Technological Unemployment News & Discussions

[Nero]

One thing that I don't understand about all of this talk that computers and robots are going to take everybody's jobs. That is the notion that they will transform the work force as opposed to totally displacing said workforce. I mean we keep reading these headlines about what jobs will be taken away, yet these same media sources often feature stories about the construction of data centers. Now, how do you construct data centers without employing construction workers?

I know advances are being made in the construction industry but there still seems to be a need for human construction workers.

Accompanying many articles concerning construction of data centers are discussions concerning the inadequacy of current infrastructure to accommodate such centers. Again, how do you provide the new infrastructure without employing human construction workers?

There is also the issue of training AI on how to use these data centers. As I understand it, such training is a very labor-intensive process.

I think a truly balanced approach would look at all of the pluses and minuses. That is to say the jobs that are being taken away alongside the jobs that are being created.

It seems that there can be no disputing that AI and robots are transforming the workforce. Yet, transforming the workforce and totaling replacing the workforce are two different things. It seems like a lot of pundits keep missing that point.

None of that proves the workforce is being transformed rather than displaced long-term it proves only that the automation system is still being built by the old labour system.

Railroads were built by humans but that did not mean railroads preserved the old transport labour structure?

A job building a data center for two years is not equivalent to the automation of tutoring, coding, writing, customer support, translation, design, accounting, legal drafting, analysis, scheduling, and administration.

[caltrek]

One thing that I don't understand about all of this talk that computers and robots are going to take everybody's jobs. That is the notion that they will transform the work force as opposed to totally displacing said workforce. I mean we keep reading these headlines about what jobs will be taken away, yet these same media sources often feature stories about the construction of data centers. Now, how do you construct data centers without employing construction workers?

I know advances are being made in the construction industry but there still seems to be a need for human construction workers.

Accompanying many articles concerning construction of data centers are discussions concerning the inadequacy of current infrastructure to accommodate such centers. Again, how do you provide the new infrastructure without employing human construction workers?

There is also the issue of training AI on how to use these data centers. As I understand it, such training is a very labor-intensive process.

I think a truly balanced approach would look at all of the pluses and minuses. That is to say the jobs that are being taken away alongside the jobs that are being created.

It seems that there can be no disputing that AI and robots are transforming the workforce. Yet, transforming the workforce and totaling replacing the workforce are two different things. It seems like a lot of pundits keep missing that point.

.

Railroads were built by humans but that did not mean railroads preserved the old transport labour structure?

Railroads themselves were partly displaced by trucks, highways and automobiles, airplanes, etc.

None of that proves the workforce is being transformed rather than displaced long-term it proves only that the automation system is still being built by the old labour system...

A job building a data center for two years is not equivalent to the automation of tutoring, coding, writing, customer support, translation, design, accounting, legal drafting, analysis, scheduling, and administration.

I think you make some very good points here.

Still, I am reminded of the observation by John Maynard Keyenes that in the long run we are all dead. These short-term jobs are important to the overall transformation process.

Other human labor inputs may not be so short term. Consider this from an article I posted November 7, 2022 in this thread:

After the model is built it must be maintained. AI models do not run perfectly forever. They must be monitored for drift, and it requires a human to determine if the drift is due to an error in the ingestion of data, such as a change in units, or a true change in the customer preferences that the model is trying to extract. In the latter case, the model must be retrained on a new data set.

Modern computer systems are built with some degree of self-diagnosing and self-repairing abilities. But the automation must punt all but the most straightforward cases into a call for help that brings a human into the process. Humans are necessary to diagnose problems and restore service when something has gone wrong.

Source: https://www.eurasiareview.com/07112022- ... -not-oped/

I would also suggest that AI itself may directly and indirectly suggest new ways of employing human labor or may put a premium on some old ways. These new ways may be hard to predict and visualize because AI will be important in theire development. These new ways may meet the need for profit for the private sector and the meeting of human needs by the public sector.

Consider this from a citation I posted December 5, 2025:

With hundreds of millions of workers hunting for jobs and employers posting open roles in real time, LinkedIn acts as one of the clearest barometers of what’s actually happening on the ground—and its managing director for EMEA, Sue Duke, is not buying the AI apocalypse narrative.

“That’s not what we’re seeing,” Duke revealed at the Fortune CEO Forum at The Shard in London. When asked about an AI-induced hiring slowdown she insisted that the opposite is actually true.

“What we’re seeing is that organizations who are adopting and integrating this technology, they’re actually going out and hiring more people to really take advantage of this technology,” Duke explained.

“They’re going out and looking for more business development people, more technologically savvy people, and more salespeople as they realize the business opportunities, the innovation possibilities, and ultimately the growth possibilities of this technology.”

Source: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/techno ... 40c&ei=96

I don’t mean to sound Pollyannish about all of this. Clearly, a lot of jobs are being lost to AI and robotics and there is no guarantee that the trends Sue Duke identified will continue. A transformation is occurring and the question of its impact on employment levels will continue to need to be monitored and evaluated. UBI may still need to be relied upon to play a roll. Still, focusing just on job loss and displacement without considering offsetting trends can result in an unbalanced view of the situation.

