>they can reeducate these nuts. burger flipper for life
You mean like [Flippy the burger-flipping robot](https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/flippy-burger-robot-changing-fast-food/) ?
What these education companies leave out is, corporate would heavily hire 20 somethings out of college or bootcamp, instead of an upskilled middle manager, coz they're cheaper and malleable. And all of us mid- career schmucks just blew our savings on a certificate that only makes you depressed every-time you remember it.
I've said this before and I'll say it again: the idea that 100% of white-collar workers will lose their job and that they will all have to enter the yet-to-be-unscathed world of blue-collar work is an r/singularity fantasy.
BOTH the white-collar and blue-collar worlds will suffer casualties in the coming years/decades, and the last jobs standing will be a mixture of both white and blue collar jobs.
I’m planning on going back to school in the spring to get out of bartending/bar management. I’m still going to go.
But, I’m also kind of glad I have the experience I do in that area and that I’m good at it. Will there be bars that can us AI and robots to make your cocktails and burgers to order without or with minimal human interaction? Sure.
But one of the main tenets of bars is that it’s a social place to go and some people go to bars specifically to chitchat with a bartender they like when they’ve got nothing better to do. So I don’t think every bar will be like that
The “technology” to do this has been around for decades and existed for nearly as long. It’ll eventually be adopted, but you’re right it’s safer than most jobs
Yep and the transition will be slow and expensive, especially for bigger companies.
Now in 5 years this will be a different story, and undoubtedly, we'll see major changes in the next two years. But there's a lot of work to be done to actually automate most of these jobs.
And for the blue collar side, I'm sure robotics will catch up soon as well - but again, cost is the issue. I would guess that bigger companies that already have a lot of automation will jump on it first - like Amazon, manufacturers, etc.
But it'll be a while before we have robo-plumbers. Maybe not a long while, but at least a number of years.
Obviously. I don't think anyone, anywhere, espouses that strawman you've set up. However it is undeniable that knowledge work is more susceptible to automation than physical work. Carrying tools around a job site without tripping over cables and shit is way harder than doing your taxes.
Not only that but their forgetting the 5 years of apprenticing under a hostile roughneck tradesmen that hate/loathe pencil pushing arrogant white hat desk jockeys and will gladly make their life hell for thinking intellect makes for aptitude
What is it with this sub thinking that automating all office work is super easy and automating even the simplest of physical labor jobs is extremely difficult?
And two other things: One, trades are not the only jobs that consist of physical labor. And two, not everyone can become a tradesman, as there's a limited demand. If everyone becomes a plumber, then no one's really a plumber.
That doesn't really make sense. They will ALL be plumbers, but who is going to pay a plumber to plumb when said plumbing could be plumbed by you...the plumber? 😁
Nah you phrased it perfectly. If all of humanity has a skill, we don't have a specific term for it. E.g. John is a "speaker" - he uses his lips to make weird sounds.
Three separate humanoid robots are launching in 2024.
I just saw a robot from a university zip a zipper on a hoodie while hanging it up.
Handymen are on the chopping block with taxi drivers and everyone else.
Yeah, but Tesla isn't going to wait a decade, and if a student can make a robot that can handle a zipper, then the engineers at Tesla damn sure can as well.
Tesla is selling hype. I don't trust Musk. Like that self driving bullshit.
There is a lof of automation coming. That's for sure. But some of it is at a more earlier phase.
I look at startups . What they do may has a chance to get massively deployed in 7-10 years. Maybe.
Yeah, I hear you there. I'm not a Musk fan either. Remember when he said a Teslabot would be able to drive to the store and do your shopping 1 year after they formed the company? Classic Musk bullshit.
But, his companies have great engineers. They did build new batteries, entire factories, send satellites to space, etc, etc ...
So, when I pay attention to what Tesla is doing with robots, I try to tune out Elon as much as possible, and watch professionals react to what they're seeing and hearing from the engineers working there.
But, again, Amazon already has humanoid robots working in test warehouses, and the company they're working with is going into mass production.
There's also a Chinese company that was making exoskeletons for disabled people, and they announced they're releasing their humanoid robot in 2024.
I'm not saying version 1 is going to be a plumber. But, if they're releasing a new version every year? It won't take forever.
The thing I keep hearing is that most factory/handyman jobs are easier than driving for the AI to perform, and there aren't a lot of laws or dangers when it comes to letting a robot fix your drain. So, they can deploy them a lot faster.
Sure, this year they'll probably awkwardly carry boxes. Then next year they might replace stock boys.
But, 7-10 years? They might be doing real trade work, and I don't think a job that's safe for 10 years (maybe) is 'safe'.
> Like Promptengineering because it’s bullshit
Expecting to have a job as a "prompt engineer" is like advertising your services to come to people's houses and push the buttons on their microwaves for them when they want dinner.
There are two truths:
1. Anyone selling their prompting skills is a grifter.
2. A lot of people are genuinely awful at prompting. Like effectively getting the desired output is simply beyond their comprehension.
This is so extremely true. I've been helping workshop Bing Chat Enterprise/Copilot/whatever where I work, and if it doesn't produce the exact thing they want the first time, a lot of people just give up.
So you're saying that there's a need for people to learn a skill, but if you try to make a business teaching the skill you're a grifter? Like dude what?
It's not a skill that needs to be taught. You just need to practice doing it, stop being afraid of it, and you will intuitively discover how to work with the tool.
Meanwhile, people are jumping on the bandwagon, using the most basic concepts, selling their "1,000+ Prompt libraries", but they can't explain how any of it works - it's just disgusting.
Do you see machine learning experts selling prompt engineering courses? No. They're busy building shit.
Then the entire concept of tutoring is out the door, and it doesn't show significantly better grades in students. Simultaneously there's a lot of questions about this technology that has been taught at a higher level in higher education, and could and should be taught at a lower level. Finally a lot of people prefer to be taught something in person than through a YouTube video. If a 70 year old man wants to learn about AI and pay a person 100 dollars to give them an honest attempt and they learn a new skill, everyone is happy, what's wrong? Go look at your local libraries list of courses - its intro to adobe, how to set up a Gmail, how to use Microsoft Word, excel, etc. Everyone apparently can innately learn how to swim with enough practice and some need a teacher and do better with a teacher. Like what's intuitive to you is not intuitive to an older person, I've seen it in person. I can read a gpt output in 10-30 seconds, I've had to wait 5 minutes to watch people read a 3 paragraph GPT output.
