Tyler Cowen

Is failure to use AI going to cause them to just immediately disappear and be replaced?

No, that will take, say, 30 years.

So you'll have some sectors of the economy, less regulated, where it happens very quickly, but that only gets you a modest boost in growth rates, not anything like, oh, the whole economy grows 40% a year, in a nutshell.

Cause disease is more general than that.

Let's say you have a bunch of factors of production, say five of them.

Now, all of a sudden, we get a lot more intelligence, which has already been happening, to be clear, right?

Well, that just means the other constraints in your system become a lot more binding, that the marginal importance of those goes up, and the marginal value of more and more IQ or intelligence goes down.

So that also is self-limiting on growth.

And the cause disease is just one particular instantiation of that more general problem that we illustrate with talk about barbers and string

quartets and the like.

he and I would agree, I hope, I think, I would tell him, hey, it's going to take a long time, and he'd say, hmm, I don't see it happening yet, I think it's going to take a long time, and we'd shake hands and walk off into the sunset.

And then I'd eat some of his rice or wheat or whatever, and that would be awesome.

I don't know what the word could mean.

So I would say this, you look at market data, say real interest rates, stock prices, right now everything looks so normal, startlingly normal, even apart from AI.

So what you'd call prediction markets are not forecasting super rapid growth anytime soon.

If you look at what experts on economic growth write, we had Chad Jones here yesterday.

He's not predicting super rapid growth, though he thinks AI might well accelerate rates of growth.

So the experts and the markets agree.

Who am I to say different from the experts in the market?

You're an expert.