AGI Job Takeover is a LIE! You're Safe (For Now...)

So in this video, I'm going to be talking about why AI won't take your job. Now, I know that I've been a huge proponent of the fact that AI is going to replace your job, replace your career, going to replace everyone. But I think it's important to discuss the other side, okay? To play devil's advocate and to give you guys some valid reasons on why AI might just not replace everything that you might think it will. Okay? And I think, like I always say, this is very important because it's always important to discuss the opposite sides of an opinion that you're thinking about because it's. It means that you're at least thinking critically and you're not going to get hit by any blind spots. So without further ado, let's get into this. So one of the first things that you can see that I've got here on my screen is this is, of course, the rules and regulations. And I think it's important to understand that rules and regulations exist in certain industries for a reason, and that is because of safety. Now, one of the primary examples of this is the aviation industry. So. So AI systems used in aircraft air traffic control and unmanned aerial vehicles must meet stringent safety and reliability standards set by aviation authorities like the faa, the Federal Aviation Administration, and the easa, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency. They must do extensive testing, simulation, and certification processes are required to validate AI performance in various flight conditions and, and scenarios. The high stakes involved in aviation safety necessitate a cautious approach to AI integration, which means that whilst, yes, AI could impact the aviation industry and many others, the regulations surrounding this industry are really, really stringent. The regulatory landscape for Autonomous airplanes and UAVs are evolving as technology advances and new cases emerge. But regulatory, but regulators are tasked with finding a balance between fostering innovation and, of course, ensuring pipeline, public safety. There's certification and airworthiness standards, developing a clear certification and process for airworthiness. There's operator training and licensing, there's air traffic integration. There are so many different aspects where you can't just simply just put AI into the sky. It has to undergo so many different tests, so much rules and regulations that it has to pass through. Which is why I do believe that certain regulations in certain industries may be very, very reluctant to include AI because a minor, minor issue could set it back for many different years. For example, let's say it's rushed ahead and it's rushed out of a prototype. The problem is, is that if an issue happens, a plane goes down or A UAV drone does something that we didn't expect it to do on F16 that is, you know, like a swarm of F16s, do something that we didn't expect it to do, that's going to set it back like 10 years because people are going to say, whoa, whoa, whoa, let's cancel all projects, let's review it for minimum three years. Things like that can happen. They do happen. And if that does happen, that is going to be something that could halt your industry progress. Now this isn't just the aviation industry. This was just one example. We also have self driving cars. Tesla is working on a robotaxi vehicle that is rumored to cost around $25,000. And it's something that they've been working on for quite some time. And autonomous vehicles must meet rigorous safety standards set by transportation authorities to to ensure passenger and pedestrian safeties. Regulators require extensive testing, extensive validation and certification of self driving systems before allowing them to operate on public roads. There are concerns about edge cases such as handling unexpected obstacles, extreme weather conditions, and these need to be addressed. Of course there's liability and insurance, there's the infrastructure and connectivity. Robotaxis may require specialized infrastructure such as dedicated lanes, smart traffic systems, just a billion different things. And one of the key things about self driving cars as well, and I'm not just talking about self driving cars, is the fact that with any AI system you have cyber security concerns. Autonomous vehicles are vulnerable to cyber attacks which could compromise passenger safety and privacy and of course the actual infrastructure of whatever country you're in. Regulators are demanding robust cybersecurity measures to protect against again against hacking attempts and data breaches. And establishing a secure communication protocol and encryption standards for vehicle to vehicle and vehicle to infrastructure. Communication is essential. So things like, you know, the cyber security, the regulations and of course the public safety are all reasons why certain industries like healthcare, self driving cars, and of course the aviation industry might not have that many impacts. Now of course this goes to many other industries that I'm not even thinking about, such as the law and of course lawyers. You know, there are certain things that do require real humans, but another thing, which is why AI might not take your job as quickly as you might think is not only due to the extensive regulations that AI has to wait to pass through, is because of the COMPUTE scarcity. So something that OpenAI and Microsoft are building is they