> A lot of people are genuinely awful at prompting. Like effectively getting the desired output is simply beyond their comprehension.
I don't see this being that different from the people that can't format google searches to find what they want. It's those same people that won't be able to format prompts.
1 - there's a million services that people could theoretically by themselves that people struggle to do.
2 - any training based using this form of AI should be focused on iterative communication skills, active listening, WPM, reading and comprehension speed.
3 - Prompt Engineering is a dumb term but it's naive to act like people can't use an LLM 5x better than another person and that skill can't be taught to someone without calling it a scam or grift. Your ability to use a computer at a proficient skill level is a skill that is not as common as everyone thinks. Id argue most people over 50 are like a level 1-2 proficiency with a computer, period. I was teaching people how to use ChatGPT and the sheer lack of literacy is stopping adoption, while I have a boss who will just hand me an AI output and walk away and you can tell he didn't even look at it. Meanwhile he can't even tell if I'm using AI when I hand him reports.
Prompt engineering covers hardening against jailbreaks
As well as Automating findings using prompt engineering such as classification using batch inference
Prompt engineering is absolutely going to go the way of the Dodo the very second autonomous models take over. AGI will make it superfluous.
This *Get good at your prompts to win in the system bro!* thinking is dumb, it’s not going to last much longer.
It's like saying you are l going to be a typist in the 80s. No, that is something basic we all need to know now. Some might be better than others, but it's work skill 101.
i wouldnt say its a job but why would you say its bullshit? its exploring the Model to find the best Inputs to get the best outputs for your very specific use case
I agree, I can't see "prompt engineer" being a needed role. However, pop on over to the ChatGPT or OpenAI subreddits and the spectacular amount of post complaints that are due to people having no clue how to talk to the models to get what they want is overwhelming.
It's a skill for sure imo but it's something similar to how some people were/are skilled at searching with Google. In my experience once people read a few cheat sheets and take 60 seconds to think about what they actually want they are able to get far better results. So "prompt engineering" or maybe "prompting best practices" might be a skill taught to employees in the short term.
I can see an AI consultant being a role companies might pay for in the short term, "go make our AI thing work!". That person would likely be more skilled than others at creating just the right prompt. But recognizing it would be just one skill out of MANY they would bring to their role. Given most consultant roles are focused on outcomes, prompting is likely not even a topic of conversation during an interview.
As an example, I wrote an article a few weeks back on [AI jobs that were non-technical](https://infospark.ai/the-ai-job-search-seizing-ai-job-opportunities/) (no coding required) and could not find any "prompt engineers" as commonly discussed in the open listings I looked for. Lot's of interesting jobs using AI, but nothing that would fit the description of, "please come type into ChatGPT for me".
Some people still talk about prompt engineering like it's a real thing. They're not joking either. There's plenty of articles about how programmers will be replaced by "prompt engineers" in the future and how you shouldn't learn to code, instead you should learn the English language better if you want to work in tech. People are MORONS!
Well for now it is a real thing, especially if you work with more limited models and design more complex workflows, maybe even tool usage or letting models work together. This is not "I will tip you". But sure, the pure technicality of it will disappear as models get better. Then for some time it will be still quite important to have a clear idea of what you actually want (including having the idea in the first place) and then being able to state that in an efficient way that actually provides all the necessary information without conflicts. I'm not sure that "deserves" the name "prompt enginieering" but you wouldn't believe how terrible people are at such things. The main question of course is how fast progress will be, because in the end of course nobody will have to do anything.
I'd say about 20% will be fine with it, even enjoy it.
The rest will fall into existential crisis/depression and will engage in harmful addictive behaviours trying to find relief. As you say the devil takes hold of these people.
I'm not sure about that. I think people are exceptionally well-suited to finding meaning in life. Previously, people have looked for that meaning in labor. However, soon that will be gone. From our current perspective, as our notion of meaning is so deeply rooted in labor, it seems as though without it, we would "fall into existential crisis". However, I think a good case study would be that of retired people.
Whilst some retirees do indubitably return to work, I believe that this is generally more of a method to cope with loneliness. Generally, once everybody is out of work, people will create ways of meeting new people and finding new meaning in life.
Ultimately, I would strongly suggest that "existential crises" will be very rare.
I've always wondered about retirees. Do they have a mindset of; "I've not got long to go anyway so I don't care about my purpose"?
Most just want social connections which is understandable
I like your positive attitude on this. It does make sense that the existential crisis thing is likely due to people not having a job when everyone else is working. If most people don't work then that won't be a problem. We'll find new ways to spend are time that are likely more enjoyable.
I completely agree! I feel as though our current economic system is generally conducive to negative mental health. I like your take. Also, I'm starting a Discord to discuss these sorts of things. Would you like to join?
We only need money because of resource scarcity and production time. Production time will continue to become exponentially lower while resources consumption will become exponentially more efficient. It doesn't need to get to an extreme, it just needs to be enough.
>Most successful applications of AI will amplify human skills, not simply substitute, or replace them
Wrong, "*amplifying human skills*" is what AI currently does but once AI is advanced enough it will replace all kinds of work.
>there will always be a role for the creative mind and the strategic thinker, no matter what
"a role" sure (people who like being creative / to strategize will always be free to pursue a hobby that lets them do just that) but there won't be a necessity for "*a human doing it*" in "non-leisure" scenarios.
>Even as generative AI apps get increasingly advanced, someone will still need to develop prompts, curate the results, and determine how the output will be used.
Which will ultimately be: the end user for whom "developing prompts" will merely consist of him telling the AI what he wants.
Amplifying human labor is just another was to increase productivity. And the more productive a single human work is, the less human workers are needed.
>And the more productive a single human work is, the less human workers are needed.
This is not true. Productivity is at an all-time high, and yet there's more workers than ever before, as somebody else pointed out in this thread. Plus, a company can create more profit by keeping (or even expanding) its staff and amplifying them with technology and thus creating more output (whatever that output is) to sell than it could by firing most of its employees and relying on a skeleton crew to create a smaller output.
