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.
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...
Consider I use online accounting to manage my own LLC, to handle bookkeeping, taxes, and payroll. I don't see why a bigger company could not do what I did by having just a few people to do the software config and not need as much people. If I had AI working for me then I would be spending even less time doing my accounting. Which I believe in another 10-15 years the software will be smart enough that I would trust the software automating my finances and I just need to check my acct periodically like electronic payment.
Companies still have people working in accounting because they need humans to help them legally cook the books and play different set of rules. The accounting side is mostly automated already.
The other reason is government mandates hiring quotas, companies with a certain size must maintain a certain headcount footprint in order to keep their tax advantages.
In our economy, it's the workers that pay majority of the taxes and the government have requirements to ensure there's enough working taxpayers. Which is why so many companies rather hire cheap labor to fill the quota.
Of course there's going to be an increase as AI is developed and implemented. AI is just now on the cusp of implementation for most of the fields it will invade in the next decade or two. If you think this situation is going to continue, given AI's potential to replace dozens and hundreds of jobs at a stroke (and in fields from which there are no paths to development, implementation or even maintenance of AI systems), you are wearing deeply rose-tinted lenses.
It depends on the niche. For example, the demand for manual software testers has decreased due to automation of tests with tools like Selenium, Cucumber, Appium, Grid, Microsoft Test Manager, TestNG, Junit, etc. But the demand for software development engineers in testing (SDET) has increased.
Similarly, mid-level management is being replaced by automation and artificial intelligence. Usually, they are older workers who know they are technically obsolete but argue that "Well I know how to manage because of 20+ years of work experience". The problem is that there are too many of them like that, and recruiters have a hard time placing "experienced mid-level managers". The reason is that they are being automated out of existence.
AI will replace some jobs but adds new ones if you know where to look - hence the "catch". Some people probably don't know where to look once AI enters their field.
It depends on the niche. For example, the demand for manual software testers has decreased due to automation of tests with tools like Selenium, Cucumber, Appium, Grid, Microsoft Test Manager, TestNG, Junit, etc. But the demand for software development engineers in testing (SDET) has increased.
Similarly, mid-level management is being replaced by automation and artificial intelligence. Usually, they are older workers who know they are technically obsolete but argue that "Well I know how to manage because of 20+ years of work experience". The problem is that there are too many of them like that, and recruiters have a hard time placing "experienced mid-level managers". The reason is that they are being automated out of existence.
AI will replace some jobs but adds new ones if you know where to look - hence the "catch". Some people probably don't know where to look once AI enters their field.
How can AI add new jobs for people on a permanent basis when the purpose of automation is to replace people with computers, robots, and machines that can do the jobs better, faster, and cheaper than people?
1. Consider I use online accounting to manage my own LLC, to handle bookkeeping, taxes, and payroll. I don't see why a bigger company could not do what I did by having just a few people to do the software config and not need as much people. If I had AI working for me then I would be spending even less time doing my accounting. Which I believe in another 10-15 years the software will be smart enough that I would trust the software automating my finances and I just need to check my acct periodically like electronic payment.
Companies still have people working in accounting because they need humans to help them legally cook the books and play different set of rules. The accounting side is mostly automated already.
The other reason is government mandates hiring quotas, companies with a certain size must maintain a certain headcount footprint in order to keep their tax advantages.
In our economy, it's the workers that pay majority of the taxes and the government have requirements to ensure there's enough working taxpayers. Which is why so many companies rather hire cheap labor to fill the quota.
I had that same conversation with the CFO. He said if we did that, we'd be at the mercy of the ERP's support whenever we need to make changes. We could hire someone who understands both accounting and computer science, but someone with that type of background wouldn't work for cheap. Also keep in mind the lack of Separation of Duties can lead to employees committing fraud.
Recently there has been some type of law change in regard of deferred revenue (ASC 606). Our computer system is not set up to generate certain reports in accordance to those changes because those rules are new.
We called microsoft dynamics and apparently we will have to update our ERP to the latest version, update whatever add-on software we use to the latest versions, RE-CREATE a bunch of custom made external software we have accumulated over the years that connect to our ERP, hire their contractors to configure our ERP to follow those new regulations, etc... etc... It will cost us time, an arm and a leg if we go that route.
It's not rare for big corps to run into situations like this. So, sometimes it's smarter to hire a few people with a BS in accounting (under the supervision of a CPA) who can manually do whatever needs to be done using raw data.
Last edited by Liar_Liar; 07-08-2019 at 10:01 AM..
AI will replace some jobs but adds new ones if you know where to look - hence the "catch". Some people probably don't know where to look once AI enters their field.
Look ahead and report back. I firmly reject that the trope that all new tech brings scads of new jobs in some vaguely defined fields applies this time around, and I think reality is going to chew such complacent posterior thinking quite viciously.
1-2 Desktop, devices support
2 people to manage: infrastructure
2 people to manage: security, network
3 people in app development.
zero QA because they don't care about software quality.
zero BA because they don't care about whether the software has good working requirements
zero cybersecurity workers to do the bidding of the cybersecurity management. So hackings will increase and more costs in the long run.
This won't end well, but at least the CEO's bonus check will go up. That is what is important. /s
It depends on the niche. For example, the demand for manual software testers has decreased due to automation of tests with tools like Selenium, Cucumber, Appium, Grid, Microsoft Test Manager, TestNG, Junit, etc. But the demand for software development engineers in testing (SDET) has increased.
And there's no way for manual QA's to get into automation because there are no automation QA jobs that require no experience to get in. Employers don't count manual experience for automation roles and QA's who teach themselves automation are locked out.
Quote:
AI will replace some jobs but adds new ones if you know where to look - hence the "catch". Some people probably don't know where to look once AI enters their field.
The "catch" is a catch-22.
There are no jobs that require no experience. People learn new things and then get rejected by employers for not having experience.
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.
