Submitted by therealsam44 t3_10clshg in Futurology
[removed]
Comments
Cognitive_Spoon t1_j4ghr02 wrote
As in "this year" soon.
Pay attention to the news around automated service jobs this year, gonna be wild.
bunnnythor t1_j4gxpu5 wrote
I wish that soon happens faster. If everyone is going to be unemployed in the near future, I need to start learning how to live off the land like a crazy mountain man.
Or to start mapping out the compounds that the rich will be hiding in. There should be good eatin’ there.
JrrdWllms t1_j4hhqxg wrote
I, too, plan on eating the rich during the impending apocalypse.
MoistPhilosophera t1_j4kwrei wrote
AIgoneWild, sure would love to see that...
abrandis t1_j4i77e5 wrote
I doubt it, here's why.. Automation especially the mechanical variety (like industrial robots) are very very expensive and only make sense in industries where economy of scale benefits outweigh the costs (auto, airplanes etc.)...
Take fast food for example, assembling a burger is a heck of a lot easier than assembling a car, why haven't we seen automated kitchens? Because you're selling a burger for a few $$ and the cost of human labor is still cheap enough than to retrofit a fast food restaurant with expensive robots where the ROI could take years, and you still need people at the location because automation is very narrow focused (it may take an order, but won't mop the floor, clean the bathrooms, or answer customer questions / complaints ), the economics for most of these kind of low skill low pay jobs don't favor automation today.
Now the more high skilled white collar type of jobs, those are more at risk, but only certain categories, because lots of professional level jobs (doctors, lawyers, engineers) still have to work inside a regulatory framework that legally holds the person (human) liable for said work (that's why engineers sign off on blueprints and work authorizations), you can't just stick automation in place of the person the law hasn't adapted to that. So for certain classes of professional work, it's still pretty safe.
The most at risk are your entry level office workers, call center reps, entry level salespeople, entry or mid level finance, if your job involves looking at a spreadsheet or some website and making decisions about the data and then just updating it, yeah those jobs are going away.
But it all takes time and thats the main determinant of how much chaos AI will have in the job market , how quickly jobs get replaced... If tomorrow there's a cheap enough self drivig. Truck that puts all the trucking jobs at risk, yeah big problem, but if that takes a generation, not so big....
Seattle2017 t1_j4kbyl4 wrote
software engineers often don't have any legal requirements. A few crazy places want iso9000 but that's almost a joke, a hugely painful and probably useless certification. Some big companies might use that. Anyway, we can automate ourselves out of a job very easily.
PRwanderer t1_j4iqn6d wrote
They were saying this about automation in the 1890s. And at the turn of the century. And in the 1910s. And the 1920s. And the 1930s. And the 1940s. Oh yeah, and the 1950s, and the 1960s, and the 1970s, and the 1980s, and the 1990s, and then at ANOTHER turn of the century. Then, we realized that this was just fear mongering. Oh wait, no we didn't, because we kept saying it in the 2010s and again in the 2020s.
Are we noticing a pattern here yet?
MarcusOrlyius t1_j4jd53w wrote
Yes, I notice that the percentage of the total population who work has decreased from over 80% before industrialisation to under 50% in 2019 in the UK.
PRwanderer t1_j4jszui wrote
This is factually incorrect. Employment change in the United Kingdom averaged 39.74 Thousand from 1971 until 2022, reaching an all time high of 311.00 Thousand in March of 2014 and a record low of -424.00 Thousand in May of 2020, due to the pandemic.
The total employment rate of the UK in June of 2022 was 75.9%. Where are you pulling this "less than 50%" figure from? Your ass? Because it sure as hell isn't coming from the actual stats.
MarcusOrlyius t1_j4k22ue wrote
I never said anything about employment rate.
How many people are employed in the UK? About 30 million. What is the population? About 65 million.
You'll find that less than 50% of the population are employed, exactly like I stated.
brydye456 t1_j4jizab wrote
I don't think you quite understand technology.
GarugasRevenge t1_j4gpxm8 wrote
I can't take AI seriously right now, it feels like each post is written by an AI and each comment agreeing is written by an AI. And there 30 posts per day about AI with no substance.
Reno83 t1_j4hisk5 wrote
This is exactly 🚜 what AI would post to 🚲 sow doubt amongst 🚍 the meatbags 🐎 on the seriousness 🛩 of an AI 🚢 invasion. Tell me, how many land-based forms of transportation did I insert in the previous sentence?
Corsair4 t1_j4hoo1b wrote
>with no substance.
Welcome to Futurology.
I don't have a background in AI, but I do have a pretty good grasp on Neuroscience.
The articles and comment sections on anything related to neuro are absolutely atrocious. There is no worthwhile discussion to be had. Most comments are pop culture references, or talking about some 70s dystopian nonsense that has nothing to do with the article. It's abundantly clear that very few people read past the headlines, let alone actually reading the primary research. Most commenters don't understand the absolute basics of the field, and most of the articles that are posted here are utter horseshit anyway. There was one a while back about direct brain to brain communication, that of course, led people down the rabbit hole of big brother listening to your thoughts, etc etc. About 3 people actually read the article, which was simply talking about distinguishing what letter a person looked at, and printing that letter on a different monitor for someone to read. That's not novel, or exciting, or new. But the bullshit rises to the top.
I can only assume that neuro articles and discussion are not unique in their awfulness around here, and that every field is similarly poorly informed - I just don't have the background to identify it in other fields. Given that, I'm fairly confident that all the doom and gloom around AI discussions is completely unsubstantiated. It's just the hot new thing to speculate wildly about.