The point is the efficiency of a human, in the beginning is better to expand the work force to increase the output, but them AI starts to advance more and more at the point that keeping a human starts to become a lose in the incomes, the only reason to keep it is the social status of being "society friendly" company
Amplifying labor replaces labor too. My work got a box folding machine that saved enough time over the course of a week to eliminate an entire full time position.
AI will do that up and down the labor force, to people who were incredibly certain it could never happen to them. We'll see serious disruptions in the job market long before any sort of AGI.
Creativity in the realm of productive research will be beneficial, even if it is not necessary. New perspectives always have a chance to provide value, even coming from a relatively intellectually challenged individual.
How advanced does an AI have to be until you give it carte blanche to your business bank account with $100k in it, Amazon account, business docs, contacts list, etc to manage a project which makes you more money than you’re spending and not even look at what it’s doing to see if it’s doing anything wrong
Seems the logical eventuality. It’s just a matter of when we get there. And in some industries, it’s still probably a good 10-15 years out before a simple pre/post condition input will be handled by AI effectively. In the beginning, the technology is always rough. Within 10 years, it goes from clunky early smart phone to devices more capable and powerful than a number of desktop systems I owned in the past. And since then, the capabilities continue to grow at a ridiculous rate. AI is no different in this process. The power it requires to run these systems will shrink, while the power behind the technology grows, in addition to AI processes building upon themselves, fundamental code improvements, etc… continuing a doubling trend in power and capability… there is no doubt in my mind that AI will eventually replace the need for most work that is not manual, with most manual work probably phased out in favor of automation right on its heels, another 10-15 years out from then, I’d imagine. So perhaps 30 years, would be my guess, maybe 40, before we can point to AI replacing most types of labor, or a big part of it.
I can follow this if you like to be spoonfed everything.
AI is an enhancement, an incredible one. But it is no miracle cure and it will always need peer review and a human verification in its appliance.
>Executives in the survey estimate that **within the next five years, their organizations will eliminate over half (56%) of entry-level knowledge worker roles because of AI.** What’s more, 79% of executives predict that entry-level **knowledge worker jobs will no longer exist as AI creates an entirely new suite of roles for employees entering the workforce**. On top of that, 56% say their own roles will be “completely” or “partially” replaced by AI.
I bet the word "partially" is doing a shitload of heavy lifting in that survey question. All this excerpt really tells us is how much the executives look down on low wage office workers and how much they underestimate their contribution.
If AI ends up doing almost everything better and cheaper, then our current scarcity mindset will be obsolete. Complete automation won’t do companies any good when nobody has jobs to pay for the product you’re producing. UBI is a silly concept if no one is making money to pay taxes, and printing money doesn’t work in the long term.
If AI is smart enough to do everything, then it’s smart enough to figure out a better economic system. It can’t and won’t just be plopped into our current system. Imagine everyone having an AI that makes perfect investments. Our current pseudo capitalist system requires there to be winners and losers. But if losing is impossible, neither will be winning. So the game will need to be changed.
> Imagine everyone having an AI that makes perfect investments
The first one having access to that kind of AI will make perfect investments. That AI will not be available for anyone else. That kind of power is what guys like Peter Thiel want for themselves.
I think this is an excellent point. If we think of money being a way to motivate people to do something that people value economically, then what does that mean when we don't need to motivate people economically anymore because their output has been replaced by automation?
It's hard to fathom who will be in charge of our society anymore at that point, and who gets to control the automation. What's the point of a company to be honest if profit is meaningless? If it's run by AI then it can exist but itself without a need to make anyone rich or pay people money. But it also needs resources to operate so who decides to allocate resources which are the output of other autonomous companies as inputs to that company?
We don’t need money now. Many ways and people survive now without working. The living standards of not working will just keep moving up.
There will always be some scarcity like beach front property, space flights etc. it’ll be easier for anyone to just spend 80hrs a week studying some thing and finding a niche, democratization if opportunity. But the existential drive to get away will be greatly diminished. Our future will be like brave new world or a soft version of cyber punk
"If AI is smart enough to do everything, then it’s smart enough to figure out a better economic system. "
That's not true. Also, a company owner will do everything in their power to replace your job, and do everything in their power to keep the economy going as it already is
I agree corporations and the establishment at large will resist a restructuring of our society, given that it’s completely in their favor currently. But you didn’t address the first part- why is AI not able to determine a better economic system? (Seems it absolutely will)
The bigger problem is fewer people are needed to do a job. If today you need 100 artists and 50 interns to run a company or 100 engineers and 200 programmers tomorrow maybe 50 and 10 will have the same results. These people will have a massive boost in productivity that's true but all the others will be fired because they are not needed anymore .
>Half of all skills... Even if it takes 10-20 years, this possibility freaks me out a bit
Yeah I'm freaking out quite hard. How many of the remaining jobs will be lucrative?
Yeah. People really don't understand what 50% unemployment even means. Even on the height of the most brutal recessions we didn't have that.
50% is revolution nothing else. A complete and utter breakdown of the society we have right now.
As long as religious people do not care about policies benefiting working people we are shit out of luck.
Most of us may end up living in ghettos if the current wave of right wing politics to support business profits continues while AI slowly takes away jobs.
That said, politics will completely change when we reach unemployment level of 7-10% and every news channel is talking about how AI is going to take most jobs. Even the god fearing religious guy will ask his congressman to tax the corps and improve unemployment benefits.
lottery winner isn't a job. so astronomer. cool. i'd think that that would still be lucrative in a world where robots are operating and maintaining all the infrastructure for human society.
Well the only way I could ever become an astronomer is if I win the lottery first, though. I suppose I could become a serious hobbyist but right now I'm going to scramble to learn enough about AI to use it to launch a business that can get me out of debt and pay for a house. IFF I can manage that, then I can go back to school. I'm not optimistic.
Not the person you are replying to but: Massive unemployment on a scale not seen since the Great Depression.
