isn't the automation, it's how the benefits of the automation propagate across this particular economic system.
Also, since I expect some will be thinking it, I don't think capitalism is the problem, the problem is the scope and framework that capitalism is running in/on. An obvious fault is citizens United, but there are more, and I suspect several I don't understand, and maybe no one understands but I suspect people will understand clearly 100 years from now.
I’m not sure about rich part tbh. For most of the people it’s quite opposite.
"You ugly, hate-filled man!"
"Hey, I may be ugly, and I may be hate-filled, but...uh, what was the third thing you said??"
The "us" AI is making rich is not the same "us" as the "us" AI is making unhappy.
genAI is making some people rich. They aren't the unhappy ones.
"the disconnect between a solid economy and an anxious public"
Maybe... the economy isn't actually as solid as he thinks?
Today I heard the best comment for how to use AI: “I won’t use AI to code but it does make our spaghetti code understandable when reviewing PRs”.
This was senior level, if not C level developer - in all seriousness.
It takes humans to create spaghetti, let a machine untangle it.
https://archive.ph/iJTkr
I think social media is making people unhappy by doom scrolling all day long and thinking it's real life.
I have relatives that are convinced their son can't get a job, because "AI replaced all of them".
Unburdened by the bias of employment/investment in or general prostration to the industry likely leads them to conclude that the invention that exists primarily to replace labor has begun to replace labor.
I take minor issue with your "the invention" framing rather than "an invention" framing, since the AI we have today is just another manifestation of automation, like the steam engine, printing press, plow, abacus...
It's just more leverage on human time.
I agree with GP that the true source of these peoples angst isn't what AI is or will do, but the emotions incepted into them by the attention economy, which by nature optimizes for what gets people's attention: not what's true, but what's novel and upsetting.
Edit: I'll go a step further and acknowledge another source of angst is that we are in the late stages of a monetary economy cycle (USD gold standard -> floating petrodollar) and a system that by design accrues the benefits of automation into the value of assets (which disproportionately rewards those who leverage assets to buy more assets). If automation increases efficiency by 10%, and the central bank aims at 2% inflation, then it will pull levers to increase money supply such that prices of consumption goods increase 2%, but all the assets not being consumed (not measured by inflation indicators), increase far faster than 2%.
So the problem isn't the automation, it's how the benefits of the automation propagate across this particular economic system.
Also, since I expect some will be thinking it, I don't think capitalism is the problem, the problem is the scope and framework that capitalism is running in/on. An obvious fault is citizens United, but there are more, and I suspect several I don't understand, and maybe no one understands but I suspect people will understand clearly 100 years from now.