If AI Takes All The Jobs(双bilingual)如果人工智能取代了所有工作

发表时间：2025-03-02 19:24

If AI Takes All The Jobs, This Is What Society Looks Like（英汉双语 bilingual）如果人工智能取代了所有工作，那么社会将会变成这样

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzRDmok1xgY

Moon 1.48M, 2,706 Comments, starting on Sep 1, 2024.

https://blog.creaders.net/user_blog_diary.php?did=NTA5Nzg4

https://www.facebook.com/andrew.colesville

https://x.com/mwsansculotte

You have got to know what's happening daily or you will be behind the curve of learning. Highly recommended will be closely investigating the AI storm in the making without hesitation. If not, you will have no future. [Mark Wain 02/17/2025]

More recent info. on AI effects on jobs as follows:

Which Jobs Will AI Disrupt Most?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUhZ5PQQtmw

The AI Daily Brief:

4,592 views Premiered Feb 15, 2025 The AI Breakdown

AI is reshaping work, but which jobs are most affected? Anthropic's new Economic Index tracks how AI is used across industries, which professions are adopting it fastest, and where automation is already replacing tasks. Software engineers are leading AI adoption, but some fields remain untouched. Are fears of AI replacing jobs overblown, or is it happening faster than expected?

From where the profit of capital's data centers comes? DepSeek R1 has answered as follows:

My original question: But according to Marx, only living labor can create surplus value for capital, cam AI data centers hire living labor for profit?

Okay, let's try to tackle this question about Marx, surplus value, and AI data centers. So, the user is asking whether AI data centers can hire living labor for profit, given that Marx believed only living labor creates surplus value. Hmm.

First, I need to recall Marx's theory of surplus value. From what I remember, Marx argued that under capitalism, workers are paid less than the value they produce. The difference between what they produce and their wages is the surplus value, which is the source of profit for capitalists. Machines and technology (what Marx called "constant capital") don't create new value; they just transfer their own value into the product over time. Only "variable capital," which is the labor power of workers, can create surplus value.

My additional explanation is as follows:

According to Marxist political economics, the formula for the social average rate of profit of capital [r] is: r = s/(v +C) = ( s/v )/(1 + C/v ), where [s] is surplus value, s/v is the infamous rate of surplus value [or exploitation rate S], and [C/v] is called the organic composition of capital σ; that is, r = S/(1 + σ). The expression of the decline in the rate of profit caused by technological progress is:

T↑ → σ= C/v ↑ → C↑v↓ → s↓→ r↓

Where T - scientific and technological progress, σ - organic composition, C - constant capital that partially condenses the value of dead labor, that is, the value of means of production, v - variable capital, that is, the value of wages paid by capital to workers, s - surplus value obtained by capital from exploiting workers' living labor without compensation, and r - social average rate of profit. Note: The longer the labor production time and/or the more efficient the living labor, the greater the surplus value created. Surplus value is the source of profit, tax and interest for the capitalist class. [Mark Wain 2025-02-19]

Now, the question is about AI data centers. These are facilities that use artificial intelligence, which likely involves a lot of automated processes, servers, algorithms, etc. But even if the data centers are highly automated, do they still require living labor? Probably. There are people involved in building the data centers, maintaining the servers, programming the AI, managing operations, etc. So even if the day-to-day operations are automated, there's still human labor involved in various stages.

So, according to Marx's theory, the workers in these data centers would be the ones creating surplus value. Even though the AI itself is a form of constant capital, the labor required to develop, maintain, and oversee the AI systems would be the source of surplus value. The owners of the data centers (the capitalists) would pay wages to these workers, and the surplus value generated from their labor would be the basis for profit.

But wait, what about the role of AI in increasing productivity? If AI makes the workers more efficient, does that affect the rate of surplus value? Marx talked about how machinery can increase productivity, leading to relative surplus value. By reducing the necessary labor time (the time workers spend producing the equivalent of their wages), the surplus labor time increases, even if the working day remains the same. So, even if AI is a form of constant capital, its use could lead to higher surplus value by making labor more productive.

However, there's also the question of whether automation can displace workers, leading to what Marx called the "reserve army of labor," which can depress wages. But even in a highly automated industry, there are still some workers employed, and their labor would be the source of surplus value.

Another angle: the workers involved in creating the AI itself. Software engineers, data scientists, etc., who develop the algorithms and systems used in data centers. Their labor is also part of the process. The value of the AI systems would be derived from the labor put into developing them, and when those systems are used in production, their value is transferred to the products (or services) they help create. But the surplus value would still come from the living labor employed in the overall process.