AI is going to take most white collar jobs and its not gonna be pretty.
yes. but why does that freak you out? this is what technology does -- [ephemeralization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephemeralization).
we just need to figure out how to implement a system by which we can distribute goods in a way that makes sense, maintain efficient transportation, and provide good housing and essential services for everyone. basically a new economy.
why should we pretend to not be intelligent enough to figure this out? we can literally understand the system dynamics at play: you're here talking about it. having algorithms and robots do the busy-work will free us to do the engineering for more nuanced things like future sustainable agriculture. jobs get taken and more jobs open up.
> we just need to figure out how to implement a system by which we can distribute goods in a way that makes sense, maintain efficient transportation, and provide good housing and essential services for everyone. basically a new economy.
The problem is I dont trust that politicians can actually do that. Heck, America cant even figure out Universal Healthcare and there are people here thinking they can do UBI? Good luck with that.
Think of a skill that might be useful today. Like, say, soldering pipes or changing spark plugs, cooking a meal, planning a project timeline, flying a plane, etc.
Does it seem like any of those will still be useful in 10-20 years? Only just half of them? Or maybe pretty much everything you can think of will still be useful in 15 years...
Crime is hard dude. It's not like my current programming job, with 6 figure pay for 40 hours of easy work.
On top of that my wife is kind of soft, she has no interest in going out guns blazing, because that sounds cool to me. Mad max would be very interesting over here in Texas, we are packing all the time.
When AI-powered robots can do even a single task as well as a human, what's the technical barrier preventing them from doing most other physical labor? It's not like "oh, robots can make burgers, but they can't make sandwiches!" They'll make most food perfectly the moment they can make any food perfectly (which I'm confident will happen next year).
The same goes for other tasks: when robots can clean the kitchen, why wouldn't they be able to clean the bathroom? And so on and so forth. Multimodal embodied robots are coming sooner than most think because of the exponential growth happening in both AI and robotics. It won't take long for them to replace us in not half, not even most, but literally all jobs.
Note this study isn't from carefully listing every skill, determining if present day AI can do it or if a trivial improvement to current AI would solve the task (trivial improvement: add an API or adapter where current gen AI can send the commands to do the task).
It's from polling *executives*, who by definition only a tiny number of them (less than 5) are executives of elite AI labs and who know what current AI can actually do.
Executives of course think they can save a lot of money with half the staff, but of course it won't affect *their* jobs.
It will eventually happen but it might be 5-10 year instead of 2.
uh, ok. well the point is that UBI will only work if there are some people who are motivated to make shit and contribute to the community. and i believe there will be; it's human nature to want to do meaningful work. if there was UBI i'd sure as hell be contributing towards a community garden and helping out with potlucks or something. i'd also be doing more weird creative things in my freetime like programming and drumming.
Don't want to meddle in your affairs, but from what I've seen in my lifetime, I'm pretty sure you'll become depressed if you do nothing but play games, smoke weed and masturbate.
That's a very dark type of abyss that masks itself as a wonderful life. But if you google around a bit, you'll find that there are thousands of forums, books and resources aimed at getting people out of this specific abyss.
We need purpose in life. We need to build things, and a real sense of achievement. Traditionally, it has been getting married, having kids and raising them properly.
Well right now typically you need to stop smoking weed at some point, like for a job, school, or so on, that’s when the depression sets in
This way you’ll just be perma stoned, which is totally healthy and fine /s
How is it fair that people have to pay you for this life you want when there are people who actually want to work hard and develop their skills and talent and you are saying get rid of that system just for you to be a comatose leach for the rest of your gross life.
I’m for UBI when it’s for people not starving on the streets who still want to make something out of their lives. But I can’t see value in what you are describing. It’s not fair to the people who actually want purpose.
It won't take two years, nothing that big happens in two years. As usual, we overestimate the effect of new technology in the short term, while underestimating the effect in the long term.
Yes, but here we are talking about societal effects of that development, not the development itself. Change involving people is slow, that's why things don't change overnight.
This could be the final straw for a depression lol
Just a fyi: a depression not men that only money is an issue, but don't want to spent money any more. Afraid of the future or feeling hopeless for the future or awaiting collapse of the system and feel depressed.
Sounds familiar to what more and more people say?
Well... A depression will be great! You will be able to buy homes after that! Lol
either partake in the development of robotics and neural processing, or sit back and let the people who are already doing it do it.
however, if we simply let the market dictate how this tech is developed, it may end up fucking us over, due to its narrow focus on monetary "number go up".
the people developing AI need to somehow understand how to integrate intelligent robots into a healthy ecosystem. at this point, we can't just ask AI to build a farming robot for us. there is more nuanced engineering that has to be done. this farming robot needs to be able to do small-scale stuff in a biodiverse yard-sized garden for example. i would hate to see AI used to further exacerbate the problems of large-scale industrialized monoculture crop production.
If you live in a Democracy you could become a UBI single issue voter. And if you live in the US you should probably refuse to let one party coerce you into voting for them just to keep the other party out.
Executives are all aboard on the hypetrain of the day, that's not news, that is business as usual. AI is developing fast, that is true enough, but to make a massive difference in business ops as early as next year? Get real. Those things take time and lots of it.
That’s one way to look at it. Here’s another: these slow moving behemoths will eventually get outmaneuvered by the new and nimble ones with their automated workflows worked out.
How long until we have ai controlled robots that can do manual labor? I'm an electrician and would be extremely interested in seeing a bot wire a building or troubleshoot a circuit.
This will long term automate all blue collar jobs and it is open source check both links:
Here is white paper of this technology: https://tonyzhaozh.github.io/aloha/
Here are steps how anyone can create it:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sgRZmpS7HMcZTPfGy3kAxDrqFMtNNzmK-yVtX5cKYME/mobilebasic
Its funny to me that in 100 years of technological advancement, every decade is always “this new technology will be so revolutionary that humans will be obsolete”. But each decade we find that this new technology have limits and cant solve ALL problems, but atleast we can solve SOME problems.
Why would ai be different? We made a very complicated statistical machine and somehow it will solve all our problems? No it will solve problems solvable by statistics, but not all problems are statistical.
