Dispelling 5 Major Misunderstandings on AI’s Role in Causing Widespread Unemployment

According to Calum Chace, author of Surviving AI and co-host of the London Futurist podcast, artificial intelligence (AI) will inevitably replace jobs on a large scale. However, he argues that this is not necessarily a negative outcome. Chace presented five major misconceptions about AI’s impact on the future of work during a panel at the Beneficial Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) Summit in Panama. The first misconception is the belief that machines taking over jobs could never happen. Chace compares the impact of AI advancements to the replacement of “muscle jobs” by factories and cars in the past, but this time it will affect “cognitive jobs.” He cites an example of financial services firm Klarna, which recently announced that an AI-powered assistant was performing the work of around 700 full-time customer service agents. Chace argues that even if AI were to take jobs, commonly referred to as “technological unemployment,” it would not necessarily be bad for society. He believes that a world in which humans are not required to work would actually be great and that the idea of being wage slaves forever is pessimistic. Chace also dismisses the misconception that a life without work would be meaningless, pointing to retirees, aristocrats, and children who are still happy despite not having jobs. However, filmmaker and AI commentator James Barrat disagrees, stating that many craftspeople derive satisfaction from their work, which is inseparable from themselves. Chace also expresses skepticism towards the concept of universal basic income (UBI) as a solution to AI-induced unemployment, describing it as overrated. He believes that if UBI is big enough to be effective, it would be unaffordable, and if it is affordable, it would not be big enough to be useful. James Hughes, an Associate Professor of Ethics at the University of Massachusetts, disagrees with Chace and argues that UBI is the only plausible solution to address the growing inequality between workers and generations exacerbated by AI. Chace’s final misconception is the idea that AI-led unemployment would be gradual and predictable. Instead, he believes there will be a sudden reckoning where AI is capable of doing the majority of human work, leading to mass unemployment. Ted Goertzel, a professor of sociology at Rutgers University-Camden, dismisses the recent AI doom and gloom, comparing it to previous “extermination panics” such as nuclear war. However, he does acknowledge that AI could play a role in future warfare, with wars between nations fought using AI-powered drones and robotics.