But maybe the user is thinking, if AI becomes so advanced that it can operate with minimal human intervention, would that mean that the surplus value (and thus profit) diminishes? According to Marx, if constant capital becomes too dominant, the rate of profit tends to fall because less variable capital (labor) is employed, leading to less surplus value. This is part of Marx's theory of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall. So, in a highly automated AI data center with very few workers, the rate of profit might decrease over time. However, capitalists might counteract this by finding new areas to exploit labor or by intensifying work (e.g., making remaining workers work harder or longer).

Also, even if the data center itself is automated, the broader economic context includes other industries where labor is exploited. The profits from the data center might rely on the exploitation of labor in other sectors, such as manufacturing the hardware, mining materials for servers, etc. So, while the data center's direct labor might be minimal, it's part of a larger capitalist system that depends on living labor elsewhere.

But the specific question is about AI data centers hiring living labor for profit. So, even if they hire a small number of highly skilled workers, those workers' labor would generate surplus value. For example, a data center might employ technicians to maintain servers, engineers to optimize AI algorithms, security personnel, etc. The wages paid to these workers would be less than the value they contribute, allowing the owners to extract surplus value.

Moreover, the services provided by the AI data center (like data processing, cloud services, etc.) are sold to other businesses. The revenue from these sales comes from other capitalists who, in turn, extract surplus value from their workers. So, the profit of the AI data center is ultimately connected to the surplus value generated in the broader economy.

In summary, according to Marxist theory, even AI data centers require some living labor, and that labor is the source of surplus value, which allows the owners to make a profit. The automation provided by AI is constant capital that transfers its value but doesn't create new value. However, the dynamics of profit might be affected by the composition of capital (more constant vs. variable), leading to tendencies like the falling rate of profit, but individual capitalists can still profit by exploiting the necessary living labor involved in their operations and through the broader exploitation in the economy.

According to Marx's theory of surplus value, only living labor (variable capital) can create new value and surplus value, while machinery and technology (constant capital) merely transfer their existing value into commodities. Applying this framework to AI data centers, we can analyze their profit potential through the lens of Marxist economics:

Necessity of Living Labor:

AI data centers, despite their automation, rely on living labor at multiple stages:

Development & Maintenance: Engineers, programmers, and technicians design, update, and repair AI systems and infrastructure.

Operations: Workers manage server farms, oversee security, and handle data logistics.

Indirect Labor: Labor in related industries (e.g., hardware manufacturing, resource extraction for servers) contributes to the value of the constant capital (AI systems) used in data centers.

These workers' labor power is exploited: they are paid wages less than the value they produce, generating surplus value for capitalists.

Role of AI as Constant Capital:

AI systems themselves are constant capital. They do not create new value but transfer their value (from the labor embedded in their creation) into services or commodities. However, AI can amplify productivity, enabling:

Relative Surplus Value: By reducing necessary labor time (e.g., automating tasks), AI increases surplus labor time for remaining workers.

Cost Reduction: Cheaper production of services (e.g., cloud computing) can lower the value of labor power (wages), indirectly boosting surplus value.

Profitability and the Falling Rate of Profit:

Marx's theory predicts a tendency for the rate of profit to fall as constant capital (e.g., AI infrastructure) displaces variable capital (labor). While AI data centers may employ fewer workers, their profitability depends on:

Exploitation of High-Skill Labor: Technicians and engineers in data centers may face intensified work or wage suppression.

Global Exploitation: Profits may rely on surplus value extracted from workers in supply chains (e.g., mining, manufacturing) or from clients using AI services to exploit their own labor forces.

Broader Capitalist Dynamics:

Even if a data center is minimally staffed, its profits are embedded in a system where surplus value is extracted elsewhere. For example:

Rentier Practices: Charging fees for AI services to firms that exploit labor.

Monopoly Power: Tech giants may leverage AI to dominate markets, redistributing surplus value from other sectors.

R1's Conclusion:

Under Marxist analysis, AI data centers can hire living labor for profit, as the workers they employ generate surplus value through their labor. While AI (as constant capital) enhances productivity and transfers value, it does not eliminate the need for variable capital. However, heavy reliance on automation may exacerbate the falling rate of profit, pushing capitalists to intensify exploitation, expand into new labor markets, or rely on systemic extraction of surplus value from interconnected industries. Thus, AI data centers remain profitable within capitalism precisely because they are not fully autonomous from living labor.