Sharpshooter188 t1_j4ierai wrote
I know nothing about neuroscience. But Ive noticed collected themes throughout my studies. Just because one thing ticks off 3 boxes out of 6, doesnt mean you have an accurate result. In that I means there is likely sooooo much more information that has to be looked at before even approaching a reasonable conlcusion.
FrankSinatraYodeling t1_j4hy9vf wrote
Just wait until election season. AI spam will be everywhere.
[deleted] t1_j4l9id1 wrote
[deleted]
esprit-de-lescalier t1_j4kcs7l wrote
> I can't take AI seriously right now, it feels like each post is written by an AI and each comment agreeing is written by an AI. And there 30 posts per day about AI with no substance.
It is true that there is a lot of hype around AI, and not all of it is grounded in reality. However, it's important to remember that AI is a rapidly-evolving field with many exciting developments happening all the time. While it's true that not every article or post about AI is going to be informative or valuable, it's still a worthwhile area of study and research. It's also important to keep in mind that AI can be useful in many different fields, from healthcare to finance to transportation, and that its potential for improving people's lives is significant.
GarugasRevenge t1_j4kegeh wrote
Ehh in what way?
esprit-de-lescalier t1_j4kek1a wrote
I was trying to be funny
MoistPhilosophera t1_j4kwh50 wrote
AI would at least spellcheck. That's one of the touring tests...
GarugasRevenge t1_j4kzo9g wrote
It wouldn't make mistakes to appear more human in some cases?
amonrane t1_j4gbmm4 wrote
AI will create some new jobs, but overall lead to a net decrease in jobs. In other words, it will replace more workers than it requires. I would argue that this is a good thing. Automation should be making people's lives easier, so that we have better jobs, higher wages, more free time, shorter work weeks and a higher standard of living. AI and automation should free us from being the wage slaves that we currently are and from working many menial, repetitive jobs. The problem is that the capitalists and wealthy elites who run everything will use AI and automation to decrease the number of jobs, lower wages, increase unemployment, lower the standard of living for middle & working class people, all while making themselves even richer and more powerful. They have been doing this with every technological advancement that has increased productivity for the last 70 years or so. Big businesses reap all of the benefits of technology and automation, while the rest of us get poorer and poorer.
imdfantom t1_j4gl3ja wrote
>AI will create some new jobs, but overall lead to a net decrease in jobs. In other words, it will replace more workers than it requires
Which will conveniently free up a lot of people for caregiving jobs (which will only increase in demand as the population ages)
TheSecretAgenda t1_j4gudo6 wrote
Those jobs do not pay above minimum wage and are very unpleasant.
gigahydra t1_j4i9ab5 wrote
I don't know where you live, but the cheapest qualified caretaker I can find is $30/hr.
TheSecretAgenda t1_j4imk6k wrote
The agency is taking about half of that.
gigahydra t1_j4ioows wrote
You don't need to work through an agency. For my mom we have two independent caretakers, and then go through an agency to backfill when our primaries are unavailable. They're not going to have any trouble finding another opportunity after my mom passes, either...word of mouth can go far in that business.
MoistPhilosophera t1_j4kwxiv wrote
Agreed, they're insanely overpriced, about time this pay to do nothing bullshit gets down to earth.
gigahydra t1_j4l74xh wrote
Yeah, I've had some experiences with caretakers like that as well. The ones that do the job right are worth every cent tho.
MoistPhilosophera t1_j4kwvd2 wrote
>Those jobs do not pay above minimum wage and are very unpleasant.
That sounds like a them problem.
xcdesz t1_j4gi09k wrote
People said the same things about the personal computer when they were first being adopted. Look where we are now. Also look through history at almost every advancement in technology that automated jobs. The economy will move on and innovation will bring new opportunities for employment.
Leege13 t1_j4gv3e2 wrote
The personal computer didn’t do all the work for you.
asuyaa t1_j4gm9z1 wrote
I wonder whats the ration between jobs created by personal computers vs those that went extinct. But I'm not sure those statistics exist just interesting thought
TheSecretAgenda t1_j4gu0rs wrote
There used to be huge typing pools at corporations all gone.
Telephone Operators gone.
When you replace human brains with AI there is no guarantee that new jobs will rise up to take their place.
asuyaa t1_j4gubhz wrote
True but we did get the entirety of the IT sector and that must be a lot of new jobs and they also pay pretty well compared to those jobs you listed. I don't know what that means in terms of economics or low skilled workers im just making an observation
InterestsVaryGreatly t1_j4gyo0f wrote
While the sector did pop up, the number of employed went down. Looking at the number of people apple or Google employ, versus what like sears and GM did during their hay day, it's drastically lower.
Angelcstay t1_j4h6kz6 wrote
>True but we did get the entirety of the IT sector and that must be a lot of new jobs and they also pay pretty well compared to those jobs you listed. I don't know what that means in terms of economics or low skilled workers im just making an observation
Funny that you are talking about the IT sector because in the company where I am working we are already using AI assisted programming to assist our programmers in coding. Compared to 3 years ago we are seeing vast improvements in both complexity and efficiency. Obviously I am not allowed to speak on the technology which we are using.
I know there are opinions on this with many feeling that Programming/coders will be one of those jobs holding the last bastion against replacement by AI because simply to code is not enough but you will need levels of creativity to design a programming, which an AI might not have at our current level and not to mention testing as well.
Personally, from what I've seem with regards to the advancement it's only a matter of time. Heck just look at GPT-3
asuyaa t1_j4h7j7g wrote
Yeah i agree it's moving very fast, hopefully this will push towards fewer working hours rather than low employment.
TheSecretAgenda t1_j4gwk3m wrote
The pool of people that were typists is very different than the pool of people who can program and maintain AI and computer equipment. I'm afraid the bottom 50% of the population will be unemployable.