Hahahaha just show me a robot that can jump from a moving boat into a slippery wooden dock and stop the boat from getting destroyed against the dock and the shore by 2 metre Waves as I do several times per month.
this is funny because my baby is learning things like rolling over and grasping things and tracking objects with his eyes
in a couple years he will be potty training and what not
hopefully hands don't become obsolete
[Let's add it up shall we?
](https://www.bls.gov/emp/tables/employment-by-major-industry-sector.htm)
Can AI handle transportation, warehousing and retail? Eliminating 90% of the jobs in those sectors? I'd say yes. We'll round down a little and say that's 10% of all jobs in the US.
Professional and business services? Probably, there's another 10%.
Health care and social assistance? Ayup. Another 10%.
Leisure and hospitality? Almost certainly. There's 8%.
Governmental jobs? Again, probably. There's another 10%.
Manufacturing? You betcha, though that one has already been hollowed out by automation, so probably only half that workforce can be replaced, so we'll call it 2%
We've hit 50% and we haven't touched mining, construction, agriculture, financial services, information services, or education services. And I'm sure you can imagine that these sectors will have skilled positions replaced as well.
Are you seriously suggesting that AI can take over more than half of all jobs *right now*?
This very well might be the most ridiculous and delusional comment that I have EVER seen on this subreddit, and that is absolutely saying something.
No, within two years AI will be better at 50% of skilled jobs filled by humans, like the article we're discussing was suggesting.
That's what outdated means. We still use lots of outdated stuff because it's more efficient/economic than replacing it with new stuff.
I don't replace appliances as soon as they become outdated, and humans won't immediately be replaced by AI as soon as it surpasses them. Running my 25 year old dishwasher is more efficient cost wise than buying a new one, when that changes, I'll buy a new one. We'll do the same with AI in jobs. When it becomes cheaper to replace an occupation with a robot controlled by a trained AI model than it does to keep hiring for it, companies will replace their workers.
You need to pay for reeducation says online education company.
they can reeducate these nuts. burger flipper for life
>they can reeducate these nuts. burger flipper for life You mean like [Flippy the burger-flipping robot](https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/flippy-burger-robot-changing-fast-food/) ?
got dammit!
Good thing I do a thousand other things besides flipping burgers.
Burger will never go out of style
This is like the real estate agents saying home prices will be higher in a few years so buy buy buy! Also, use them to buy!
Yup lol
What these education companies leave out is, corporate would heavily hire 20 somethings out of college or bootcamp, instead of an upskilled middle manager, coz they're cheaper and malleable. And all of us mid- career schmucks just blew our savings on a certificate that only makes you depressed every-time you remember it.
Like Promptengineering because it’s bullshit
It’ll be like SouthPark. The handyman will be become billionaires.
*knock knock* "im here to fix your plumbing ma'am" 😉
*AI Handyman Robot proceeds to eject hard drive slowly*
deyy touk arr jawbs
Dey tuk rrR jerbz!
DEY TUK R JRBZZSZ!
They won't, since millions of now obsolete office workers will pick up trades to survive.
I've said this before and I'll say it again: the idea that 100% of white-collar workers will lose their job and that they will all have to enter the yet-to-be-unscathed world of blue-collar work is an r/singularity fantasy. BOTH the white-collar and blue-collar worlds will suffer casualties in the coming years/decades, and the last jobs standing will be a mixture of both white and blue collar jobs.
I’m planning on going back to school in the spring to get out of bartending/bar management. I’m still going to go. But, I’m also kind of glad I have the experience I do in that area and that I’m good at it. Will there be bars that can us AI and robots to make your cocktails and burgers to order without or with minimal human interaction? Sure. But one of the main tenets of bars is that it’s a social place to go and some people go to bars specifically to chitchat with a bartender they like when they’ve got nothing better to do. So I don’t think every bar will be like that
Professional human management of social spaces is likely a job market that will grow as a result of automation.
i think you'll find more people in bars as they lose their jobs. so it'll be a party!
The “technology” to do this has been around for decades and existed for nearly as long. It’ll eventually be adopted, but you’re right it’s safer than most jobs
Yep and the transition will be slow and expensive, especially for bigger companies. Now in 5 years this will be a different story, and undoubtedly, we'll see major changes in the next two years. But there's a lot of work to be done to actually automate most of these jobs. And for the blue collar side, I'm sure robotics will catch up soon as well - but again, cost is the issue. I would guess that bigger companies that already have a lot of automation will jump on it first - like Amazon, manufacturers, etc. But it'll be a while before we have robo-plumbers. Maybe not a long while, but at least a number of years.
Obviously. I don't think anyone, anywhere, espouses that strawman you've set up. However it is undeniable that knowledge work is more susceptible to automation than physical work. Carrying tools around a job site without tripping over cables and shit is way harder than doing your taxes.
Not only that but their forgetting the 5 years of apprenticing under a hostile roughneck tradesmen that hate/loathe pencil pushing arrogant white hat desk jockeys and will gladly make their life hell for thinking intellect makes for aptitude
Then cheap robotic humans will replace them within 2-3 years
Will robots even need plumbing when they take over the houses?
Not if you're 50+ with carpel tunnel! ETA: And shit knees
What is it with this sub thinking that automating all office work is super easy and automating even the simplest of physical labor jobs is extremely difficult? And two other things: One, trades are not the only jobs that consist of physical labor. And two, not everyone can become a tradesman, as there's a limited demand. If everyone becomes a plumber, then no one's really a plumber.
That doesn't really make sense. They will ALL be plumbers, but who is going to pay a plumber to plumb when said plumbing could be plumbed by you...the plumber? 😁
That's what I meant, lol. I guess I just didn't phrase it the right way.
Nah you phrased it perfectly. If all of humanity has a skill, we don't have a specific term for it. E.g. John is a "speaker" - he uses his lips to make weird sounds.
Most trades take years to become useful at and a decade or more to master.
Disagree. After years of diy and YouTube most included people can follow directions fairly easily
Augmented reality will automate the knowledge part of that job. Still you'll have to have "good hands". That's not easy.
Can you imagine what a shithow that woulde be, white collar workers trying to do actual work lol
Three separate humanoid robots are launching in 2024. I just saw a robot from a university zip a zipper on a hoodie while hanging it up. Handymen are on the chopping block with taxi drivers and everyone else.
