Séb Krier on X: "There are broadly two ways people think about AGI and labour: Position A is where humans get fully substituted, which is usually advanced by parts of the AI commentariat. The argument is that if AGI is a scalable input that can do what workers do at lower cost, then the market https://t.co/2FTLH90hff" / X

x.com · 598 words · saved by 1 readers

To view keyboard shortcuts, press question mark View keyboard shortcuts Home Explore Notifications Chat Grok Lists Bookmarks Communities Premium Profile More Post Kavish Garg @thatkavish Post See new posts Conversation Séb Krier @sebkrier There are broadly two ways people think about AGI and labour: Position A is where humans get fully substituted, which is usually advanced by parts of the AI commentariat. The argument is that if AGI is a scalable input that can do what workers do at lower cost, then the market value of human work falls. Even if humans remain physically capable, and even if adding AI raises human "physical productivity" in some narrow sense, the prices of what humans can sell can fall faster because AI floods supply. In competitive equilibrium, firms buy the cheapest effective input. Unless there is a large and persistent demand for "specifically human" labour (therapy, arts etc), wages are pushed toward the minimum people will accept; if the market-clearing wage is

Séb Krier @sebkrier There are broadly two ways people think about AGI and labour: Position A is where humans get fully substituted, which is usually advanced by parts of the AI commentariat. The argument is that if AGI is a scalable input that can do what workers do at lower cost, then the market value of human work falls. Even if humans remain physically capable, and even if adding AI raises human "physical productivity" in some narrow sense, the prices of what humans can sell can fall faster because AI floods supply. In competitive equilibrium, firms buy the cheapest effective input. Unless

related reading