Chinese courts ruled AI adoption can't justify firing workers, forcing tech companies to budget for expensive transitions that could increase global gadget prices.
That is absolutely not the subject of this ruling. The ruling forbid the termination of a work contract for the reason of it being replaced by AI. That is a significant difference : the problem is not to replace workers with AI, it is of who will pay in the society for it. China rules that companies will pay for the transition, not the workers and the state.
I don’t understand your point, your job has just been made automatable, your skills superfluous… But you’re supposed to stay employed at the same place for the same thing? And “paying”, is not happening anyway, automation is a good thing, I guess you meant who is supposed to benefit from it? I completely agree that workers should not “lose” (https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/68074600/25823579), but it just logically does not make sense to stay employed when your job literally does not need to exist anymore… Instead, as a worker, you should just be able to chill now and do nothing, not indefinitely stay at a company that doesn’t need you anymore.
This isn’t something that makes sense to be handled by companies. What if someone can not find a job in the first place because while they were studying, there was a breakthrough that made their field of study superfluous? Or someone loses (or voluntarily quits) their job because of any other reason, and then while searching for a new job, the automation breakthrough happens? Etc etc etc. Which company pays for them?
This is just simply nothing that makes sense to be solved by individual companies, but by the government.
That is absolutely not the subject of this ruling. The ruling forbid the termination of a work contract for the reason of it being replaced by AI. That is a significant difference : the problem is not to replace workers with AI, it is of who will pay in the society for it. China rules that companies will pay for the transition, not the workers and the state.
I don’t understand your point, your job has just been made automatable, your skills superfluous… But you’re supposed to stay employed at the same place for the same thing? And “paying”, is not happening anyway, automation is a good thing, I guess you meant who is supposed to benefit from it? I completely agree that workers should not “lose” (https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/68074600/25823579), but it just logically does not make sense to stay employed when your job literally does not need to exist anymore… Instead, as a worker, you should just be able to chill now and do nothing, not indefinitely stay at a company that doesn’t need you anymore.
This isn’t something that makes sense to be handled by companies. What if someone can not find a job in the first place because while they were studying, there was a breakthrough that made their field of study superfluous? Or someone loses (or voluntarily quits) their job because of any other reason, and then while searching for a new job, the automation breakthrough happens? Etc etc etc. Which company pays for them?
This is just simply nothing that makes sense to be solved by individual companies, but by the government.