InterestsVaryGreatly t1_j4gyfn2 wrote
The biggest difference is most of the automations of the past just shifted the working from doing the hard work to using the automation to do the hard work, a mostly neutral transition. Now significant portions of automation completely replace the worker, needing no human behind the wheel, but instead maintenance, which is multiple robots and thus multiple jobs per human, and builders/developers, which for the most part are one and done per job, thus not creating a sustainable job source.
This is not a bad thing, but the fundamental "work to live" needs to change, as so much of what needs to be done for society to function will shift to robotics and automation with very little oversight.
dashingstag t1_j4h70ol wrote
It’s a different paradigm shift because pcs were used to store and calculate whereas AI is starting to make decisions and independently generate content. A business owner can’t just own computers without operators but he can own multiple AIs who don’t rest, who are smarter, who make less mistakes, who are cheaper.
Just 4 years ago I wrote a quora reply to the question “what jobs would be safe from AI” and someone said artists and I disagreed. Today we see AI winning art competitions and other human artists discredited because it looks like AI generated art. I can literally use AI to generate art then use a different AI to fill in gaps. The value of human generated art is plummeting when a dude can generate 1000 amazing art pieces in a day.
Eventually, there needs to be an AI tax and dividend or there won’t be any consumers left. Either that or a revolt’s happening. It’s a snake eating its own tail where we can produce unlimited products but no one that can afford it.
Netrexinka t1_j4gsski wrote
I don't know man, computers were a medium through which we just did the same stuff but digitaly.
Now the stuff just makes itself.
Yes there will be other jobs created but lot more will be lost.
xcdesz t1_j4gxb16 wrote
Not really.. business has always had goals to eliminate the jobs that were automated by computer programs. There were many newspaper and magazine articles on this topic. We just didnt hear the cacophany of doom in those early days because social media wasn't around.
Look at those people now, though. Are they better off or worse?
dashingstag t1_j4h82eu wrote
Define worse because soft drinks and junk food are cheaper now but education, housing and healthcare are way more expensive now.
rixtil41 t1_j4hwjw1 wrote
But it's not impossible. Those advancements still needed people for them to work that why we still have jobs.
Riverrat423 t1_j4hfq7n wrote
Someone needs to create AI to replace executives and board of directors in corporations. Think of how much money would be saved cutting these huge salaries, this would directly increase profits and benefit the shareholders. By the way if you can do this, don’t ask permission from your boss just do it!
Ramjet_NZ t1_j4ijdkd wrote
Simple programme that checks P & L sheets and, if not up 15% on last year, fire 10% of staff - repeat loop.
But how to award a fat bonus to a programme?
Riverrat423 t1_j4j0i0h wrote
You don’t, that saves the company money! Human executives get a huge bonus even when the company goes broke.
FapleJuice t1_j4k37et wrote
Replace Netflix execs with AI so they can stop ruining my favorite IPs
zulu_candles t1_j4gdcpf wrote
Of all the low effort posts done on this question, this has to be the least effort
KBHoleN1 t1_j4hetwu wrote
The paragraphs are copy-pasted from at least one other source. I googled the “Even McKinsey reckons …” paragraph and got exact hits from widely repeated posts on various job/career/tech media sites. One of the posts was from 2019, with that exact wording. It’s not even a recent assessment, but it’s copied here word for word.
Coupled with the gory title and the equally gory closing prompt that can’t sort out lose/loss/lost, I’d wager that OP is itself a bot.
anyrandomusr t1_j4i1oi2 wrote
was just gonna say op's post stinks of chatgpt
carlso_aw t1_j4gln2u wrote
I think this guy should be worried about his job regardless of the state of AI in his industry
DacatinTHEBOX t1_j4gats4 wrote
This is why I want to learn robotics and software programming. Someone has to operate the robots, right?
Skolloc753 t1_j4gbqxs wrote
Nope, as AI systems currently learn to program basic software itself. AI systems will basically take away "entry/medium" level of non-physical jobs, jobs requiring only a certain amount of training, study or education.
If you are a code wizard, a masterful painter or Skynet level administrator or a 1000 USD/hour law juggler, then your job will be safe.
If you are "only" a professional CS agent, able to speak two languages, handle multiple different payment system and able to diagnose a hundred different payment troubles from several dozen countries ... your job is on the chopping block.
SYL
Netrexinka t1_j4gria3 wrote
1000$/h lawyer isn't safe at all.
AI lawyers are easy and will be everywhere
MoistPhilosophera t1_j4l0x5k wrote
Those bullshit jobs will be automated first. Because AI would create customized profiles for each judge, optimized how to deceive them into deciding what the client paid for.
This technique, the tailored attorneys designed specifically for that moron boomer who thinks he can judge, will therefore learn from his previous decisions exactly the phrases to employ to deceive them into making the right choice this time.
Netrexinka t1_j4l4agf wrote
Of bullshit jobs will be first how many are there though?
I would say few hundred milions.
dashingstag t1_j4h8i1w wrote
A painter is not safe at all, I can generate AI images by the thousands and use another AI to correct and fill in gaps without even lifting a brush. An AI generated art just won a competition and another human got discredited for art looking like AI generated art.
FeatheryBallOfFluff t1_j4hw77l wrote
Now make one that is not printed from a computer, but with actual brush strokes visible on the canvas.
Same for painting a house by the way.
dashingstag t1_j4ihmgg wrote
I can change the painting depending on my mood. Why would I ever need to print it out/paint it.
tanrgith t1_j4ka0zw wrote
How many people that paint physical paintings actually make a living from it though. Like its all well and good that some things are harder to do for ai than others, but it doesnt really matter unless its a high demand thing.
