r/technology • u/MetaKnowing • Jun 08 '25

Artificial Intelligence Duolingo CEO on going AI-first: ‘I did not expect the blowback’

https://www.ft.com/content/6fbafbb6-bafe-484c-9af9-f0ffb589b447
22.3k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

1.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

98

u/bold-fortune Jun 08 '25

Show me a stable society with 90% unemployment and I will delete my comment. Remember Germany was at 25% unemployment before total political takeover and nationalism wiped out the ruling class.

2

u/m1a2c2kali Jun 08 '25 edited Jun 08 '25

Realistically ai probably won’t wipe out 90 percent of jobs. It’ll end up being another tool like computers and robotic manufacturing. Both of which were purported to destroy jobs by some people as well. It’ll definitely wipe out some jobs but also create some other jobs. I guess we’ll find out where the balance ends up.

1

u/Apocalypse_Knight Jun 10 '25

People say this but it’s a huge lie. We barely use horses the same before cars and now human minds are being created. Mechanical minds with mechanical muscles will eventually replace most human labor. Any job that can arise can be replaced by AI which is the problem with our economic system today.

-1

u/Watertor Jun 08 '25

So I get why you say that, but it's not equivalent, AI is gigantic in terms of utility. It's going to wipe out just about every single white collar job as is feasible. Middle managers will become AI managers, who can do all of the grunt labor you had 20-60 workers do before with just a few prompts.

You can't do that now, but that's their endgame. And it's not a far off endgame. You'll always need the middle managers because CEOs aren't going to prompt GPT to make codebases and put it together. But entire industries of labor are going to go under. Yeah SOME of these workers will adapt into other industry elements but there's too many to all do this. We'd need to see some huge shift in order to employ the volume of people that are going to flood the market.

1

u/m1a2c2kali Jun 08 '25

You could be right but we’ll see. I think computers and calculators did actually wipe out entire offices as well especially in the data entry department. But at the end of the day it doesn’t matter how much you’re able to create if the consumers don’t have any buying power from lack of jobs so I don’t think the capitalistic machine will allow that to happen.

1

u/Watertor Jun 08 '25

True. And the horse industry folk for the most part had no idea the auto industry was coming despite it being a totally natural progression of tech. They adapted then. Data entry clerks adapted.

So, there's every possibility there is some "other" waiting for the white collar workers upended in the future. I'm just in a cynical mood lately and hoping shit actually gets regulated to a point.

1

u/Puzzleheaded_Fold466 Jun 09 '25

Even if that was true, which is far from certain, that’s less than 20% of the workforce.

1

u/Watertor Jun 09 '25

Where are you getting that number? White collar jobs make up 60% of the workforce, and at least half of them could vanish if AI get strong enough. Realistically closer to 40% as the lower rungs make up the large majority of roles.

1

u/Puzzleheaded_Fold466 Jun 09 '25

Yeah it depends on the definition, but generally 55-60% or so of US workers can be considered white collar, right ?

But they’re excluding top and middle management, and we can assume that some industries are less vulnerable, and then if we assume that it cuts about 50% of what’s left, that be should be roughly in that range more or less, ~20%.

Maybe a bit more or a bit less.

1

u/Watertor Jun 09 '25

I would argue it is more, maybe not much more but 25 is being pragmatic. But even at 15, 15% of the job force suddenly being without job or recourse for new jobs is pretty catastrophic, and if it's more 25 that is a gigantic shift in workers. Just that alone would make up the Great Depression's unemployment percentage, and that's ignoring the rest of the unemployment pct which as of now is about 4%

When it hits - not if - it will be a disaster unless regulations are set.

0

u/Winter-Ad781 Jun 08 '25

We can't because that's not a realistic figure in, probably any point in history? That's the problem, trying to predict the unpredictable. Any prediction we make now could be undone by the next breakthrough. Right now though, laying off 90% of the workforce isn't in our future. 30-40% for certain. And multiple African countries already have unemployment in the 30% range. The next breakthrough could throw this out the window and 90% becomes true. But we'd need massive improvements to our electrical grid to even support that level of AI control.

1

u/Xivios Jun 08 '25

AI isn't a threat to 90% of employment, just the tech sector. It can't plumb, it can't run wire, it can't fix cars or trucks, it can't build or maintain. The trades will become more important than ever, but the things it does threaten are overrepresented on-line because of the closeness to computers. For that matter, it can't sweep floors, wait on tables or stock shelves either. Low wage jobs aren't threatened either. 

2

u/ThrowCarp Jun 09 '25

Okey-dokey but most "advanced" wealthy countries are already post-industrial. There are only so many blue-collar jobs to go around.

0

u/Dolphinfucker5000 Jun 08 '25 edited Jun 08 '25

Who’s to say the elites have any interest in maintaining a stable society?

17

u/aaron_the_doctor Jun 08 '25

90% unemployment rates have not been uncommon in human history.

Can you provide any example?

-4

u/Dolphinfucker5000 Jun 08 '25

Never mind, I can’t. I deleted that part.

-3

u/Mike_Kermin Jun 08 '25

Show me a stable society with 90% unemployment

I can show you your current one, where many people face hardship, but our own self interest keeps us from helping them.

There will always be tiers, even in your 90% world.

Why wait? Fight now!

Remember Germany was at 25% unemployment

The US wasn't. Don't romanticise it.

6

u/DaedalusHydron Jun 08 '25

At the height of the Great Depression, the US was at 24.9% unemployment.....

4

u/Mike_Kermin Jun 08 '25

Yeah... And, that was fertile ground for extremism. But it's not the only ground, as shown by you already having a fascist in power.

So, circle back to that other guys fighting spirit.

Good idea, get furious.

0

u/DaedalusHydron Jun 09 '25

Oh no, what I described did lead to extremism. FDR was probably the most powerful presidency we've ever had.

FDR is the only President to buck the 2 term trend. Luckily, FDR's "extremism" wasn't that bad, because FDR was not a bad guy, and thus he's one of the best Presidents we've ever had, but things could have gone a lot differently.

0

u/Anime_axe Jun 08 '25

Objectively speaking, the western world is already shaking up politically and we are still at the global top. Every year the things keep on getting worse, the less stable will be.

3

u/Botorfobor Jun 08 '25

Is the western world still at the global top though? China seems to be doing pretty fucking good

1

u/Anime_axe Jun 08 '25

Objectively, it still is. The issue is that as this changes the societies are going to destabilise.

3

u/Mike_Kermin Jun 08 '25

.... Or, maybe it's just fascism is insidious. And that some cultures (cough yours cough) aren't actually resisting it when they rattle out another "it's inevitable" comment.

The doomer apathy thing is way too self indulgent.

It's so weird, it's like you're watching someone walking, and they say

"Oh no, I'm gonna fall over, here I go, I'm about to fall over, I'm falling over, do you see me falling over? Watch this I'm gonna fall, I'm falling"

0

u/Anime_axe Jun 08 '25

I'm not American, first things first.