We shall see. Most automations didn't automate the "controller/intelligence" part - they automated the actual task's labor (even if it was clicking for hours on a computer screen). Someone still needed to make all the decisions at every decision point. AI is fundamentally different if it approaches what AI proponents want; it surpasses human intelligence and has "agency/agentic".
On a side note this is why I find proponents that state people with agency will thrive in the AI world puzzling -> isn't the whole point of "agentic AI" to have "agency"?
With no advantage left (e.g. strength, intelligence, agency, etc) even if new industries come about why not use the AI for those too? Unlike previous industries where new domains needed more "brains" to drive/direct it, we have AI now. AI isn't a tool; it can for example deploy and can make decisions for itself. That's what the obsession with "agentic" is all about - replacing agency which at the moment was the very general domain that you still needed humans for.
This strongly favors the economic means of production remaining that are still scarce (capitalism rewards the scarce, not the efficient). Land, capital, social connections/nepotism, etc. Logically people without these will be less economically and socially valued in general - I hope I'm wrong. The current productive class have the most to lose from AI.
AI IMO breaks meritocracy and skilled based work long term assuming they succeed. Even if not in the next decade, and not the current crop of companies pushing it I'm sure AI will eventually cause this outcome.
On a side note this is why I find proponents that state people with agency will thrive in the AI world puzzling -> isn't the whole point of "agentic AI" to have "agency"?
With no advantage left (e.g. strength, intelligence, agency, etc) even if new industries come about why not use the AI for those too? Unlike previous industries where new domains needed more "brains" to drive/direct it, we have AI now. AI isn't a tool; it can for example deploy and can make decisions for itself. That's what the obsession with "agentic" is all about - replacing agency which at the moment was the very general domain that you still needed humans for.
This strongly favors the economic means of production remaining that are still scarce (capitalism rewards the scarce, not the efficient). Land, capital, social connections/nepotism, etc. Logically people without these will be less economically and socially valued in general - I hope I'm wrong. The current productive class have the most to lose from AI.
AI IMO breaks meritocracy and skilled based work long term assuming they succeed. Even if not in the next decade, and not the current crop of companies pushing it I'm sure AI will eventually cause this outcome.