It's simply that no one who's still in the job market in China, has ever witnessed a recession or high unemployment. They had a non-stop, rapid growth from 1978. They have no mental concept of it. So they live in blissful ignorance.
The US at only 38%... I really didn't expect that. Japanese news always reports that the US is vigorously pushing AI forward, but it turns out it's just 38%. It seems America still has a long way to go.
I am Korean. First of all, I often receive freelance requests from China (because I am cheaper than Chinese developers), and in China, starting with the 996 work culture, they exploit human labor to an extreme degree.
To be clear right off the bat, the anti-AI protesters mentioned in the article (researchers, engineers, artists, etc.) are essentially the "establishment" who have enjoyed the greatest benefits under the current system. They instinctively sense that AI will dismantle their high-value-added jobs, and they are causing system bottlenecks in the most primal ways—through NIMBY opposition to data center construction and physical violence (like the terror attack on Sam Altman's home).
On the other hand, countries like Singapore and Indonesia have a relatively smaller legacy ecosystem to protect. For them, AI is a tool for a *'quantum leap'* that allows them to skip traditional stages of industrial development. The video of dancing robots during the Chinese Spring Festival is not simple optimism; it is the manifestation of a ruthless pragmatism that says, "We will thoroughly exploit technology as a tool."
Why has this pragmatism developed? It is likely a complex mix of reasons. However, fundamentally, it is because Asian governments are central control groups. Starting with South Korea, China, and Japan, Asian governments are inherently authoritarian.
This means it is easy for them to control the public's anxiety about AI. Herein lies the problem. What is the greatest function of the media? It is 'agenda setting'. However, in Korea, China, and Japan, the level of criticism against the government is weaker than one might think, and social agendas are not formed around articles critical of the government. The media is failing to play its proper role.
People know the narrative that "if you don't use AI, you will fall behind." But they also see an opportunity: the chance to close the knowledge gap with the English-speaking world. The issue is the underlying belief that "I will be the beneficiary of that Golden Ticket." In reality, of course, the vast majority will never receive that Golden Ticket.
As for the media, since most traditional outlets have hit their growth ceilings, they sell the anxiety of "falling behind without AI" for their own profit. I consider this an 'Anxiety Business'. Most legacy media can no longer grow, and in a society where they must compete with "new media" like YouTube, they ultimately needed a new card to play—and I believe that card is the AI business.
In truth, modern society is already fundamentally abundant in productivity. So what is the problem? Most sectors of business have become bloated, and capital needs new places to invest. Businesses that have grown sufficiently large in a specific sector effectively have a growth rate identical to the industry's growth rate, yet the growth rate of the internet is slowing down. The core issue was that there was a limit to how much labor costs could be cut to drive profit.
In modern industry, labor accounts for roughly 20-25% of the price of manufactured goods. Is the world currently unable to overproduce? Not at all. We are in a state where overproduction is intentionally restricted for the sake of fuel costs, real estate, and corporate profits. In other words, it is not an era where we cannot overproduce, but an era where we do nto. With technology advancing like this, I have no idea how people are supposed to consume or how companies will actually increase their revenues. The current wave of AI replacement feels exactly like the shift to self-serve kiosks.
They eliminated the labor cost of store clerks, but the prices remained the same. Even when you actually use an AI customer service agent, you end up getting completely pissed off during the call, only to finally face a human agent in a state of rage. If it had just been a human agent from the start, there would have been no reason to get angry... Most of the...
It's not fully Confucianist like the others[0], Taoist ex-Minister Audrey Tang visualizes AI to be a glue, "a steering wheel rather than a hamster wheel"
4 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 22.0 ms ] threadTo be clear right off the bat, the anti-AI protesters mentioned in the article (researchers, engineers, artists, etc.) are essentially the "establishment" who have enjoyed the greatest benefits under the current system. They instinctively sense that AI will dismantle their high-value-added jobs, and they are causing system bottlenecks in the most primal ways—through NIMBY opposition to data center construction and physical violence (like the terror attack on Sam Altman's home).
On the other hand, countries like Singapore and Indonesia have a relatively smaller legacy ecosystem to protect. For them, AI is a tool for a *'quantum leap'* that allows them to skip traditional stages of industrial development. The video of dancing robots during the Chinese Spring Festival is not simple optimism; it is the manifestation of a ruthless pragmatism that says, "We will thoroughly exploit technology as a tool."
Why has this pragmatism developed? It is likely a complex mix of reasons. However, fundamentally, it is because Asian governments are central control groups. Starting with South Korea, China, and Japan, Asian governments are inherently authoritarian.
This means it is easy for them to control the public's anxiety about AI. Herein lies the problem. What is the greatest function of the media? It is 'agenda setting'. However, in Korea, China, and Japan, the level of criticism against the government is weaker than one might think, and social agendas are not formed around articles critical of the government. The media is failing to play its proper role.
People know the narrative that "if you don't use AI, you will fall behind." But they also see an opportunity: the chance to close the knowledge gap with the English-speaking world. The issue is the underlying belief that "I will be the beneficiary of that Golden Ticket." In reality, of course, the vast majority will never receive that Golden Ticket.
As for the media, since most traditional outlets have hit their growth ceilings, they sell the anxiety of "falling behind without AI" for their own profit. I consider this an 'Anxiety Business'. Most legacy media can no longer grow, and in a society where they must compete with "new media" like YouTube, they ultimately needed a new card to play—and I believe that card is the AI business.
In truth, modern society is already fundamentally abundant in productivity. So what is the problem? Most sectors of business have become bloated, and capital needs new places to invest. Businesses that have grown sufficiently large in a specific sector effectively have a growth rate identical to the industry's growth rate, yet the growth rate of the internet is slowing down. The core issue was that there was a limit to how much labor costs could be cut to drive profit.
In modern industry, labor accounts for roughly 20-25% of the price of manufactured goods. Is the world currently unable to overproduce? Not at all. We are in a state where overproduction is intentionally restricted for the sake of fuel costs, real estate, and corporate profits. In other words, it is not an era where we cannot overproduce, but an era where we do nto. With technology advancing like this, I have no idea how people are supposed to consume or how companies will actually increase their revenues. The current wave of AI replacement feels exactly like the shift to self-serve kiosks.
They eliminated the labor cost of store clerks, but the prices remained the same. Even when you actually use an AI customer service agent, you end up getting completely pissed off during the call, only to finally face a human agent in a state of rage. If it had just been a human agent from the start, there would have been no reason to get angry... Most of the...
It's not fully Confucianist like the others[0], Taoist ex-Minister Audrey Tang visualizes AI to be a glue, "a steering wheel rather than a hamster wheel"
https://english.cw.com.tw/article/article.action?id=3795
AI that addresses the "Golden Ticket mindset", sidestepping centralized agenda with decentralized agency.
In my own words,
(LLM platforms are far from collaborative-- there is no Confucianist "productivity flywheel' neither)Maybe once the youth-driven TPP gets into power their TFR+TFP might overtake SK's
(gerontocrats of Taiwan are equally exploitative but fortuitously their tentacles don't reach into software :)
[0]the symbolisms on your flag suggests that it should be much more Taoist than it is tho?