AI created three times as many jobs as it killed last year (payment, employers)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
AI cannot function without human interface, so the claim that it will eliminate jobs is debunked.
AI is continually being refined and improved, and in the future won't need a human interface. That is what progress is all about. Eventually all jobs will be done with computers, robots, and other machines since they can/will be able to do the jobs faster, better, and cheaper than people. People just won't be needed.
From an old post (and some other things to think about):
The consumption based economic financial system is dying. It emphasizes and measures success (growth) as more units, transactions, increasing marginal unit profit, it thrives on wastefulness of planned obsolescence. This combined with technological efficiency gains which are usurping the output of human labor with machine labor will continue. This leads to a few consequences straining the system: human labor skill sets usefulness are compressing, human life span is increasing, and wealth is accruing exponentially to the few owning the 'capital'.
The problem here is workers share of output, and what do you do when the machine hour output usurps the average human labor hour output? In this environment the corps will continue to do what they always do, seek greater marginal unit profit by using machine technologies (this is not bad, per se, if everyone benefits from the gains) we want to increase efficiency, but does everyone benefit (gain leisure without loss of quality of life) from the new efficient output? The problem is - what do you do with the excess labor, and how does labor get income? Especially when the usefulness of skill set life cycle is compressed and made obsolete so rapidly?
Unemployment is a structural issue camouflaged by many going off the employment roles completely and transferring to short term disability / ssi payments, part time service jobs with significantly lower pay etc... Total 'employment' is back to 1981 levels. It is a structural issue along with a "workers share of output" issue. The formerly reasonably paid middle class is drifting sharply into debt slavery as corporate entities have waged global labor arbitrage on an accelerated pace since NAFTA / GATT passed.
There we be new jobs and new industries but they will continually increase efficiency and eliminate the human labor expenses and long term financial obligations associated with them.
Another corollary is what material wealth will this AI and tech automation provide humans? Think in line with the philosophical question posed by Tolstoy in How Much Land Does a Man Need.
If the individual is not employed from where does he get the means to purchase the 'things' he needs? And how much 'stuff' does a man need?
But you are not taking into consideration the possibility that new tech might create completely new industries along with completely new set of job titles we can't think of right now.
The invitation still stands to sketch out what these industries might be, in the most general terms. You may not be able to, say, identify the job slot of software systems architect, but in 1970 a reasonably prescient person could have seen that it would take a lot of people to maintain and improve computer systems. Have a go at "new industries enabled by the rise of AI," especially as it displaces a lot of existing jobs.
However... consider that new industries are not going to start by hiring millions of people and then slowly automating or whatever, as is the creaky historical pattern. If some snot-nosed middle schooler arrives at Harvard in six or seven years and gets a Bezos-Musk-Zuckerberg flash of inspiration, his or her implementation is going to use AI and automation right out of Mom's garage. Example: Musk built the Tesla factories from the ground up to be as fully automated as possible... not by hiring tens of thousands of auto assemblers with some vague notion of "automating" later. (It bit him on the ass, too.)
So your ideas for industry have to account for the fact that the entrepreneurial barons will have a chance to shape them from Prototype #1 as automation-driven, AI-based endeavors. There is very unlikely to be the historical pattern of a giant surge of "jobs from nowhere"... because this time, it really, really is different.
But swing away. Three pitches comin' at ya.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BusinessManIT
AI is continually being refined and improved, and in the future won't need a human interface.
I think we can safely ignore those who can only see the past, and assume the future will be just "more so of the same," but especially those for whom the past only comes up to about twenty years ago.
But you are not taking into consideration the possibility that new tech might create completely new industries along with completely new set of job titles we can't think of right now.
Sort of how there was a time when "software developer" wasn't a thing yet. So, no one could have said "Factory works will be in the decline because of tech advancement but a lot of companies are looking for software developers though. Some people are even making a living as a web dev freelancer"
There's a displacement effect, old jobs being replaced by new ones however with technology you need less to do more.
There's no new technology where you create something and you would need the same or equal resource to maintain. Everything rolled out today from every vendor touts you can do MORE with less.
I used to work with large IT teams where each group have 3-6 people, nowadays I visit an IT dept say 800 employees. There would be less than 25 IT worker in the whole firm where it used to number ~60.