are building a $100 billion supercomputer to, to power the next generation of AGI or AI systems. But the problem is, is that COMPUTE will still be scarce. And how does this mean that AI won't take a job if there's literally $100 billion of compute dedicated to replacing us? Well, let's take a look. So COMPUTE is a scarce resource and it's been argued that in the future compute is going to be like gold or like oil, because it's going to be so scarce. So the thing is, is that computer, it's going to be high demand but limited supply. If AGI is really what we says it is, then it's going to be probably the most valuable piece of software that we could literally have. And they're going to be extremely resource intensive and expensive to maintain. Due to the immense computational resources required. Companies and governments are going to prioritize allocating AGI capabilities to projects with the highest impact. So fields like space exploration, climate change modeling and biomedical research will have priority access to AGI, given the potential for transformative discoveries. Which means that, remember when GPT4 on a small scale was very, very COMPUTE intensive and we were only allowed like 20 messages every three to five hours? That is probably going to be what AGI is like. It's probably going to be something that, you know, is given to the government first, is given to certain industries and certain areas where they're really looking on a breakthrough. And I can guarantee that the large majority of COMPUTE is going to be going to ambitious projects. And I don't think it's going to be going to mundane projects like the average person's job or what the average person is going to be doing. But AGI is likely to be reserved for those use cases where it can be readily available for advancing the areas that are going to have the most economical impact and transformative nature for our society. In addition, AGI could be directed towards solving intricate global problems such as renewable energy development, food security, water management. And its abilities will likely be harnessed to design innovative solutions that surpass human analytical capacity. And governments are also going to prioritize AGI for cybersecurity, defense and strategic intelligence, leaving everyday tasks to more basic systems. And this is something that we don't think about. We think AGI is probably going to be used to replace workers. Whilst yes, in some cases it will. But what if AGI is going to be used to just defend. Now, another thing as well is that AGI will need robust human supervision due to ethical concerns, especially in fields like healthcare, law enforcement and policy. And advanced AI will primarily function as an advisor rather than a decision maker. And of course AGI requires immense computational our so specialized data centers, high speed networks, it won't be practical to implement it across every single office desk. And access to AGI is probably going to be carefully rationed to prevent misuse and ensure that the computing power is not wasted on time tasks that other less resource intensive AI systems can handle. And it's probably also going to be bound by certain restrictions where only certain individuals are going to be using it because maybe some people might misuse it for various different tasks. As we know people like to jailbreak LLM. So I'm thinking that maybe you're only going to be able to use AGI if you do have like some kind of ID system because it's going to be that powerful. It may just be some something that's reserved for researchers or people working in certain fields. Now another reason why AGI might not take your job is because AGI could peter out in terms of the energy scarcity problem. Currently there's a giant energy scarcity problem. So Microsoft is actually going nuclear to power its AI ambitions. If you didn't know, many people have discussed the fact that energy scarcity is one of the biggest bottlenecks to AI. Because these large data centers actually take up so many computational resources and so much effort to power these systems, it's very hard to build the infrastructure that's going to be able to power these data centers. So Microsoft and OpenAI, these companies are trying to collaborate on data centers that they can use to power the next generation. And it's estimated that the inference costs and power usage are at least 10 times higher than the training costs. So to put this into perspective, in January ChatGPT consumed roughly as much electricity per month as 26,000 U.S. households. And that's just for inference. And as these models get bigger and bigger to handle more complex tasks, the demand for servers to process the models grows exponentially. So it's important to know that you can see right here, these AI systems, even in their stages right now, are very, very energy intensive. And we know that it's very, very expensive to run these mod Claude Pro, which many people are saying that they're using it instead of GPT4. You can literally only send 45 messages every five hours. Which means that with an advanced AGI level system it's probably going to be like five messages every 24 hours. Or we can predict that it's probably going to be so compute intensive that it probably isn't going to be applied to everyday tasks. I mean, think about it like this. It's very, very, very hard to conceive. But AGI could be used to. And this is just something that is completely