@remixtures woww! many (economists) discovering F.W. Taylor and Henry Ford, and how they stripped workers of their expertise and control over the work process

"AI is making me more productive, but so far it isn’t putting me in danger of unemployment.But what about those weakly bundled jobs? Garicano et al. predict that these will begin to decline only after demand becomes sufficiently inelastic — in other words, once AI becomes so productive that its output hits diminishing returns for the consumer. After that point, automation tends to replace human labor — it becomes a way to make the same amount of stuff with fewer workers, instead of a way to make more stuff with the same amount of workers.Until that point, there will be quite a lot of work for people in weakly bundled jobs to do, because of expanded demand. And yet at the same time, companies won’t know which tasks to hire workers for, because AI’s “jagged” strengths and weaknesses will be constantly changing.The rapidity with which Claude Code replaced the task of code-writing demonstrates this problem. In 2025, companies hiring software engineers could judge their merit based on how good they were at writing code. In 2026, companies have to judge the merit of software engineers based on how good they are at checking and maintaining code. Those skills don’t always go together.The solution, I think, is to hire more generalists. Instead of picking people to do specific tasks, companies will pick people whose job is to constantly learn what AI is good and bad at, and to fill in the gaps."noahpinion.blog/p/salarymen-sp