Capitalism Is Over: What's Next Is Worse

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNblIGVKgks

Wisecrack 739,906 views Feb 7, 2025

What was life like for the Japanese after the economic bubble burst? It's so similar to ours! Shocking!(in Chinese)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBMZiXIOMyc

Hardcore Liu Da Mar 2, 2025

I shall comment on the future of AI and its enormous impact below:

We are in the stage of late capitalism, i.e., the end and replacement of capitalism as a social sytem is near. The bourgeoisie of the world has established and maintained the system for more than five hundred years, starting its embryonic stage in today's Holland, through its breaking-through progresses in industrial productions. Finally, its viability has reached its late stage, hence its continued progresses in production have gone to their opposites due to internal social-economic conflicts.

Although reformists, fake lefitists, accomplices as well as helpers of and for the system have done their utmost to maintain the survivability of the system by resorting to all kind of conceivable progresses including taking AI as a panacea, those progresses are doomed to fail.

Long-term decline of the socially averaged rate of profit will cause the system to collapse as a result of the ensuing increase of the rate of unemployment and the increase of the class struggle both in frequency and intensity. In other words, the progress in social productive forces including AI can no longer be controllable by the capitalist system. "The contradiction between advanced productive forces and productive relations is a central concept in Marxist theory, explaining societal transformation through historical materialism."[chat.deepseek.com]

The only way out is to change the system to a new one which can handle progresses in social productive forces such as AI. The new system obviously can neither be private-profit driven nor be controlled, ruled and owned by the bourgeoisie and must be controlled by the united proletariat. This new system period is what Karl Marx called "a political transition period, during which the state can only be the dictatorship of the proletariat." [Mark Wain 03-02-2025]

汉译:

如果人工智能取代了所有工作，那么社会将会变成这样

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzRDmok1xgY

Moon 1.48M，2,706 条评论，从 2024 年 9 月 1 日开始。

https://blog.creaders.net/user_blog_diary.php?did=NTA5Nzg4

https://www.facebook.com/andrew.colesville

https://x.com/mwsansculotte

你必须知道每天发生的事情，否则你将落后于学习。强烈建议毫不犹豫地密切调查正在形成的人工智能风暴。否则，你将没有未来。[Mark Wain 02/17/2025]

有关人工智能对工作影响的最新信息如下：

人工智能将对哪些工作产生最大影响？（英文）

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUhZ5PQQtmw

人工智能每日简报：

4,592 次观看 2025 年 2 月 15 日首播人工智能细分

人工智能正在重塑工作，但哪些工作受到的影响最大？Anthropic 的新经济指数追踪了人工智能在各个行业的使用情况、哪些职业采用人工智能的速度最快以及哪些领域已经由自动化取代了任务。软件工程师正在引领人工智能的采用，但有些领域仍未受到影响。人们对人工智能取代工作的担忧是被夸大了，还是它发生的速度比预期的要快？

资本的数据中心利润从何而来？DepSeek R1 的回答的说：

我最初的问题是：但根据马克思的说法，只有活劳动才能为资本创造剩余价值，人工智能数据中心会雇佣活劳动来获利吗？

好吧，让我们试着解决这个关于马克思、剩余价值和人工智能数据中心的问题。所以，用户问的是，鉴于马克思认为只有活劳动才能创造剩余价值，人工智能数据中心是否可以雇佣活劳动来获利。嗯。

首先，我需要回顾一下马克思的剩余价值理论。我记得马克思认为，在资本主义制度下，工人的工资[v]低于他们生产的价值[v+s]。他们生产的东西和工资之间的差额就是剩余价值[s]，这是资本家的利润来源。机器和技术（马克思称之为“不变资本”[C] ）不会创造新价值；它们只是随着时间的推移将自己的价值转移到产品中。只有“可变资本”[v]，即工人的劳动力，才能创造剩余价值。

我的补充说明如下：

根据马克思主义政治经济学，资本的社会平均利润率[r]的公式是：r = s/(v +C) = ( s/v )/(1 + C/v ), 其中 [s] 是剩余价值，s/v 就是臭名昭著的的剩余价值率【或剥削率 S】，[C/v] 称作资本的有机组成 σ；即 r = S/(1 + σ)。由技术进步产生的利润率下降的表达方式是：

T↑ → σ= C/v ↑ → C↑v↓ → s↓→ r↓

其中 T -科技进步, σ - 有机组成, C - 部分地凝结着死劳动价值在内的不变资本也就是生产资料价值, v - 可变资本也就是资本有偿付给工人的工资价值, s - 资本无偿剥削工人的活劳动所得到的剩余价值, 及 r - 社会平均利润率。注意：劳动生产时间越长及/或其效率越高的活劳动所创造的剩余价值越大。剩余价值是资本家阶级用来获取利润、交税、付利息的源头。[Mark Wain 2025-02-19]

