GATES: Go to San Francisco and ask people “would you rather ride in a Waymo or rather ride with a human driver?”
So, he’s right about that—I’ve seen past polling that shows that people in the Bay Area do say that they prefer to not have to deal with a human driver and would prefer the robotic taxi over the human-driven one. But it’s also true, unless things have changed recently, and I have not been monitoring the situation, that Waymo’s rates were higher, and so it’s also not presently an even comparison. You have to pay a premium for the Waymo.
That being said, my bet is that a lot of Waymo’s costs are fixed, so those costs will drop on a per-ride basis as their fleet scales up. And they are expanding.
Whenever I visit SF for work once a quarter it feels like there is a cult running the city. So many cringe ads telling you that meta glasses will let you be more in the moment and some XY product will make AI work for you without really telling you anything about the product. Yet they can’t even keep their elevators at the transit stops working cuz fuck the poor and disabled. Point is, SF has a weird sense of priorities and I don’t really trust the common wisdom coming from that place. I love Oakland though, some of the best food to be found there
Human drivers, fuel, car parts, and compute are all non-fixed.
Can confirm, live in SF and prefer waymos. They don’t have a sense of urgency so they tend to drive safer then the Uber drivers who are trying to get you to the destination and out of the car as quick as possible to start the next ride, can’t blame them but they drive really aggressive sometimes. They are more expensive though…
Why listen to a guy with a micro soft?
Who’s saying it will create more jobs? I’ve literally never heard that claimed anywhere. Someones probably saying it, presumably, but that’s not at all even once what I’ve heard.
Either AI will prove incapable of replacing us, and we keep the same amount of jobs as we currently do, or it will replace us. Horses never really found that much work after we developed the combustion engine…
My idiotic not-even-briefly-thought-through prediction:
- LLM systems can’t do anything reliably, but they can do it cheaply, so ‘decision makers’ contract out LLM based systems to handle customer support/service and slap a disclaimer on it. You can pay for premium support by a person. Your PA still has to wait on hold to talk to this person. If you can’t afford a PA, you can’t afford the premium service.
- It’s so much cheaper than having real people, not because it’s cheap, but because now you have infinitely scalable team size with no downtime, no managers, no benefits, or other ancillary costs. Quality goes down. Unit economics improve.
- Companies that don’t jump on the LLM train will be more expensive because they have to have real people, which are better on almost every metric, but expensive to maintainne. No one will be able to afford the premium service of having someone who actually has the ability to do anything, so they will lose customer base, so they’ll get more expensive, so they’ll lose customer base, so they… Repeat until they are bought out by their competitors or are a luxury brand charging fifty billionaires whatever they feel like because the check is blank.
- The market polarizes. Everything is either barely affordable crap or expensive luxury service. No one is happy, but ‘profit’ is maximised. The American health insurance company becomes the model for everything.
I can only speak to my field, which is legal. Incomprehensible but prolific drivel has always been something the court system has struggled with getting through. That same drivel is now pretty good at pleading generalities but it’s awful at detailing facts.
You can get past the first hurdle in the legal world and unlock a massive and expensive cascade which AI can also effectively navigate for you.
In essence, AI can, very effectively, take an incoherent unreasonable and often mentally unwell litigant and magnify the expense of getting rid of their frivolous claim by over 100.
It’s almost assuredly going to 1. Chock the system. 2. Force massive reallocation of resources in the judiciary 3. Thereby vastly increasing not decreasing legal work. And 4. End up with valid claims being killed in a massive change in judicial attitude toward “clear enough” pleadings as they struggle with an AI influx.
Prediction:
Plaintiff - Submits AI fueled claim.
Judiciary - Uses AI to parse claim.Outcome: more people attempt claims because previously they were incapable of a cohesive claim, but overall time dealing with individual claims goes down. Probably not in the short term though.
I sincerely doubt it. Judges want to do justice. I think most people would call having a robot judge your pleadings and dismiss merit less claims as dystopian.
Even if it was just “parsing” that’s a layer between you and the judge. Probably also dystopian.
Ugh. I hadn’t even thought of AI slop litigation. These companies are giving a firehose to the mentally ill as a monthly subscription.
If only. If you google an AI specifically for litigation you’ll get websites selling weekly access for just shy of $500.
I often get very large pleading dumps immediately prior to a hearing instead of at a more logical time and I think it’s the pro se scrounging the money together for another fix of an expensive AI website.
At least that’s prohibitively expensive for a lot of people. It’d be so much worse if it was affordable by more people.
I don’t know. I mean it’s probably a very bad model and these people are just being scammed for a gpt 3.0. I can’t say I like them but I still abhor a scam.
Having seen fucking crypto and NFTs and now this LLM abomination, their fucking greed and narcissism… absolutely nauseating.
