Josh Herritz
39.8K posts

Josh Herritz
@jherritz
Obsolete Data Wrangler | AI, data, startups, code, economic development, YIMBY, urbanism, current events and running



Our open letter today on autonomous driving and prevention of serious accidents and road deaths w/ @slotkinjr Adding signatories for those supportive opmed.doximity.com/articles/an-op…



New pod: THE SMARTEST CASE AGAINST THE AI JOBS APOCALYPSE AI is the first technology that seems to automate the same cognitive sectors that absorbed work during previous waves of automation. For that reason, many people worry that it will destroy tens of millions of jobs imminently. But after I review the evidence showing that AI is not clearly destroying work today—and might even be stimulating demand for certain tech jobs— I brought on the great @alexolegimas to talk about the best reasons to doubt the doomsday narrative. We talk about all sorts of economic principles—lump of labor fallacy, income elasticity, Jevon's Paradox—but maybe his most interesting point is about the nature of desire and status. Desire is insatiable, and technology will never solve for status. Even in a world where AI can automate many tasks, status might go up rather than down or flat. And status motivates a lot of economic activity. So even in a world where AGI is very good at 99% of existing tasks is still a world where people will want to send their money to things that are perceived as "scarce" and "status-enhancing." You can create a lot of jobs on this basis alone. You could argue that this is how economic transformations have always worked. Our economy is a rough register of human desires. And in a world where artificial intelligence automates some tasks, it might not destroy work so much as it moves dollars and labor toward new desires in new sectors of the economy. The pet care economy wasn't really a thing in 1800. Now it's a >$100 billion business, made possible by the fact that a richer country moved dollars and workers from corn farms to bespoke poodle manicure spas. It is easy to imagine that AI could automate many tasks and even some jobs. What's harder to imagine is that we'll be permanently stuck in an disequilibrium where people with disposable income aren't trying to satisfy their desires and burnish their status. And in a world where AI is abundant, the question we should be asking about the future of work is: What will be scarce? What will be kind of jobs will be produced as desire and status shift, once again? open.spotify.com/episode/74OPgO…


Very important update from UK AISI. This is a meaningful change from the previous report. Here’s what the new data would look like for “Mythos Preview (new)” with $ on the x-axis:

People are mad about data centers, they're mad about warehouses. Boy if neoliberalism hadn't killed all the factories people would be mad about them too. nytimes.com/interactive/20…

We've published a paper that explains our views on AI competition between the US and China. The US and democratic allies hold the lead in frontier AI today. Read more on what it’ll take to keep that lead: anthropic.com/research/2028-…



President Trump is right to push for an AI strategy that keeps America ahead of China while putting real guardrails in place against serious risks. As President Trump meets with Xi, AI talks with China should focus on common sense steps that make America safer, even if we have to take those steps on our own. My letter to the admin laying this out ⬇️



Are autonomous vehicles (self-driving cars) “less able to detect people of color”? That’s what I read in The Atlantic this weekend, in Xochitl Gonzalez’s “People Who Don’t Like People Are Making All of Our Decisions.” It appears to be entirely false.


Exclusive: US clears H200 chip sales to 10 China firms as Nvidia CEO looks for breakthrough reuters.com/business/retai…