现在，问题是关于人工智能数据中心的。这些设施使用人工智能，可能涉及大量自动化流程、服务器、算法等。但即使数据中心高度自动化，它们是否仍然需要活劳动力？很可能。有人参与数据中心的建设、服务器的维护、人工智能的编程、运营管理等。因此，即使日常运营实现了自动化，各个阶段仍然需要人工。

因此，根据马克思的理论，这些数据中心的工人将创造剩余价值。即使人工智能本身是一种不变资本，开发、维护和监督人工智能系统所需的劳动力将是剩余价值的来源。数据中心的所有者（资本家）将向这些工人支付工资，他们劳动产生的剩余价值将成为利润的基础。

但是，人工智能在提高生产力方面的作用又如何呢？如果人工智能使工人更有效率，这会影响剩余价值率吗？马克思谈到了机器如何提高生产力，从而产生相对剩余价值。通过减少必要劳动时间（工人生产相当于其工资的产品所花费的时间），即使工作日保持不变，剩余劳动时间也会增加。因此，即使人工智能是一种不变资本，它的使用也可以通过提高劳动生产率[也就是每小时生产出来的劳动价值量 - MW]来提高剩余价值。

然而，还有一个问题，即自动化是否会取代工人，从而导致马克思所说的“劳动后备军”，这可能会压低工资。但即使在高度自动化的行业中，仍有一些工人在工作，他们的劳动将成为剩余价值的来源。

另一个角度：参与创建人工智能本身的工人。软件工程师、数据科学家等，他们开发数据中心使用的算法和系统。他们的劳动也是这个过程的一部分。人工智能系统的价值将来自开发它们的劳动，当这些系统用于生产时，它们的价值将转移到它们帮助创造的产品（或服务）上。但剩余价值仍然来自整个过程中使用的活劳动。

但也许用户正在想，如果人工智能变得如此先进，以至于它可以在最少的人为干预下运行，这是否意味着剩余价值（以及利润）会减少？根据马克思的说法，如果不变资本变得过于占主导地位，利润率就会下降，因为使用的可变资本（劳动力）减少，导致剩余价值减少。这是马克思利润率下降趋势理论的一部分。因此，在一个高度自动化、工人很少的人工智能数据中心，利润率可能会随着时间的推移而下降。然而，资本家可能会通过寻找新的领域来剥削劳动力或加强工作（例如，让剩余的工人工作更努力或更长时间）来抵消这种影响。

此外，即使数据中心本身是自动化的，更广泛的经济背景也包括其他剥削劳动力的行业。数据中心的利润可能依赖于其他部门对劳动力的剥削，例如制造硬件、为服务器开采材料等。因此，虽然数据中心的直接劳动力可能很少，但它是更大的资本主义体系的一部分，该体系依赖于其他地方的活劳动力。

但具体问题在于人工智能数据中心雇佣活劳动力以牟利。因此，即使他们雇佣了少数高技能工人，这些工人的劳动也会产生剩余价值。例如，数据中心可能会雇佣技术人员来维护服务器，雇佣工程师来优化人工智能算法，雇佣安全人员等。支付给这些工人的工资将低于他们贡献的价值，从而使所有者能够提取剩余价值。

此外，人工智能数据中心提供的服务（如数据处理、云服务等）是出售的资本的数据中心利润从何而来？DepSeek R1 的回答：

我最初的问题是：但根据马克思的说法，只有活劳动才能为资本创造剩余价值，人工智能数据中心会雇佣活劳动来获利吗？

首先，我需要回顾一下马克思的剩余价值理论。我记得马克思认为，在资本主义制度下，工人的工资低于他们生产的价值。他们生产的东西和工资之间的差额就是剩余价值，这是资本家的利润来源。机器和技术（马克思称之为“不变资本”）不会创造新价值；它们只是随着时间的推移将自己的价值转移到产品中。只有“可变资本”，即工人的劳动力，才能创造剩余价值。

此外，人工智能数据中心提供的服务（如数据处理、云服务等）是出售的向其他企业销售产品。这些销售收入来自其他资本家，而资本家又从工人身上榨取剩余价值。因此，人工智能数据中心的利润最终与更广泛经济中产生的剩余价值有关。

总之，根据马克思主义理论，即使是人工智能数据中心也需要一些活劳动，而这些劳动是剩余价值的来源，可以让所有者获利。人工智能提供的自动化是不变资本，它转移了价值，但不会创造新价值。然而，利润的动态可能会受到资本构成（更多是恒定的而不是可变的）的影响，从而导致利润率下降等趋势，但个别资本家仍然可以通过剥削其运营中涉及的必要活劳动以及通过经济中更广泛的剥削来获利。

