What paid work might remain for human beings to do if we approach a world where AI is able to perform all economically useful tasks more productively than human beings? In this paper, I argue that the answer is not ‘none at all.’ In fact, there are good reasons to believe that tasks will still remain for people to do, due to three limits: ‘general equilibrium limits,’ involving tasks in which labor has the comparative advantage over machines (even if it does not have the absolute advantage); ‘preference limits,’ involving tasks where human beings might have a taste or preference for an un-automated process; and ‘moral limits,’ involving tasks with a normative character, where human beings believe they require a ‘human in the loop’ to exercise their moral judgment. In closing, I consider the limits to these limits as AI gradually, but relentlessly, becomes ever-more capable.
It’d be nice to see some evidence of this increasingly productive AI. So far, it all looks like hype, except enshittifying customer contact centers by making it even more difficult to reach a human being.
Yeah but I would still like to have the conversation. It would be far better if all of this could be decided before we get super capable AI rather than scrambling to come up with some kind of coherent policy after the fact.