Or that the fed is preparing us to expect higher levels of unemployment for the same level of inflation.

Monetary policy isn’t inflationary if it’s on par with real production gains. More money chasing even more more goods is deflationary.

I have no workable exit strategy because I have small children and our family has been continuously under layoffs and terminations.

If the doom really comes to pass then what future is there for us? I fear a life of impecunious servitude and poverty more than death.

Save up enough money to be safe for many years after I get laid off so I have plenty of time to figure out what to do.

Writing the code has never been what has held companies back.

A lot of companies will use the speed of AI to wallpaper over the fact that they don't know what to make or how to prioritize.

We used to call the job Analyst Programmer. I am not sure what thing your code did but I am pretty sure you needed it - but who could understand that gap existed ? Who could explain to an AI that it needed to create this obscure code to solve that problem. And now comes the hard part - persuading your organisation to adopt it.

AI can code - but can it understand what it missing from the organisation and persuade it to chnage - to spend years at industry conferences?

Look at Starliner. NASA just announced that Boeing stuffed up, not with an engineering mistake (no one still knows exactly what broke) but that the whole organisation is so screwed up and so political Nasa just don’t believe Boeing can fix it.

AI cannot fix our turf wars. That’s not intelligence (humans know going to war is bad, but Putin still exists). I ye the systems we live in, and work in.

Changing those is feasible - once they are coded, transparent and open To inspection in a democracy.

We need programmable introspective systems of organisation - democracies in other words.

The engineering was not the problem - the problem was the organisation was more or less toxic and incapable of doing engineering. Writing code that won’t get used because if politics is a job we and AI can both do.

How do you plan an exit strategy for something that may or may not obsolete a whole field in a matter of months? Not sure there's a real way to do such a thing.

I would emphasize self reliance and sustainable living. Things like home ownership, dollar-resistant assets like gold, and self education in topics that matter to you and your existence.

Another way to frame it is what would you do in a low trust environment where corporations and the government were not to be trusted. You would likely avoid things like bubble bursting AI stock investments, jostling for rank in a company, etc.

I've been using these tools for nearly a year and half on a daily basis. They've become an integral part of my tool box for solving problems.

But writing code was never much more than 35-40% of my job while working for companies/others. Most my time has always gone towards communication, design, and validation. All three of those are not particularly vulnerable to mass AI automation except for the most trivial of scenarios and I have not seen evidence that has changed in over 2 years of so called "improvements".

My "exit plan" ultimately is to be one of the engineers capable of using these tools to scale my impact accordingly so I can focus on higher order problem solving, which ultimately is what is most valuable. I would be more concerned if I was in marketing/sales or frankly middle management.

Maybe this is just "copium" on my part, who knows, this sector is moving fast.

Yeah, it's pretty wild, huh? I'm at one of the big tech companies and the strategy that I've fallen into is to basically just mostly coast, save / invest as much as possible, and hope that this gets me to a financial threshold of "permanently comfortable" before the job losses kick in.

As for what happens after that, I'd really prefer not to have to do physical labor or trades. And it doesn't seem like any other white collar occupation is really going to be insulated, other than perhaps medical. So my strategy is to basically wait and see what society looks like after the transition and I guess I'll try and decide on something then?

They linked to the economic report article:

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-third-quarter-productivi...

Productivity up 5%.

Productivity/dollar up 3% Q2 and 2% Q3 even as labor costs up 1%.

What's new is who is saying it, i.e. people with better understanding of the economy than you or I.

Important thing to remember is that "new opportunities", whatever they are, are neither for you nor your children to partake - they're for the people just entering the workforce. Those whose careers suddenly disappear, as well as their families and children, are too busy dealing with consequences of being suddenly thrown down a rung or three on the socioeconomic ladder.

It’s not articulated in depth because nobody knows what opportunities there are on the other side.

Prediction is hard, especially of the future.

This isn't the first time they new technology has reshaped society, or even just the economy. How well were the results of prior things predicted ahead of time?

“Thanks to AI (and new immigration policies), there are tons of exciting new opportunities for Americans that want to pursue careers in: harvesting crops, installing roofs, or home health care”

Two different things. My understanding is that the Goldman Sachs take was about the effect of AI investments (largely the humongous CapEx spends by the hyperscalers) showing up in the GDP.

This is about labor productivity, a standard national-level economic indicator (see https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/prod2.pdf and https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/OPHNFB) going up 4.9%, as reported in this article linked in TFA: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-third-quarter-productivi...

Nah, the articles are non-contradicting. That article focuses on how the spend mostly goes to imports, which decreases GDP. This one focuses on the effects on unemployment. It's very plausible that a decrease in interest rates right now would lead to more imports and AI spending, not increased employment.

sure, but also looking at the pattern of who is involved - they could also declare bankruptcy (even if federal gov’t bankruptcy isn’t actually a thing).

The only question is how ugly it's going to get. Globally.

The closest thing we've seen in terms of scope/velocity is probably the introduction of the web in the late 90s to the broader world. Very few jobs were killed by that, though, relatively speaking.