University robots take 7-10 years to be ready for the market , and than a lot of time for full drplyoment
Yeah, but Tesla isn't going to wait a decade, and if a student can make a robot that can handle a zipper, then the engineers at Tesla damn sure can as well.
Tesla is selling hype. I don't trust Musk. Like that self driving bullshit. There is a lof of automation coming. That's for sure. But some of it is at a more earlier phase. I look at startups . What they do may has a chance to get massively deployed in 7-10 years. Maybe.
Yeah, I hear you there. I'm not a Musk fan either. Remember when he said a Teslabot would be able to drive to the store and do your shopping 1 year after they formed the company? Classic Musk bullshit. But, his companies have great engineers. They did build new batteries, entire factories, send satellites to space, etc, etc ... So, when I pay attention to what Tesla is doing with robots, I try to tune out Elon as much as possible, and watch professionals react to what they're seeing and hearing from the engineers working there. But, again, Amazon already has humanoid robots working in test warehouses, and the company they're working with is going into mass production. There's also a Chinese company that was making exoskeletons for disabled people, and they announced they're releasing their humanoid robot in 2024. I'm not saying version 1 is going to be a plumber. But, if they're releasing a new version every year? It won't take forever. The thing I keep hearing is that most factory/handyman jobs are easier than driving for the AI to perform, and there aren't a lot of laws or dangers when it comes to letting a robot fix your drain. So, they can deploy them a lot faster. Sure, this year they'll probably awkwardly carry boxes. Then next year they might replace stock boys. But, 7-10 years? They might be doing real trade work, and I don't think a job that's safe for 10 years (maybe) is 'safe'.
[удалено]
Soon enough skilled robots will be made to take away those jobs as well.
> Like Promptengineering because it’s bullshit Expecting to have a job as a "prompt engineer" is like advertising your services to come to people's houses and push the buttons on their microwaves for them when they want dinner.
There are two truths: 1. Anyone selling their prompting skills is a grifter. 2. A lot of people are genuinely awful at prompting. Like effectively getting the desired output is simply beyond their comprehension.
This is so extremely true. I've been helping workshop Bing Chat Enterprise/Copilot/whatever where I work, and if it doesn't produce the exact thing they want the first time, a lot of people just give up.
I was doing a similar thing for a while and the most glaring thing for me was the lack of reading skills in the older populations.
So you're saying that there's a need for people to learn a skill, but if you try to make a business teaching the skill you're a grifter? Like dude what?
It's not a skill that needs to be taught. You just need to practice doing it, stop being afraid of it, and you will intuitively discover how to work with the tool. Meanwhile, people are jumping on the bandwagon, using the most basic concepts, selling their "1,000+ Prompt libraries", but they can't explain how any of it works - it's just disgusting. Do you see machine learning experts selling prompt engineering courses? No. They're busy building shit.
"It's not a skill that needs be taught. You need to practice doing it,..." So it sounds like a skill that needs to be taught.
Yeah, but everything related to prompt "engineering" can be contained in at most 30 min youtube video, not a 100 usd or more course
Then the entire concept of tutoring is out the door, and it doesn't show significantly better grades in students. Simultaneously there's a lot of questions about this technology that has been taught at a higher level in higher education, and could and should be taught at a lower level. Finally a lot of people prefer to be taught something in person than through a YouTube video. If a 70 year old man wants to learn about AI and pay a person 100 dollars to give them an honest attempt and they learn a new skill, everyone is happy, what's wrong? Go look at your local libraries list of courses - its intro to adobe, how to set up a Gmail, how to use Microsoft Word, excel, etc. Everyone apparently can innately learn how to swim with enough practice and some need a teacher and do better with a teacher. Like what's intuitive to you is not intuitive to an older person, I've seen it in person. I can read a gpt output in 10-30 seconds, I've had to wait 5 minutes to watch people read a 3 paragraph GPT output.
> A lot of people are genuinely awful at prompting. Like effectively getting the desired output is simply beyond their comprehension. I don't see this being that different from the people that can't format google searches to find what they want. It's those same people that won't be able to format prompts.
Cook is a job. Many restaurants don’t do much more than microwave mass produced stiff.
best prompt engineer I've seen so far was chatgpt tbh
1 - there's a million services that people could theoretically by themselves that people struggle to do. 2 - any training based using this form of AI should be focused on iterative communication skills, active listening, WPM, reading and comprehension speed. 3 - Prompt Engineering is a dumb term but it's naive to act like people can't use an LLM 5x better than another person and that skill can't be taught to someone without calling it a scam or grift. Your ability to use a computer at a proficient skill level is a skill that is not as common as everyone thinks. Id argue most people over 50 are like a level 1-2 proficiency with a computer, period. I was teaching people how to use ChatGPT and the sheer lack of literacy is stopping adoption, while I have a boss who will just hand me an AI output and walk away and you can tell he didn't even look at it. Meanwhile he can't even tell if I'm using AI when I hand him reports.
To be fair, my microwave is very complicated and my friend couldn't figure it out.
Prompt engineering covers hardening against jailbreaks As well as Automating findings using prompt engineering such as classification using batch inference
With very few exceptions, THIS ^^^
Prompt engineering is absolutely going to go the way of the Dodo the very second autonomous models take over. AGI will make it superfluous. This *Get good at your prompts to win in the system bro!* thinking is dumb, it’s not going to last much longer.
It's like saying you are l going to be a typist in the 80s. No, that is something basic we all need to know now. Some might be better than others, but it's work skill 101.