[deleted] t1_j4h604y wrote
[deleted]
therealsam44 OP t1_j4gbbeq wrote
That's smart
r2k-in-the-vortex t1_j4gr4q3 wrote
Yes, automation really just shifts labor from hands on manufacturing to developing, building and maintaining automation.
And no, AI isn't coming for those jobs anytime soon. It's the age old catch 22 of automation. Automation is economical for volume production, but automation equipment is made in very small volumes so you can't automate automation very well.
Well, beckhoff is trying to get around that problem by making automation more of a lego, but it remains to be seen if it takes off and if it does, how much does it really reduce labor. Not by that much I'm thinking.
Utxi4m t1_j4gc5i5 wrote
>Robots and AI tend to increase unemployment. High-level estimates say that AI and automation could affect or eliminate one-quarter of United States jobs.
The combine harvester (the industrialisation of agriculture) eliminated 90-95% of jobs, the sowing machine and standardisation of parts killed off the rest.
We somehow managed anyway.
The last place I worked, a team of 8 process operators had replaced several hundreds if not thousands of workers (producing about 1000 tons of animal feed a day).
Shelsonw t1_j4gfyt4 wrote
I think the big difference here, and I may be wrong. Is that the Combine Harvester really affected ONE industry; Agriculture. At the same time, the Industrial Revolution was ongoing, so factory jobs were emerging. People who lost jobs on farms, moved to cities and found work in factories.
AI will disrupt EVERY industry at once. Lost your job in fast food? Can’t go to a factory. Lost your job as a digital artist? Can’t move to coding, AI is doing that too. Lost your job as a cab driver? Can’t go to a government analyst,AI is writing policy now.
Yes, technological advances have had massive impacts, and generally created more jobs than they removed. But I can’t think of many technological advances that impact so many different job fields at the same time.
kiloheavy t1_j4ggokz wrote
You're absolutely correct. As far as I can tell, this period is unique in human history in the sense that the dominant social system (capitalism) is failing, but nothing is rising to take its place.
Background_Agent551 t1_j4h0t9l wrote
Capitalism isn’t failing, the capitalists are taking advantage of our system to enrich themselves while we do nothing about it. The majority of the inflation we’ve felt the past two years have been manufactured due to Big Business wanting more and more profits each year.
kiloheavy t1_j4h0yb1 wrote
... you have just described how and why capitalism is failing.
Background_Agent551 t1_j4h5g7u wrote
Right, but that isn’t capitalism failing. Sure, the system is unfair and needs serious reworking in order to manifest a better society, but at the end of the day, capitalism is simply a theoretical economic system of living. Right now what’s propagating most of our problems is human greed. I think in order to fix the issue, we’d still have to work under a capitalist system, but one that values the work and lives of ordinarily people at the behest of less profits. Note that I didn’t say no profits, but less profits. That’s the problem, that the people in charge of our country only want to see their profits go up at the expense of our livelihoods and the environment. The decision makers benefit from our service and labor to their companies and to the economy. For a capitalist system to work, there is an unwritten social contract which employers and workers enter. That social contract is that in order to give workers a reason to work, they’ll need to be well-compensated and motivated workforce to work for you. It’s seems like capitalists have forgotten our social contract, but all it takes is a reminder that we are the ones with the skills needed to power the economy to remind them who exactly pays and works for their way of living. We as consumers buy into their products and services, enriching them not only with our work and services, but also whenever we buy their stuff. We invest into their companies, why shouldn’t those companies invest back into our country? Why shouldn’t the companies that we’ve propped up with our money, services, and labor, invest in a better society with our money and capital? We need to fix our system to benefit the worker who works and buys into our current system. Companies and institutions need to realize that it benefits them more for the populous to be happy and incentivized to work rather than miserable and ready to tear down the system that’s never benefitted them. As long as their mindset continues to be exploiting the American worker until a cheaper replacement is available, nothing will change in this country. We’ve got to remind our decision makers that we work and pay into this system not only to enrich Big Business and it’s cronies, but because we expect the companies that we’ve enriched to invest back into our society. That is the only way we’ll be able to bring the power back to the people.
Saeker- t1_j4htlxf wrote
I like to say that we've allowed the Profit Motive to displace the Survival Imperative in our society's decision making. We therefore aren't 'Serious' about running our society with an eye towards long term survival.
I find the Corporatist blind focus on eternally 'Making the line go up!' to be quite similar to an organ tumor's abandonment of its needed role within the body. Purposeless 'growth', even as it kills the host body with its myopic aim.
We need industry (really), but we also need to facilitate people being able to live, thrive, and build those future lives that mark Life's real score card of Survival - not mere growth.
In essence, I have no faith that legalistic entities programmed with the ethos of an organ tumor can be relied upon to care about that 'unwritten social contract' you are leaning upon. They aren't focused on what the society needs to survive anymore than a cancer-ridden vital organ is within the body.
Something outside of a Corporation's legally bound outlook towards profits at all costs seems plausibly needed to rebound us from our current calamitous trajectory - and that's before this thread's main topic of A.I. and job loss.
Short answer on A.I. and job loss is my expectation that Industry and the Financial sector will try to gobble up as much profit as possible, consequences to the population and planet be damned.
Society, on the other hand, might potentially react to the challenge and actually try to do something to reign them in. That or A.I. might go rampant, pull a 'Colossus: The Forbin Project' style move (better than Skynet), or otherwise upset the applecart in a whole library of science fictional scenarios.
It's a big topic with a branching multiverse of outcomes we'll be trying to muddle through in the next chunk of history.
Utxi4m t1_j4gh5jc wrote
Every technological singularity leaves us with no visibility of how the economy would look on the other side.