just off the grid, and that's why I'm stating this. But it could be used to like, you know, build a Dyson sphere, which is like an entire structure that goes around the sun and harnesses the energy. And I know that sounds absolutely astronomical in terms of a capability, but the reason I'm stating that is that there are going to be new industries born. And I think AGI will go to furthering those new industries which are right now pretty hard to conceive because we don't have those technologies and those breakthroughs there. Once those breakthroughs are there, once those new industries there, I think that that's where AGI development is going to go into and that's where the compute is going to be used, but not in standard everyday tasks. Now I'm going to be moving on to something that is a little bit interesting because I think people always forget about this. But one thing you have to know is that humans value humans. So in the event that AGI is readily available for everyone to use, the problem is that people aren't going to like it. What one interesting trend that I've noticed while looking at the landscape in terms of AI is that there is a slowly increasing trend of people revolting against AI. Currently what you're looking at is a Waymo car, and this Waymo car is essentially on fire because people are just quite apprehensive to new technologies. And the thing is, is that humans increasingly seemingly value humans. One of the things that means that humans are probably going to be still valued in the workplace and is the fact that humans are likely going to value human interaction. So on those kinds of deals where you don't really want to talk to an AI bot, on those high ticket sales or interactions where you really do want to be speaking to a human. You know, restaurants and stuff like that, a lot of people just want to talk to another human and remember that if people hate it, it simply won't happen because the society is dictated by what people actually use. And right now we're presuming that humans are going to want a society that is driven by AI. But if start to boycott companies that use AI or boycott certain AI tools and there's less economic investment in that, then it goes defunct and people just can get on with their normal lives and that industry remains whole. Remember, Hollywood writers actually did triumph over AI, and this is a key, key milestone. And this actually sets the precedent for future technologies because if studios cannot use AI to write scripts or to edit scripts that have already been by a writer, and it prevents studios from treating AI generated content as source ma, then it's going to be pretty, pretty crazy because it means that the industry isn't going to be impacted at all by generative AI as the trends would have presumed. So it means that certain industries and certain jobs are actually probably just going to be exempt because people just don't want AI to actually impact their industry whatsoever. And I can see increasingly that this trend is going to increase, especially the creative ones, because the human aspect of creativity is very, very valuable. Like when someone creates an artwork and it's created by a human, it just has much more weight than if an AI generated it in a bunch of different seconds. Now remember something that I've discussed already is that I've spoke about how AI hate is continuing to increase. When Sora was released, we thought that it was going to be this watershed moment of everyone thinking, wow, this is some crazy, amazing technology. However, people were stating that they wanted this to be illegal. It got 11 million views, 205,000 people liked this tweet and 13,000 people retweeted it of someone stating that I want this to be illegal, someone else stating that I struggle to think of a single positive thing that this could even bring to us. And you can see that 150,000 people left alike to this. And of course someone said, screw your AI Trash. Only trash. People like it or use it. I painted this. I don't care how tech bro tantrums you get. AI is theft and not art. And we can see that there's an increasing trend of this, which means that in certain industries, I've seen it before where people, companies are stating that they're using generative AI. They face tons and tons and tons of backlash to the point where they revert that change. And it's arguably better for the company in terms of their brand image to be against generative AI than it is to save money using generative AI, which is pretty, pretty crazy. Now we can also see how people that are not looking at AI actually reacted to this.

I am losing my mind thinking about how many women's lives are going to be ruined over this AI video bullshit. Don't tell me I'm wrong. Don't tell me it's not going to be used for what we all know it's going to be used for, because it already happens. And now we're just going to add video to this. Nothing good that could be Created with this justifies the evil that will be done with it. Like literally my first thought when I started seeing these videos was like, I need to delete my social media. Like this is not safe. This is not the only thing that this is going to be used for, for evil like the political corruption, the, the criminal justice implications of this. It's. I feel like I'm going insane from the smallest levels. Like the chat GPT of it all, everything AI related. I'm just like, what are you guys talking about?