[wjfox]

[wjfox]

[weatheriscool]

Good...Still need pro human regs to assure 70% human jobs rate in knowledge and creativity. Have as much a.i a you want but a human has to over see it. I also want all humans to be educated until at least we get brain uploading of information. I want a star trek future. Not a a.i ruled human farm!

[weatheriscool]

[caltrek]

Sanders Sovereign Wealth Fund Plan Would Give US Public ‘Direct Ownership Stake’ in AI Giants
By Jake Johnson
June 1, 2026

Introduction:

(Common Dreams) Sen. Bernie Sanders on Monday announced he will soon introduce legislation that would give the American public “a direct ownership stake” in the largest artificial intelligence companies in the US by establishing a sovereign wealth fund, which would ensure everyone benefits from the rapidly advancing technology.

Sanders (I-Vt.) wrote in a New York Times op-ed that his American AI Sovereign Wealth Fund Act would create the new fund by imposing a one-time, 50% tax on the stock of OpenAI, Anthropic, and other AI behemoths. The sovereign wealth fund, a government-owned investment vehicle, would both “give the public a direct role in determining the future of this technology” and “guarantee that the trillions of dollars potentially generated by AI are used to improve the lives of all of us—not simply to make the richest people in the world even richer.”

The senator emphasized that “this is not an original idea,” noting that scholars and even leading AI companies have proposed some version of a public wealth fund to broadly distribute AI-related gains. Sanders also observed that Norway and Alaska have sovereign wealth funds, and that “even President [Donald] Trump, in an executive order, has proposed establishing an American sovereign wealth fund.”

“I recognize that for the government to have a major stake in a company, particularly one for which AI is only part of its business, is complicated,” Sanders wrote. “More details—including the specific spending priorities and the mechanics of implementation—will be included in the legislation I unveil in the coming weeks.”

“But the principle is simple: When a public resource generates wealth, the public should share in that wealth.* AI is being built on a public resource far more valuable than oil: the accumulated knowledge, creativity, and labor of mankind,” he continued. “The future of AI and the fate of humanity must not be decided behind closed doors in Silicon Valley. It must not be dictated by billionaires seeking to maximize their power and profit. It must be decided by workers, parents, teachers, artists, scientists, communities and the American people. It’s our future. We must decide it.”

Read more here: https://www.commondreams.org/news/bern ... lth-fund

*caltrek’s comment: It is about time that instead of socializing the costs and privatizing the profits we socialize (some) of the costs and socialize at least some of the profits.

[weatheriscool]

Sanders Sovereign Wealth Fund Plan Would Give US Public ‘Direct Ownership Stake’ in AI Giants
By Jake Johnson
June 1, 2026

Introduction:

(Common Dreams) Sen. Bernie Sanders on Monday announced he will soon introduce legislation that would give the American public “a direct ownership stake” in the largest artificial intelligence companies in the US by establishing a sovereign wealth fund, which would ensure everyone benefits from the rapidly advancing technology.

Sanders (I-Vt.) wrote in a New York Times op-ed that his American AI Sovereign Wealth Fund Act would create the new fund by imposing a one-time, 50% tax on the stock of OpenAI, Anthropic, and other AI behemoths. The sovereign wealth fund, a government-owned investment vehicle, would both “give the public a direct role in determining the future of this technology” and “guarantee that the trillions of dollars potentially generated by AI are used to improve the lives of all of us—not simply to make the richest people in the world even richer.”

The senator emphasized that “this is not an original idea,” noting that scholars and even leading AI companies have proposed some version of a public wealth fund to broadly distribute AI-related gains. Sanders also observed that Norway and Alaska have sovereign wealth funds, and that “even President [Donald] Trump, in an executive order, has proposed establishing an American sovereign wealth fund.”

“I recognize that for the government to have a major stake in a company, particularly one for which AI is only part of its business, is complicated,” Sanders wrote. “More details—including the specific spending priorities and the mechanics of implementation—will be included in the legislation I unveil in the coming weeks.”

“But the principle is simple: When a public resource generates wealth, the public should share in that wealth.* AI is being built on a public resource far more valuable than oil: the accumulated knowledge, creativity, and labor of mankind,” he continued. “The future of AI and the fate of humanity must not be decided behind closed doors in Silicon Valley. It must not be dictated by billionaires seeking to maximize their power and profit. It must be decided by workers, parents, teachers, artists, scientists, communities and the American people. It’s our future. We must decide it.”

Read more here: https://www.commondreams.org/news/bern ... lth-fund

*caltrek’s comment: It is about time that instead of socializing the costs and privatizing the profits we socialize (some) of the costs and socialize at least some of the profits.

I agree. but lets use 50% for a basic income and develop an efficient automated production line to feed and house all people.