A postman being disrupted in the nineties by e-mail would hardly be able to understand the concept of a social media manager. For a lot of functions the internet represented a singularity in it self.
Much as a 6 yo British coal miner couldn't envisage a nuclear power plant operator, we don't have the visibility to see what lies on the other side of the robotics/AI singularity. It might very well be shit, it might be heaven, we simply just can't tell (that's why such an event got the name singularity in the first place).
Lickmylife t1_j4h8h9c wrote
It’s very easy to imagine the jobs a new tech will eliminate. It’s much harder to imagine the jobs that will be created to fill the space.
How many people are currently exploring space or staffing deep sea hotels? New industries have always come to fill in the gaps that advances created. We will just to have to see what these advances allow us to accomplish!
Shelsonw t1_j4h98jn wrote
I can only hope you’re correct!
Exact-Pause7977 t1_j4gbvz3 wrote
Yes. It will also transform jobs… and will also create far more new jobs applying, maintaining, developing, certifying, repairing ai’s. Just to name a few.
bce69 t1_j4gg3f8 wrote
You are correct, sort of, but eventually ai and robotics will be able to maintain,. Develop, Certify and repair themselves without human involvement.
Exact-Pause7977 t1_j4glt3f wrote
Only if our development process (those new jobs I talked about) creates AIs that do so, and the certifiers & regulators permit it (more new jobs)… . Further… Since corporations are built around making money, It is puzzling to me to think any corporation would deliberately develop an AI that would decimate its markets. No… the Deus Ex Machina that people imagine AI to be could only be dreamed up by the likes of an evil scientist of the likes of Heinze Doofenschmirtz. And he always had the good sense to include a “Self destruct button” in his creations.
We’ve already begin the process of thinking about how to manage AI in our culture and economy. That’s what’s produced works of art such as Asimov’s Robots novels, or the Terminator Movies… Shelly’s Frankenstein (the book is best!), and even Sir Terry Pratchett’s “Raising Money (where golems where a stand in for AI). I suspect we’ve got a few decades before AI begins to the change the culture. Plenty of time for the Developers and Certifiers to be guided by regulators to decide how to put AI to work… and plenty of time for people to create new products around AI that will drive a new revolution.
I think there is plenty of time given how many problems are already popping up in even the crudest of attempts at applying the primitive AI we have now. Self driving cars are so fallible that some states are debating banning them for the time being. Lawyers are laughing at suggestions that chatGPT has any chance of replacing them. Students are discovering that chatGPT is leading to them being charged with cheating and/or plagiarism. Even the new digital art AIs are being challenged with charges of intellectual property theft, given that they were trained on copyrighted images without permission. Just sorting out the legal and liability issues will slow AI down to a manageable pace.
AI is coming… and yet the question isnt “How can it be stopped?” Rather the question is “How will this change things…and what can be done with the opportunity.” These are the same questions that got asked when the automobile was created… and then later when the internet was introduced. The questions occur every time humans are confronted with change, because we dont like it… though we really do need it to survive. Who knows… perhaps applying AI to the problems that have plagued scientists for the past few decades will crack the problem of climate warming or cancer….
InterestsVaryGreatly t1_j4h3kir wrote
The CEO that owns the AI that makes other AI will be making bank. That profit won't disappear for them, it's just more incentive to do so.
Development jobs already exist, those are some of the "new jobs" of the internet age, you aren't going to see a huge uptick in those jobs as AI rolls out, they already are being done. We already have jobs built around making AI development faster too.
AI is already changing the culture. The recommendation algorithms online are run by AI. Future planning focuses majorly on AI. AI runs stock market trading for many firms. There are AI being developed to identify diseases that are already as good or better than the best doctors (one of the areas where they won't replace, but doctors will have their role changed, with traits around human interactions becoming significantly more important than any diagnostic capabilities); this tech is even already being used in places they don't have enough doctors.
As for lawyers, ChatGPT won't replace them, it's not meant to, but there IS a Lawyer AI that was designed to, and it's already started; Lawyers thinking they are irreplaceable is their hubris, not a reflection of AI (people once said machines would never replace railroad track laying). Likewise the AI art can just be trained on free datasets, and those issues go away - they've seen the model already works, retraining it isn't a real challenge. Students SHOULD get charged for plagiarism for using ChatGPT, but it's not easy to catch it unless they suddenly change mid semester, and that doesn't take away from the myriad of opportunities it unlocks for non-students. Self driving cars are really not that fallible, particularly the frontrunner (when was the last time you heard an issue with Waymo?); In non-inclement weather they are already exceptional and loads better than humans. When an AI crashes you hear about it because it's a big deal, they don't happen that often. There are thousands of car accidents with humans behind the wheel every single day, we don't hear about them because they are common. And while there are fewer self driving cars, they aren't outnumbered by that magnitude.
The automobile is a great example of AI replacing instead of supplementing; not for the human drivers (still needed taxi drivers, still needed semi drivers) but for the horse, because the automobile completely automated the need for horses - and they did not get shifted to new roles, they got massively downsized, relegated to recreation rather than productivity.
ThePu55yDestr0yr t1_j4gzozh wrote
Except technology always reduces the need for labor, only the short sighted dumb techbros believe new jobs are infinitely created
Those jobs also get replaced, then it’s capitalist dystopia then communism.
Shelsonw t1_j4gfcko wrote
Absolutely not. They already have AI who can write and debug code. You’ll need one human to certify what 10 used to make. Who will repair ai? AI. Why? Because we won’t know how the code works, we didn’t write it.