Companies do more with less today.
AI will usher in the new ~10 man IT dept for companies under 1000. There are companies that already operate close to that with outsourcing.
I can see that it only takes
1-2 Desktop, devices support
2 people to manage: infrastructure
2 people to manage: security, network
3 people in app development.
1-2 director
Everything will be hosted in the cloud or managed services, off-premise services.
If you don't believe it, then you think you're smarter than Stephen Hawkins.
There's a displacement effect, old jobs being replaced by new ones however with technology you need less to do more.
There's no new technology where you create something and you would need the same or equal resource to maintain. Everything rolled out today from every vendor touts you can do MORE with less.
I used to work with large IT teams where each group have 3-6 people, nowadays I visit an IT dept say 800 employees. There would be less than 25 IT worker in the whole firm where it used to number ~60.
Companies do more with less today.
AI will usher in the new ~10 man IT dept for companies under 1000. There are companies that already operate close to that with outsourcing.
I can see that it only takes
1-2 Desktop, devices support
2 people to manage: infrastructure
2 people to manage: security, network
3 people in app development.
1-2 director
Everything will be hosted in the cloud or managed services, off-premise services.
If you don't believe it, then you think you're smarter than Stephen Hawkins.
I work in Accounting/Finance. If I were to take the tech that I use at my current job and time travel to the 1980's (and somehow be able to use it), I am 100% sure I could replace every 1000 accountants with 10 accountants. By your logic, the Accounting field shouldn't have survived. Yet, here we are in 2019 where a mere B.S. in Accounting is still lucrative with new jobs popping up all the place..
All I am saying is, we don't yet live in a world where AI is that advance. So, it's silly to believe we have all the factors to determine whether or not humans will have a place in the workforce. Only time will tell...
Last edited by Liar_Liar; 07-03-2019 at 09:39 AM..
I work in Accounting/Finance. If I were to take the tech that I use at my current job and time travel to the 1980's (and somehow be able to use it), I am 100% sure I could replace every 1000 accountants with 10 accountants. By your logic, the Accounting field shouldn't have survived. Yet, here we are in 2019 where a mere B.S. in Accounting is still lucrative with new jobs popping up all the place..
You're welcome to back that up with any kind of verifiable figures, especially ones that account (puntended) for the shift in job focus and the overall job distribution in finance. I suspect you're going to find some net job losses as "accountants" absorbed broader and more... independent task sets. That is, "accountants" might have become more numerous... as the "clerks" who supported their endless on-paper work diminished and vanished.
Quote:
All I am saying is, we don't yet live in a world where AI is that advance. So, it's silly to believe we have all the factors to determine whether or not humans will have a place in the workforce. Only time will tell...
Which is an airy wave at some far-future situation of no concern to any of us.
You're welcome to back that up with any kind of verifiable figures, especially ones that account (puntended) for the shift in job focus and the overall job distribution in finance. I suspect you're going to find some net job losses as "accountants" absorbed broader and more... independent task sets. That is, "accountants" might have become more numerous... as the "clerks" who supported their endless on-paper work diminished and vanished.
Which is an airy wave at some far-future situation of no concern to any of us.
Five years too far off for your concern?
Alright. Cool. Thanks for giving your predictions a time frame. Hopefully we both will be here to re-visit this convo on 7/03/2024
Alright. Cool. Thanks for giving your predictions a time frame. Hopefully we both will be here to re-visit this convo on 7/03/2024
I plan to be around.
My timeline comes from association with a brilliant visionary in the field - specifically the human-AI interface and equation, not the tech or the generalities of development. I tend to be the drag and the nitpicker on his thinking, and even more conservative in what I post here.
I've said it before, I'll say it again... if you are afraid that automation or robots or illiterate Third World peasants are going to replace you, your problem is not the automation or robots or illiterate Third World Peasant.
OK, so what do you expect people to do?
"you have to reskill and adapt" you'll probably say.
So people go back to school, learn new things, then attempt to get a new job and get told they can't have that job because they have no experience.
The problem is not people who are worried about losing their job.
"you have to reskill and adapt" you'll probably say.
I suspect it's more along the lines of "if a peasant or robot can replace you, you're not a very valuable worker, so who cares?"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