Why?

Why are we letting this happen? Why are we acting excited about this? Why? Why do I see a million videos on my for you page of like create a product to sell entirely with AI? What? Why? Why? Why do we think that's okay? Why do we think this is okay? Why? Why is no one else other people are freaking out about this, but why is everyone not freaking out about this now?

It's important to note that this isn't a cherry picked video. I actually searched for a few videos and these ones were really, really popular. As in they had millions of different views, millions of people commenting on the videos, stating that they support them. And this wasn't the only one. There was one here of this guy stating that there is no non evil use for AI videos, another YouTuber stating that, you know, this is just awful, it's just simply not good. There were several different videos that were basically stating that we are completely against this. And the thing is is that I think generative AI is reaching a point where yes, it could automate several different careers, but the impact is largely probably going to be different because we are forgetting that the society is run by humans and humans usually dictate how things are integrated into them. And I think that Uber drivers are probably going to react to the same way if you don't know. Essentially Weibo is an autonomous vehicle that is going to be apparently expanding all around the us but I think once Uber drivers realize that their careers, and I mean, I know it's not technically a career, but it's a great way to earn, you know, a side hustle income. If you're trying to support your income, if you're trying to supplement your income with like a side hustle, but I think once people realize what Waymo is doing, whilst yes, it provides a safe alternative, I think there's going to be some kind of revolt there because I think people are just going to value the humanness in terms of having a human drive you around. And yes, whilst this does have privacy, reliability and security, having Your fellow man lose his side hustle isn't something that people are going to be excited for. Now another thing as well is that online platforms might incur a soft ban on it. So the platform uses a combination of AI and human moderation to detect for guideline violations and AI content that has not been declared. Viewers can also report AI content and request it to be taken down if the video has recreated their visuals or voice. So YouTube actually does have a new policy on AI generated content where you need to declare if your content contains AI generated material. And when I say I think they might soft ban it, I think that YouTube doesn't want their platform to be filled with AI generated spam. What they might do is if they realize a channel is uploading AI generated spam, they're probably going to put put it down in the algorithmic rankings and other human LED videos are going to be boosted more in that kind of content. And I think that matters a lot because in the future where the Internet is going to be this dead Internet theory, where there's going to be so much different pieces of AI generated content, AI ran accounts, you won't know what is human and what is not. And because of that, when someone completely knows that the content is made by a human, it's going to get pushed even more because humans are going to be seeking out real connections with other real humans. And in this age that's going to be dominated by AI. And you can see that Google is literally already taking steps to do this. So Google is going to be removing all AI generated SEO content to clean up search results for organic, real, human written driven content. And that is because Google's SEO has been schemed and it's been manipulated by people that just want to make money from the platform. And it's been exacerbated by generative AI where people are pumping out massive, massive articles, where they're just literally spamming the algorithm and ruining the platform for everyone else. So Google is literally removing that. YouTube is kind of clamping down on AI content. And overall it doesn't seem like maybe there's a counter trend towards AI. And remember that with certain websites, people aren't going to want AI agents running around crawling their websites. And that's because they can't click ads. Remember, if you get viewers on your website, whatever it may be, you have someone that has a cookie or whatever and then they click the ads and then that's how you make money. But if you have a billion different agents that are going to be impacting your metrics, it's going to mess up the entire ad industry, and that's not something that people want. So I can guarantee that new captchas are probably going to be invented on certain websites to verify that you're human. And it's likely that certain websites will just ban the use of AI agents from scraping their websites. So it seems that maybe, just maybe, AI won't take your job, it may not take your career, because there might be a lot of regulations that just prevent it from happening. The compute used to generate generate AGI will probably just go to even more ambitious projects. And not to mention the humans are not too fond of AI at this moment in time. But this video was literally just to play devil's advocate. Let me know what you thought about it and I will see you guys in the next one.