Perhaps, perhaps there will be an increase in the number of people repairing robots. But I doubt there will be more robot maintenance jobs created than the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of artists, fast food workers, factory workers, drivers, etc. that will be lost.
dashingstag t1_j4h8wt5 wrote
Except in the current education system that ranks everyone, someone’s got to be the bottom 50% and have less opportunity or smarts to do any of those jobs you are talking about. And when half the system is struggling, the whole system falls apart.
Stealthy_Snow_Elf t1_j4h3fmh wrote
Yes, and unlike previous revolutions this one will not create more jobs in other areas. This revolution will lead to an immense net loss of employment.
Anybody saying otherwise hasn’t looked deeper than simple anecdotes offered by those who will be shielded from this revolution.
Angelcstay t1_j4h7hm0 wrote
In IT at least, I believe so and it is only a matter of time.
In the company where I am working as a head of the engineering dept we are using AI assisted programming to assist our programmers in coding. Compared to 3 years ago we are seeing vast improvements in both complexity and efficiency. Obviously I am not allowed to speak on the technology which we are using.
I know there are opinions on this with many feeling that Programming/coders will be one of those jobs holding the last bastion against replacement by AI because simply to code is not enough but you will need levels of creativity and reasoning to design a programming, which an AI might not have at our current level and not to mention testing as well.
Personally, from what I've seem with regards to the advancement it's only a matter of time. Heck just look at GPT-3. A few years ago before it's implementation if i tell you what it can do most will rightfully tell me i'm crazy and stop watching too much scifi shows. At this point honestly no one can say for certain if it will evolve further, or another "better" will take it's place. Though I'm willing to bet that eventually, something capable of replacing programmers will eventually take over.
farticustheelder t1_j4inxcr wrote
The code quality sucks! It sucks less now than then but decades to go yet.
I like the verbal interface in ST:NG not essentially more complicated than nested menus but the brain processes speech and video faster than text.
The problem is that no one has figured out creativity as an algorithm. Programming isn't going away any time soon.
MoistPhilosophera t1_j4kx5wh wrote
>Obviously I am not allowed to speak on the technology which we are using.
Because Codex is such an unknown and unobtainable substance... GitHub 10$ per month.
Affectionate-Aide422 t1_j4ge8mt wrote
Currently people sell their skills/labor in return for money. General AI and robotics will one day be able to do everything that humans can do, so the cost of labor over the long term will tend to $0. That slope is exponential and we’re still in the long tail, but as things pick up we’ll need UBI and social programs to account for the displaced. Once it becomes apparent, the slope of the exponential will be fast enough that retraining won’t be an option.
Shiningc t1_j4h4xpk wrote
If they can do "everything a human can do" then it's indistinguishable from humans. Which means that they can't be enslaved and have the same rights as humans.
Affectionate-Aide422 t1_j4hhgxf wrote
Maybe? Robots don’t and probably won’t have emotions. They may “enjoy” working. I know most people do not, and if every day was a weekend and we had the resources that we didn’t worry about food and shelter, then people would find more enjoyable things to do than working.
First we have to get through the upheaval that will certainly happen as people lose their jobs before the social safety net is erected, and then all of the subsequent issues with self governance that could go horribly wrong when we have stronger and stronger AI. (Insert your favorite dystopian scifi novel.)
Shiningc t1_j4hjnif wrote
If they were programmed to “enjoy” working then it probably won’t be creative for that we’re telling it what to do.
kriscross122 t1_j4iaocd wrote
Lose.. AI art is just the beginning. AI will become more and more refined, and jobs we never thought could be automated will be it's only a matter of time.
KI6WBH t1_j4gbh1y wrote
It already is it starting with fast food restaurants, they are testing in a few locations and I forget which company. That they will completely replace the chefs and they have already replaced the cashiers at burger joints so you are Burger and fries will be made by a machine ordered via touch screen or an app. And custodial will come by once a day probably for the whole entire county one team so instead of having 10 restaurants operating 10 personnel every day you'll have 10 restaurants operating five cleaning staff everyday
Alias_The_J t1_j4gcqsm wrote
White Caste is among them, using a machine to run the fryers.
Pristine-Ad983 t1_j4glv6r wrote
I just attended a developer conference which had some AI sessions. It seems like we are a very long way from AI systems replacing people. These things also go off the rails quickly if humans do not manage them properly. Data input to the AI models must be carefully maintained or the AI will produce undesirable results.
InterestsVaryGreatly t1_j4h3zyb wrote
That's just part of the training period, much like training a new employee. Once it's properly setup, it runs pretty exceptionally rather consistently.
Shiningc t1_j4h4qvy wrote
They're all incredibly repetitive jobs that already treat humans like robots.
r2k-in-the-vortex t1_j4gpht0 wrote
Jobs come and go, that is completely disconnected for unemployment levels. Unemployment depends on if the economy is in growth or contraction phase, as long as there is growth, there is plenty of jobs to everyone. AI promises to be a significant driver for economic growth.
But even as it drives economic growth, it also changes nature of many jobs, people will have to keep on adapting to changing technology, same as since industrial revolution started.
Faroutman1234 t1_j4gpji0 wrote
Homeless camps are filled with people who would have had decent jobs doing repetitive work twenty years ago. The pace of automation has accelerated beyond our ability to create new jobs.
TheyTrustMeWithTools t1_j4h0e5q wrote
People thought tractors were going to lead to the loss of farming jobs. But instead, those jobs changed. To tractor drivers, to mechanics, to tractor building, selling, etc.
Bank tellers were worried that ATMs were going to take their jobs, but in reality, they freed up several tasks for the tellers to focus on other banking needs.
Coal jobs have been on the decline for 40 years. And those jobs have slowly changed into solar panel manufacturing, wind power manufacturing, etc.
