Economist pushes back on 'pro-worker AI' critique: markets, not labs, should pick applications
soumitrashukla9 · x · 2026-09-15
Responding to criticism that AI labs neglect pro-worker technologies in pursuit of AGI, economist Andrey Fradkin offers four counterarguments:
- Demand-driven: capital chases AGI because of market demand, productivity gains, and applications; a credible pro-worker AI business plan would trivially attract capital and talent.
- Division of labor: labs pursue AGI while the rest of the economy finds applications; labs also train models for many high-application tasks, so the criticism may be overblown.
- Ex-ante indistinguishable: given the generality of model capabilities, it's difficult or impossible to identify pro-worker vs. substitute AI technologies in advance; government-directed tech has a checkered history.
- Beliefs only go so far: changing people's beliefs would have only moderate effects, as competition dominates.
More from AGI Musings
- Researcher who trained frontier LLMs and synthesized viruses calls AI bioterror fears bogus — ccerrato147 · 2026-09-15
- Jensen Huang calls AI doomer 10% extinction prediction 'made up' and 'irresponsible' — firstadopter · 2026-09-15
- Common AI forecasts ignore algorithmic breakthroughs, argues one skeptical poster — shauseth · 2026-09-15
- Yacine: AI can't get much smarter — only faster from here — yacineMTB · 2026-09-15
- "Name One Thing AI Actually Made Better": Dev's Viral Skeptical Rant Beyond Coding — sebpaquet · 2026-09-15
- Analysis: Anthropic pacing alone buys one month; coordinated US slowdown cuts risk to 21% — soleio · 2026-09-15