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.
Related event: MIT Economist Fradkin Pushes Back on Acemoglu's "Pro-Worker AI" Case(5 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Alpha School investigation: 17 campuses on probation, Bill Ackman as shadow lead, Holmes involved — benjaminjriley · 2026-11-02
- Google's chief economist: AI will transform more jobs than it kills — gains come from redesigning workflows — danielrock · 2026-11-02
- Daniel Lemire: AI is exploding demand for boring compute, server CPUs to double — lemire · 2026-11-02
- Alignment researcher: the word "aligned" implies consistencies that don't exist — davidmanheim · 2026-11-02
- By 2035, Indian Parents Will Ask How Many Agents You Manage, Not Your Salary — theteknosaur · 2026-11-02
- Under 5% of US consumers pay for AI, yet compute demand is already forcing usage cuts — NinaDSchick · 2026-11-02