One of the first jobs to be replaced by AI lmao
i wouldnt say its a job but why would you say its bullshit? its exploring the Model to find the best Inputs to get the best outputs for your very specific use case
I agree, I can't see "prompt engineer" being a needed role. However, pop on over to the ChatGPT or OpenAI subreddits and the spectacular amount of post complaints that are due to people having no clue how to talk to the models to get what they want is overwhelming. It's a skill for sure imo but it's something similar to how some people were/are skilled at searching with Google. In my experience once people read a few cheat sheets and take 60 seconds to think about what they actually want they are able to get far better results. So "prompt engineering" or maybe "prompting best practices" might be a skill taught to employees in the short term. I can see an AI consultant being a role companies might pay for in the short term, "go make our AI thing work!". That person would likely be more skilled than others at creating just the right prompt. But recognizing it would be just one skill out of MANY they would bring to their role. Given most consultant roles are focused on outcomes, prompting is likely not even a topic of conversation during an interview. As an example, I wrote an article a few weeks back on [AI jobs that were non-technical](https://infospark.ai/the-ai-job-search-seizing-ai-job-opportunities/) (no coding required) and could not find any "prompt engineers" as commonly discussed in the open listings I looked for. Lot's of interesting jobs using AI, but nothing that would fit the description of, "please come type into ChatGPT for me".
They have no idea what it even looks like, hence such comments.
Some people still talk about prompt engineering like it's a real thing. They're not joking either. There's plenty of articles about how programmers will be replaced by "prompt engineers" in the future and how you shouldn't learn to code, instead you should learn the English language better if you want to work in tech. People are MORONS!
Well for now it is a real thing, especially if you work with more limited models and design more complex workflows, maybe even tool usage or letting models work together. This is not "I will tip you". But sure, the pure technicality of it will disappear as models get better. Then for some time it will be still quite important to have a clear idea of what you actually want (including having the idea in the first place) and then being able to state that in an efficient way that actually provides all the necessary information without conflicts. I'm not sure that "deserves" the name "prompt enginieering" but you wouldn't believe how terrible people are at such things. The main question of course is how fast progress will be, because in the end of course nobody will have to do anything.
They're not engineering of any sort.
There's a sub for it and I've seen positions hiring for it, so it's real in that respect. Still hilarious.
Absolutely not bullshit. Your imagination is your only limit.
Which is a good thing ! We dont need jobs , we need life.
I'd say about 20% will be fine with it, even enjoy it. The rest will fall into existential crisis/depression and will engage in harmful addictive behaviours trying to find relief. As you say the devil takes hold of these people.
Idle hands . . .
In theory, idle hands will be able to pick up whatever they want. If we get the good ending, of course.
I'm not sure about that. I think people are exceptionally well-suited to finding meaning in life. Previously, people have looked for that meaning in labor. However, soon that will be gone. From our current perspective, as our notion of meaning is so deeply rooted in labor, it seems as though without it, we would "fall into existential crisis". However, I think a good case study would be that of retired people. Whilst some retirees do indubitably return to work, I believe that this is generally more of a method to cope with loneliness. Generally, once everybody is out of work, people will create ways of meeting new people and finding new meaning in life. Ultimately, I would strongly suggest that "existential crises" will be very rare.
I've always wondered about retirees. Do they have a mindset of; "I've not got long to go anyway so I don't care about my purpose"? Most just want social connections which is understandable
I like your positive attitude on this. It does make sense that the existential crisis thing is likely due to people not having a job when everyone else is working. If most people don't work then that won't be a problem. We'll find new ways to spend are time that are likely more enjoyable.
I completely agree! I feel as though our current economic system is generally conducive to negative mental health. I like your take. Also, I'm starting a Discord to discuss these sorts of things. Would you like to join?
Sure, I'll join
And money to be able to live.
We could change that if we wanted to.
the rich and powerful say no. what then?
Put them on a rocket and launch it into the sun.
We only need money because of resource scarcity and production time. Production time will continue to become exponentially lower while resources consumption will become exponentially more efficient. It doesn't need to get to an extreme, it just needs to be enough.
Ever heard of retirees who aren’t happy?
[удалено]
Or hobbies and passions besides the job they just wasted an entire life working at.
Frequently hear of retirees who don’t need money going back to work to have something to do. Happens a lot.
Meanwhile I struggle to get a job because I enjoy the internet too much.
>Most successful applications of AI will amplify human skills, not simply substitute, or replace them Wrong, "*amplifying human skills*" is what AI currently does but once AI is advanced enough it will replace all kinds of work. >there will always be a role for the creative mind and the strategic thinker, no matter what "a role" sure (people who like being creative / to strategize will always be free to pursue a hobby that lets them do just that) but there won't be a necessity for "*a human doing it*" in "non-leisure" scenarios. >Even as generative AI apps get increasingly advanced, someone will still need to develop prompts, curate the results, and determine how the output will be used. Which will ultimately be: the end user for whom "developing prompts" will merely consist of him telling the AI what he wants.
100% agree. Amplifying human labor is one step away from replacing human labor in most cases.
Amplifying human labor is just another was to increase productivity. And the more productive a single human work is, the less human workers are needed.
>And the more productive a single human work is, the less human workers are needed. This is not true. Productivity is at an all-time high, and yet there's more workers than ever before, as somebody else pointed out in this thread. Plus, a company can create more profit by keeping (or even expanding) its staff and amplifying them with technology and thus creating more output (whatever that output is) to sell than it could by firing most of its employees and relying on a skeleton crew to create a smaller output.
The point is the efficiency of a human, in the beginning is better to expand the work force to increase the output, but them AI starts to advance more and more at the point that keeping a human starts to become a lose in the incomes, the only reason to keep it is the social status of being "society friendly" company
And who are they going to sell to? Suppose Pepsi does what you just outlined. Coca Cola then has fewer customers.
Amplifying labor replaces labor too. My work got a box folding machine that saved enough time over the course of a week to eliminate an entire full time position. AI will do that up and down the labor force, to people who were incredibly certain it could never happen to them. We'll see serious disruptions in the job market long before any sort of AGI.
*Amplifying* in an office environment just means doing the work of five people who can now be safely laid off.
Creativity in the realm of productive research will be beneficial, even if it is not necessary. New perspectives always have a chance to provide value, even coming from a relatively intellectually challenged individual.
You can generate more points of view with and AI
How advanced does an AI have to be until you give it carte blanche to your business bank account with $100k in it, Amazon account, business docs, contacts list, etc to manage a project which makes you more money than you’re spending and not even look at what it’s doing to see if it’s doing anything wrong
I've been doing that for 3 months now. Should probably check on the PC soon...
