Forget artificial intelligence break free from human control and conquer the world. A far more pressing concern is how today’s generative AI tools will transform the job market. Some experts envision a world of increased productivity and job satisfaction; others, a landscape of mass unemployment and social upheaval.
Someone who has an overview of the situation is Marie Daly, CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, part of the nation’s system responsible for setting monetary policy, maintaining a stable financial system, and ensuring maximum employment. Daly, a labor market economist by training, is particularly interested in how generative AI could change the state of the labor market.
Daly spoke with WIRED Editor-in-Chief Will Knight about Zoom. The conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
You’ve been talking to early stage companies about their use of generative AI. What do you see — or to ask the question that worries many people: are workers being replaced?
More companies than I would have imagined are already interested in it. Some will have more opportunities to replace their workers, and others to increase their numbers. But overall, what I’m seeing is that no company is using it as a replacement tool on its own.
One person I spoke to, his company has invested in generative AI and used it to help write descriptions of items they have for sale. They have hundreds of thousands of articles, but not all of them are high margin or interesting to write about. They can continue to hire more writers or use generative AI to write first drafts of these items. Editors become listeners and do more interesting work.
How confident are you that generative AI will not eliminate jobs overall?
Technology has never reduced net employment over time for the country. If you look at technology over several centuries, you see that the impact is somewhere in the middle, not necessarily in the middle, but somewhere in there, and where we end up depends a lot on how we engage with the world . technology.
When I think about generative AI – or AI more broadly – what I see is opportunity. You can replace people, increase their number and create new opportunities for people. But there are winners and losers. I became an economist in the age of computerization. This IT boom and the productivity that accompanied it have clearly produced inequalities.
AI in general, but generative AI in particular, is an opportunity to help middle-skilled people be more productive. But it’s our choice, and it requires a lot of thought on our part.
So white-collar workers could, in theory, benefit from AI. How can we ensure that companies deploy technology in this way?
Before arriving at constrainI think we could start with educate, and a tight job market is really helping us. In a market where people with a computer science degree are harder to find, businesses are driven primarily by their own motivation: to be profitable and productive. They ask, “How can I use less expensive talent more effectively?” I think business thinking naturally tends toward replacing workers, because it’s easier to think that way, but it’s not set in stone.
Companies that develop and sell AI models and tools don’t seem to think this way. They seem exclusively focused on how AI can replace humans.