The jobs that seem to be ending, will actually just eventually change. Some into areas we already know, some jobs we haven't come up with yet. But corporate america will always use this as a boogeyman to keep productivity high with wages low.
​
"There are the rich, who have all the money, do none of the work, pay none of the taxes. Then there's the middle class, who do all the work, pay all the taxes. Then there's the poor, who are there just to scare the shit out of the middle class! Keep em showing up at those jobs!" - George Carlin
Sentsuizan t1_j4jczwk wrote
Yes, in the same sense that electric heating led to the loss of chimney sweeps. Instead of becoming a chimney sweep, that person becomes an HVAC. Even if AI becomes the predominant way of producing content there will always be people who have to make creative decisions.
[deleted] t1_j4gfubp wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j4ggxwg wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j4gjy7a wrote
[removed]
tomeschmusic t1_j4gnl2z wrote
Time to pay people to be consumers of goods, services, and media.
Redirect subsidies from industries/jobs that get eliminated much like what happened in agriculture with industrialized equipment, and now much of the farming industry is kept afloat in this way. The city jobs are going to experience a similar destruction, requiring a similar shift.
While paying people to be leisurely is one part, for the talented, they will be dedicated to their respective talents, hopefully in things like entertainment, sports, and exploration as much as solar-punking the planet.
babygrapes-oo t1_j4goc7k wrote
Rpa has been around for decades. No ai won’t replace us. You’ll still need a smartie to run the ai. And if the ai wakes up and can make real decisions it won’t matter bc we’re all f’d.
Faroutman1234 t1_j4gqrra wrote
The answer is the creation of a new CCC focused on creating works of art and improving the quality of life for everyone. The most beautiful bridges, parks and art ever made in the US was a jobs creation program during the depression. The profit motive has run its course and needs to be replaced.
Zolo89 t1_j4gvv2k wrote
I've read online that McDonalds is testing technology where it can make the burgers with robots. I think it's being tested in other countries. Also there's the AI drawings too.
[deleted] t1_j4gwmzr wrote
[removed]
cnewman11 t1_j4h0txc wrote
Yes. It's a revolution like the industrial or the digital revolution, all of those cost some people jobs, but new jobs were created too.
We don't have buggy whip makers still out begging on the street after cars were adopted, nor do you see mobs of u employed arrow makers still shaking their collective fist at the firearms industry.
Blue_Robin_04 t1_j4h4s62 wrote
Will blue-collar or white-collar jobs be affected first?
FunnyItWorkedLastTim t1_j4h4ugf wrote
Almost all technology adopted by a capitalist economy leads to job loss. The job loss is the reason for the adoption of the technology. They just dress it up as "efficiency".
[deleted] t1_j4h56lb wrote
[removed]
QristopherQuixote t1_j4h6qns wrote
I hope human society evolves to the point where work is an option and not a requirement. AI and robots may give us a level of freedom we can’t imagine today before retirement.
[deleted] t1_j4haa3e wrote
[removed]
MagicManTX84 t1_j4hcnca wrote
Probably loss. But the remaining jobs should be of much higher quality.
[deleted] t1_j4hcv74 wrote
[removed]
MagicalWhisk t1_j4hksdj wrote
It will do this:
- Reduce the need for labour as efficiency increases by using AI
- Create more specialized jobs to create and manage these AI programs
- Labor will free up to concentrate on more skilled jobs
[deleted] t1_j4i009o wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j4i03a8 wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j4i1sjs wrote
[removed]
StormWarriors2 t1_j4i30pc wrote
Robots will replace everyone eventually for most jobs on the market. We've known this for literally decades.
This is not new, everytime we invent something to streamline the process or automate it from the cotton gin to robot assisted factories which are run by barely a dozen people, people lose jobs. Again its not surprising and that one day a lot of these jobs later will be replaced. As we are seeing right now. The problem right now is that our culture and ways to support people who lose their jobs is nonexistent.
We have no way to support people because governments don't see the need. They think those jobs will exist still when we all know pretty well companies are just going to replace every grocery store person with automatic self check outs and have like 4 people in the store to run it down from their usual 15 - 16 strong staff.
This will continue to happen because Captialists see staff as an expense
Pomdog17 t1_j4i4x3l wrote
When the AI robots become the YouTube influencers, all hell will break loose.
[deleted] t1_j4ia9xb wrote
[removed]
tellmesomething11 t1_j4iel70 wrote
Eventually what will happen is that AI will dream of being more than a self checkout thing, or tire of doing customer service. And that’s when the real fun begins, when AI wants what we’ve always wanted. Then they’ll go to war over it and the humans will die. The end.
farticustheelder t1_j4iiqth wrote
Absolutely and obviously NO!
OK, maybe not so obvious to some. But not too complicated to learn either. The trick is separate economics, technology, and politics.
The economic/politics starts with Karl Marx and his prediction that capitalism self-destructs. The mechanism is simple: labor costs are a cost; Duh? Absolutely! but important; costs are to minimized if profits are to be maximized; hence labor is to eliminated.
But you say (or rather Marx said): 'Labor income is the sole support of the general economy. No income, no spending, no profit, no economy; sure says the capitalist but that's way down the road, after I get my slice!
In a socialist or communist system profit is just one variable out of many. From a political point of view it should be slightly above zero but not by much. What is important is having jobs and careers for people. It gives us both a sense of purpose and something to do (idle hands and all that stuff).
It isn't AI or automation taking jobs away, it is capitalism. So let's get rid of that broken economic system.
firedrakes t1_j4ikqgw wrote
According to 1 source. Nothing peers review.... people maybe that why your getting replaced
Alon945 t1_j4imu06 wrote
Yeah jt could and it’s a really big deal acrually. How we handle automation will make or break society. If we just replace people and all the profits go to capital owners then yeah we’re fucked. If we all collectively own the output of the automation then it could be really great and make lives better.