What is tragic, though, there are whole countries being pushed by their governments – already lobbied by big techbros promising “miracles” – to normalize LLMs as if these are nothing to worry about, anywhere from queries to create posters and… fuck damn, essays.
Fuck this pedophile pirate trying to stay relevant and respectable. Who the fuck is saying that AI will create more jobs??
We didn’t need Bill Gates to tell us this.
There’s a whole band of people who only listen to rich people. Because “they’re rich because they’re genius” mentality
One of the greatest sociopaths in history claiming society must embrace lobotomisation to appease his imaginary god.
Financial obesity is neurotoxic, and anyone afflicted should be quarantined from the decision making processes which affect those not contaminated.
poor BILL, trying to distract people from him being with epstein and giving his wife an std, notice how all the news about his philantrophy stopped immediately after all this news came out. thats why thought his “charities” are just scams the whole time.
“Millions of people around the world will soon consider large models ‘hoovering up’ all their work to be an astonishing theft of unprecedented proportions,” an internal Microsoft document admitted.
https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/ai-is-creating-doom-loops-all-over-the-economy
Yeah really. Also buying up farmland.
The video where he gets asked about Jeffrey, the micro expressions, eyes all over the place, fidgeting, tonal changes, stammering, indirectly stating being involved by bringing up slight details without being asked directly about them, etc–it’s easier to watch the video. He lost his cool so fast it makes Clinton look like a smooth criminal.
Guess he’s okay with the UBI future. He’ll be paying all of us.
The problem is he should, but he definitely won’t.
Isn’t this the guy who tried to slip his wife STD medicine because he had sex and caught something from (allegedly underage) Russian prostitutes on Epstein Island?
bill asked EPSTEIN how to sneak it into his wife without her noticing. he probably couldnt do it because abx has to be properly prescribed depending on the type of bacteria, and for how long. its not like single pill cures it once and all.
That’s right! Bill Gates fucked a kid.
Whatever it was it was bad enough for his wife to divorce him
That doesn’t mean he’s wrong about AI though.
But, they are also controlling the narrative by playing good cop bad cop on this subject. So he’s not telling the truth, either.
“allegedly underage” oh sure, ole Willy Gates fucked Epstein’s old lady slaves. Which he was known for.
This how you know Microsoft is behind on forcing AI into everything.
Probably lost the race, in fact.
People are already losing the jobs they have because of Ai
Transcript:
Interviewer: So tell me about why you think AI really will take jobs away from human beings at a significant scale.
Bill Gates: Yeah, so there’s no doubt to date, AI has created more jobs than it’s destroyed. The demand for the skill sets even just to build the data centers is very, very high. We have a, you know, a reasonably low unemployment rate.
The superiority of these systems is subject to a threshold where you have to believe that it’s incredibly reliable. And if you’re going to have your tele-sales or tele-support capability be AI-driven, you want to make sure that its accuracy is better than humans. And so the only profession we’ve truly crossed over that threshold is coding. And even there, I know a lot of people who are, you know, kind of stuck in the past and, you know, don’t want to use the AI for coding. But managers of coders get that most applications can be developed very inexpensively.
We will, in the next few years, cross over those thresholds for accounting, legal work, tele-sales, tele-support where 24 hours a day in every language with infinite trivia capability and no urgency, you know, so you look at the AI nurse and their several companies. They have perfect memory.
[Interviewer briefly clarifies something here, I removed this part because the autotranscription didn’t handle it well]
You know, you go to San Francisco and ask people, do you rather ride in a Waymo or rather ride with the human driver? Go ask people in the UK who use limbic for mental health support. You know, so the notion that just the market demand preference for driving or the nurse, you know, or even the person on the phone will favor humans. That’s a quality threshold which will be passed through, you know, if say insurance companies are still doing human claims, medical claims, which is a very AI-capable task, then a competitor who has very few human employees will come in and change the pricing model for that industry.
I think robot customer support will always suck because whatever it is you need from the company, they don’t actually want to bother with you. Don’t think I’ve ever made a phone call because I needed “trivia capability”. It won’t be good because they won’t give it access or authority to actually help anyone.
They don’t give the average call center worker the ability to fix anything already. The gig mostly became being there for customers to abuse at some point with a bit of passing a handful of people up the chain one step closer to a person with the authorization to maybe offer you appeasement for a problem they won’t actually fix.
He repeats the “better than humans at coding” which is super situational. Executives got so used to “code is code” mentality they can’t seem to understand that just because they can prompt up straightforward apps and other folks have done stunts like “make a knock off of this compiler” does not mean it’s just better than people.
Also very bizarre to say they have perfect memory, they are pretty spotty at that.
On the matter of support, it will generally always such because it’s rigged for the company in all matters where helping the customer would go against the company’s interests. Has been a long time. Why pay warranty when you can make it so painful they will give up?