根据马克思的剩余价值理论，只有活劳动（可变资本）才能创造新价值和剩余价值，而机械和技术（不变资本）只是将其现有价值转化为商品。将此框架应用于人工智能数据中心，我们可以通过马克思主义经济学的视角分析其盈利潜力：

活劳动的必要性：

尽管人工智能数据中心实现了自动化，但在多个阶段都依赖于活劳动：

开发和维护：工程师、程序员和技术人员设计、更新和修复人工智能系统和基础设施。

运营：工人管理服务器场、监督安全并处理数据物流。

间接劳动力：相关行业（例如硬件制造、服务器资源提取）的劳动力为数据中心使用的不变资本（人工智能系统）的价值做出了贡献。

这些工人的劳动力被剥削：他们获得的工资低于他们生产的价值，为资本家创造了剩余价值。

人工智能作为不变资本的作用：

人工智能系统本身就是不变资本。它们不会创造新价值，而是将其价值（从其创造过程中嵌入的劳动）转移到服务或商品中。然而，人工智能可以提高生产力，从而实现：

相对剩余价值：通过减少必要的劳动时间（例如，自动化任务），人工智能增加了剩余工人的剩余劳动时间。

降低成本：更便宜的服务生产（例如，云计算）可以降低劳动力的价值（工资），间接提高剩余价值。

盈利能力和利润率下降：

马克思的理论预测，随着不变资本（例如，人工智能基础设施）取代可变资本（劳动力），利润率会下降。虽然人工智能数据中心可能雇用更少的工人，但它们的盈利能力取决于：

高技能劳动力的剥削：数据中心的技术人员和工程师可能面临工作压力或工资被压低。

全球剥削：利润可能依赖于从供应链（例如，采矿、制造业）中的工人或使用人工智能服务剥削自己劳动力的客户那里提取的剩余价值。

更广泛的资本主义动态：

即使数据中心的人员配备最少，其利润也嵌入在从其他地方提取剩余价值的系统中。例如：

食利者实践：向剥削劳动力的公司收取人工智能服务费用。

垄断力量：科技巨头可能会利用人工智能来主导市场，重新分配其他行业的剩余价值。

R1的结论：

根据马克思主义的分析，人工智能数据中心可以雇佣活劳动力来获利，因为他们雇用的工人通过他们的劳动创造了剩余价值[s]。虽然人工智能（作为不变资本[C]）提高了生产力[P]并转移了价值，但它并没有消除对可变资本[v]的需求。然而，对自动化的过度依赖可能会加剧利润率[r]的下降，迫使资本家加强剥削，扩展到新的劳动力市场，或依靠系统地从相互关联的行业中提取剩余价值[s]。因此，人工智能数据中心在资本主义制度下仍然有利可图，正是因为它们并非完全独立于活劳动力[v]。

资本主义已结束：接下来会更糟（英文）

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNblIGVKgks

Wisecrack 739,906 次观看 2025 年 2 月 7 日

日本人经济泡沫破裂后的生活是啥样？和我们太像了！震撼！

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBMZiXIOMyc

硬核刘大 Mar 2, 2025

下面我将对人工智能的未来及其巨大影响作出评论：

我们正处于晚期资本主义阶段，即资本主义作为一种社会制度的终结和替代已经临近。世界资产阶级通过工业生产的突破性进步，从今天的荷兰开始，建立并维持了五百多年的资本主义制度。最后，它的生存能力已经到了晚期，因此，由于内部的社会与经济的冲突，其在生产方面的持续进步走向了反面。

尽管改良主义者、伪左派、同谋者以及制度的帮闲们竭尽全力维护制度的生存能力，诉诸各种可以想象的进步，包括把人工智能当作灵丹妙药，但这些进步注定要失败。

社会平均利润率的长期下降将导致制度崩溃，随之而来的是失业率的上升和阶级斗争的频率和强度的增加。换言之，包括人工智能在内的社会生产力的进步已经不再是资本主义制度可以控制的。“先进生产力和生产关系之间的矛盾是马克思主义理论的核心概念，它通过历史唯物主义来解释社会变革。”[chat.deepseek.com]

唯一的出路是将制度改变为一个能够处理人工智能等社会生产力进步的新制度。新制度显然既不能被私人利润驱动，也不能被资产阶级控制、统治和拥有，而必须由团结起来的无产阶级控制。这个新制度时期就是卡尔·马克思所说的“政治过渡时期，在此期间国家只能是无产阶级专政。”[Mark Wain 03-02-2025]