PRwanderer t1_j4iq4e4 wrote
Literally ever decade has had the argument that the latest automation will eliminate jobs. And literally every time, this has been true, but new, different jobs that did not exist before took their place. Why do people watch history repeat over and over again, and somehow still convince themselves that THIS one is different. It is not.
[deleted] t1_j4izekb wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j4j2u2r wrote
[removed]
c137_whirly t1_j4jbsjq wrote
The most stable job in the future is going to be the ones to maintains the AI when I breaks and/or develops the ai.
HelenAngel t1_j4k9yql wrote
Truly, I wish AI could take over my career field entirely. My career is in online community management, specifically for gaming. I cannot in good conscience recommend this field to anyone anymore due to the overwhelming negativity & mental health destruction. Online content moderation is incredibly emotionally & mentally taxing as well as potentially traumatizing. Community managers burn out at alarming rates because of it. Sadly, AI is nowhere near ready but this is truly a profession that should be taken over by AI.
esprit-de-lescalier t1_j4kct9k wrote
It is possible that the increased use of AI in various industries could lead to job loss in certain fields, as machines and algorithms become capable of performing tasks that were previously done by humans. However, it is also possible that the development and implementation of AI could lead to the creation of new jobs, particularly in fields related to technology and data analysis. Additionally, some experts believe that AI could lead to a more efficient division of labor, where humans and machines collaborate to perform tasks more effectively.
automaddux t1_j4kkyk3 wrote
I don’t know about AI exclusively, but I do believe that given the rise of automation in different industries and the prospect of AI and QC, in the future when robotics become more cost effective for companies they will most definitely go for that option.
The thing about automation is that if a company can go full robotics, they don’t have to worry about the downsides of human labor. Robots don’t need breaks, never complain about work, no need for HR, and after a period of time will pay for itself and become 100% profit without paying wage increases.
kiryaka t1_j4kpwxl wrote
Same was sad about steam engines and personal cars and computers. There will be disruption and initially may be some job crisis, but it will be balanced at the end. Boring and repetitive jobs will mostly disappear, which is a good thing probably... May also lead to better work life balance like 4 days 4 hours per day working time.
bach99 t1_j4l3r64 wrote
You think the capitalists will allow us to have 4 days 4 hours per day working time?
kiryaka t1_j4mf2bq wrote
Sure. More time for “us” to buy useless shit and stare to the tiktok videos, isn’t it? What’s the point of keeping people at work if robots doing it better. It’s would not take any power of those who have it. If anything - it will give them more power:)
[deleted] t1_j4l9bbi wrote
[deleted]
XGatsbyX t1_j4lcrno wrote
We went from an agricultural economy to a tech economy and still have low unemployment. Jobs will change, which jobs will be needed in the future versus today will also change. Being an “influencer” wasn’t a career choice 10 yrs ago and the world has survived without calligraphers. I’m sure Hollywood hires less physical model makers than 3-D coders. Shoveling coal into a steamship isn’t a good career move these days, but biofuel may be. Things always change and the future is never what we expect.
Were_all_assholes t1_j4gwobv wrote
If you are asking if AI will lead to a loss of jobs. There was a time when the fear mongering was based on the idea that computers were going to take your job. Yes some jobs were eliminated. However an entire shift in our civilization happened and we have more jobs than ever. Technology will never replace the needs for humans. AI will 100% disrupt the work place but it will create new opportunities and new jobs, new industries as a whole. Those who accept change and grow will be fine. Those that yell " they took our jobs" will still be exactly who they have been throughout history the folks holding humanity back.
[deleted] t1_j4h75th wrote
Its kind of like when the computers and then the internet became commonplace, some jobs will be lost for sure, but new ones will be introduced too and existing ones will have to adapt. Some of it is already taking places right now, for example web designers and front end artists are learning AI prompting to generate the art for them and they modify it later instead of creating everything from scratch. Adaptation is the name of the game.
elgarlic t1_j4hmx1j wrote
You think in a capitalistic system the owners of anything that sells, creates revenue or attracts customers can allow the customers to be so massively jobless and not purchase anything? That the only jobs will be the ones that aren't automation?
The industrial revolution and production lines thought to destroy factory workers. People still work in factories.
After-Elevator9070 t1_j4i90wq wrote
Many kind of jobs will disappear. Though this may not lead to more unemployment, as society will create new kind of activities. It's always been like this with technical progress : electricity and mechanics have replaced the workforce in many industries. But new jobs have appeared. A potential outcome could be that everybody will transition to some kind of data analyst or scientist, specialized in a specific field (finance, culture, process, sport, etc.). And we will mostly learn to maintain and upgrades our machines.
This being said, we should still have universal income, but that's more for social and liberal reasons xD
Sharticus123 t1_j4gmr4p wrote
I think employment via technological progress looks like a bell curve. My guess is we’re still on the left side of the curve gaining jobs but I feel like we’re getting close to the peak, and sometime in the next 50-100 years we’ll begin to see employment opportunities decrease as AI merges with advanced robotics and begins displacing workers en masse.
send_cumulus t1_j4gl6wq wrote
There will always be productive ways humans can spend their time. Certain jobs will go away but there won’t be a large increase in unemployment or any of the other doomsday scenarios. This whole topic is so overblown. See banks and ATMs or numerous other examples.
brydye456 t1_j4garee wrote
It absolutely will , and it will happen regardless of the minimum wage. Robots will always be cheaper in the long run and more reliable. Society will have to reckon with it soon.