undefined | Better HN

0 pointsquijoteuniv2y ago0 comments

I appreciate the perspective shared in the article, but I can't help but find it somewhat egocentric. Firstly, it seems to overlook the fact that Priya was already being exploited in a low-paying job. The article describes the long hours and overwork she endures, but it fails to challenge the status quo of her employment situation. This lack of critical analysis may be indicative of a narrow focus on the negative effects of GPT-4.

Secondly, it appears that the author is using Priya's story as a way to gain self-importance in his blog, painting her as a victim of ChatGPT's progress. While it's essential to address the potential job displacement caused by AI advancements, using an individual's plight as a narrative tool seems rather opportunistic. A more balanced discussion of the broader implications of AI on society and the workforce would have been more informative and less self-centered.

0 comments

japhyr2y ago

I would guess that a higher proportion of HNers have had a chance to work with GPT-4 than the general population has. Most people are still basing their takes about AI either on something like GPT-3, or just what they're hearing in the general media.

The point of the article I that there are a lot more people in jobs like Priya's who won't be able to quickly leverage AI for their own benefit than there are who will. We throw the word "disruptive" around a lot here. But that's exactly what these new AI tools will do to many people's lives. Their lives will be disrupted, and they have little cushion to fall back on.

I believe technical progress is inevitable, but a lot of people suffer on the path forward.

eminence322y ago

I think I have a similar feeling to you.

Why is it that only the blog author gets to use GPT4 to do Priya's work? Why doesn't Priya also get to use GPT4 to accelerate/enhance her work?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse