MIT Sloan School of Management

Prof. Daron Acemoglu speaks with VOX Talks host Tim Phillips about his new book written with Prof. Simon Johnson, “Power and Progress.” The book explores “how we can redirect the path of innovation,” Phillips explains.

Prof. Alexey Makarin and his colleagues have found that following the arrival of Facebook, depression, anxiety and diminished academic performance increased across U.S. colleges, reports Jesse Greenspan for Scientific American. “Makarin says much of the harm they documented came from social comparisons,” explains Greenspan.

Bloomberg reporter Adrian Wooldridge spotlights a new book titled “Power and Progress: Our Thousand-Year Struggle Over Technology and Prosperity” by Prof. Simon Johnson and Prof. Daron Acemoglu. “The authors’ main worry about AI is not that it will do something unexpected like blowing up the world,” writes Wooldridge. “It is that it will supercharge the current regime of surveillance, labor substitution and emotional manipulation.”

President Sally Kornbluth spoke with reporters from The Tech about her first months as president of MIT and her vision for her time leading the Institute. “MIT is a pretty decentralized place, so I am taking some time to get to know every nook and cranny,” says Kornbluth. She adds that in terms of her top priorities as president, “there's no question that climate change is at the very top of the list.”

Institute Prof. Daron Acemoglu discusses AI and the labor market, the history of technological progress and Turkey with Financial Times columnist Rana Foroohar. “I think the skills of a carpenter or a gardener or an electrician or a writer, those are just the greatest achievements of humanity, and I think we should try to elevate those skills and elevate those contributions,” says Acemoglu. “Technology could do that, but that means to use technology not to replace these people, not to automate those tasks, but to increase their productivity.” 

Prof. Daron Acemoglu speaks with Wired reporters Gideon Lichfield and Lauren Goode about his new book with Prof. Simon Johnson, “Power and Progress.” Acemoglu explains that: “The way I would put it is, don't think of your labor as a cost to be cut. Think of your labor as a human resource to be used better, and AI would be an amazing tool for it. Use AI to allow workers to make better decisions.”

Guardian reporter Will Hutton spotlights “Power and Progress,” a new book by Institute Prof. Daron Acemoglu and Prof. Simon Johnson that makes the case that “the political struggle has consistently aimed to contain excessive inequality of wealth, and act collectively to share prosperity. It is successive waves of transformative technologies above all that bring the productivity gains that create great wealth, only for it to be captured by the incumbent elite.”

Prof. Stuart Madnick speaks with Wall Street Journal reporter Seán Captain about how AI could make scamming easier and more dangerous. AI “raises the level of skepticism that we must have substantially,” notes Madnick. “Procedures will have to be put in place to validate the authenticity of who you are dealing with.”

Prof. Anna Stansbury and her colleagues have found that economics PhD recipients are more likely to have a parent with a graduate degree, reports Andrew Van Dam for The Washington Post. “This study is one of the first to describe academia’s struggles with economic diversity, but its racial diversity issues have been well documented,” explains Van Dam. “They’re particularly pronounced in economics, which has fewer underrepresented minorities among its PhD graduates (about 6 percent) than any other major field.”

Wired reporter Caitlin Harrington writes that a study by researchers from MIT and Stanford highlights the impact of generative AI tools on workers and raises a “provocative new question: Should the top workers whose chats trained the bot be compensated?”

Researchers from MIT have found that “although women received higher performance ratings than their male colleagues, they received 8.3% lower ratings for potential than men,” reports Caroline Castrillon for Forbes. “Because those ratings strongly predict promotions, female employees were 14% less likely to be promoted than male ones,” writes Castrillon.

Writing for The Los Angeles Times, Institute Prof. Daron Acemoglu and Prof. Simon Johnson make the case that the development of artificial intelligence should be shifted “toward a focus on ‘machine usefulness,’ the idea that computers should primarily enhance human capabilities. But this needs to be combined with an explicit recognition that any resulting productivity gains must be shared with workers, in terms of higher incomes and better working conditions.”

Prof. Simon Johnson and Prof. Yossi Sheffi speak with Boston 25 about the potential impact of AI on the labor market. “We need people to have what’s called soft skills,” says Sheffi. “They need to be able to convince people, manage people, work with people, partner with people.” Johnson notes while there are still fields that are safe bets, but notes that the speed with which [AI] is moving and currently the acceleration is really dramatic.”

Researchers from MIT and elsewhere have tested the impact of generative AI among 5,000 customer service agents within a Fortune 500 software company, reports Jo Constantz for Bloomberg. “The company’s lowest-skilled workers became 35% faster with the tool,” explains Constantz. “The researchers think this was because the AI essentially transferred top performers’ knowledge to less-experienced colleagues through the automatically-generated recommended responses.”

Prof. Danielle Li, graduate student Lindsey Raymond and Stanford University Prof. Erik Brynjolfsson released an “empirical study of the real-world economic effects of new AI systems,” reports Greg Rosalsky for NPR. The researchers found “AI caused a group of workers to become much more productive.” Rosalsky adds that the study also “shines a spotlight on just how powerful AI is, how disruptive it might be, and suggests that this new, astonishing technology could have economic effects that change the shape of income inequality going forward.”