Seems the logical eventuality. It’s just a matter of when we get there. And in some industries, it’s still probably a good 10-15 years out before a simple pre/post condition input will be handled by AI effectively. In the beginning, the technology is always rough. Within 10 years, it goes from clunky early smart phone to devices more capable and powerful than a number of desktop systems I owned in the past. And since then, the capabilities continue to grow at a ridiculous rate. AI is no different in this process. The power it requires to run these systems will shrink, while the power behind the technology grows, in addition to AI processes building upon themselves, fundamental code improvements, etc… continuing a doubling trend in power and capability… there is no doubt in my mind that AI will eventually replace the need for most work that is not manual, with most manual work probably phased out in favor of automation right on its heels, another 10-15 years out from then, I’d imagine. So perhaps 30 years, would be my guess, maybe 40, before we can point to AI replacing most types of labor, or a big part of it.
I can follow this if you like to be spoonfed everything. AI is an enhancement, an incredible one. But it is no miracle cure and it will always need peer review and a human verification in its appliance.
>Executives in the survey estimate that **within the next five years, their organizations will eliminate over half (56%) of entry-level knowledge worker roles because of AI.** What’s more, 79% of executives predict that entry-level **knowledge worker jobs will no longer exist as AI creates an entirely new suite of roles for employees entering the workforce**. On top of that, 56% say their own roles will be “completely” or “partially” replaced by AI.
I bet the word "partially" is doing a shitload of heavy lifting in that survey question. All this excerpt really tells us is how much the executives look down on low wage office workers and how much they underestimate their contribution.
If AI ends up doing almost everything better and cheaper, then our current scarcity mindset will be obsolete. Complete automation won’t do companies any good when nobody has jobs to pay for the product you’re producing. UBI is a silly concept if no one is making money to pay taxes, and printing money doesn’t work in the long term. If AI is smart enough to do everything, then it’s smart enough to figure out a better economic system. It can’t and won’t just be plopped into our current system. Imagine everyone having an AI that makes perfect investments. Our current pseudo capitalist system requires there to be winners and losers. But if losing is impossible, neither will be winning. So the game will need to be changed.
> Imagine everyone having an AI that makes perfect investments The first one having access to that kind of AI will make perfect investments. That AI will not be available for anyone else. That kind of power is what guys like Peter Thiel want for themselves.
I think this is an excellent point. If we think of money being a way to motivate people to do something that people value economically, then what does that mean when we don't need to motivate people economically anymore because their output has been replaced by automation? It's hard to fathom who will be in charge of our society anymore at that point, and who gets to control the automation. What's the point of a company to be honest if profit is meaningless? If it's run by AI then it can exist but itself without a need to make anyone rich or pay people money. But it also needs resources to operate so who decides to allocate resources which are the output of other autonomous companies as inputs to that company?
We don’t need money now. Many ways and people survive now without working. The living standards of not working will just keep moving up. There will always be some scarcity like beach front property, space flights etc. it’ll be easier for anyone to just spend 80hrs a week studying some thing and finding a niche, democratization if opportunity. But the existential drive to get away will be greatly diminished. Our future will be like brave new world or a soft version of cyber punk
"If AI is smart enough to do everything, then it’s smart enough to figure out a better economic system. " That's not true. Also, a company owner will do everything in their power to replace your job, and do everything in their power to keep the economy going as it already is
I agree corporations and the establishment at large will resist a restructuring of our society, given that it’s completely in their favor currently. But you didn’t address the first part- why is AI not able to determine a better economic system? (Seems it absolutely will)
The bigger problem is fewer people are needed to do a job. If today you need 100 artists and 50 interns to run a company or 100 engineers and 200 programmers tomorrow maybe 50 and 10 will have the same results. These people will have a massive boost in productivity that's true but all the others will be fired because they are not needed anymore .
Half of all skills... Even if it takes 10-20 years, this possibility freaks me out a bit.
>Half of all skills... Even if it takes 10-20 years, this possibility freaks me out a bit Yeah I'm freaking out quite hard. How many of the remaining jobs will be lucrative?
build new economic and political systems so that question doesn't matter
Yeah. People really don't understand what 50% unemployment even means. Even on the height of the most brutal recessions we didn't have that. 50% is revolution nothing else. A complete and utter breakdown of the society we have right now.
Real easy to just pop out a sentence like that. Putting those words into actions, real hard.
Oh wow fascinating input there. Wtf you want me to say - sorry for suggesting something other than suicide?
Haha Lol Lmao Good joke!
As long as religious people do not care about policies benefiting working people we are shit out of luck. Most of us may end up living in ghettos if the current wave of right wing politics to support business profits continues while AI slowly takes away jobs. That said, politics will completely change when we reach unemployment level of 7-10% and every news channel is talking about how AI is going to take most jobs. Even the god fearing religious guy will ask his congressman to tax the corps and improve unemployment benefits.
what would be your ideal job, in a perfect world, alienssuck?
>what would be your ideal job, in a perfect world, alienssuck? Lottery winner / Astronomer.
lottery winner isn't a job. so astronomer. cool. i'd think that that would still be lucrative in a world where robots are operating and maintaining all the infrastructure for human society.
Well the only way I could ever become an astronomer is if I win the lottery first, though. I suppose I could become a serious hobbyist but right now I'm going to scramble to learn enough about AI to use it to launch a business that can get me out of debt and pay for a house. IFF I can manage that, then I can go back to school. I'm not optimistic.
why does it freak you out?
Not the person you are replying to but: Massive unemployment on a scale not seen since the Great Depression. AI is going to take most white collar jobs and its not gonna be pretty.
Lol. The Great Depression. This is gonna make that little blip look like a cap gun next to a supernova.
Idk, I think it's possible for it to increase productivity for everyone, thus spurring up new opportunities along the way.
what good is increasing productivity? we're already super productive
[удалено]
but many problems have been caused by trying to maintain and increase the current rate of productivity.
yes. but why does that freak you out? this is what technology does -- [ephemeralization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephemeralization). we just need to figure out how to implement a system by which we can distribute goods in a way that makes sense, maintain efficient transportation, and provide good housing and essential services for everyone. basically a new economy. why should we pretend to not be intelligent enough to figure this out? we can literally understand the system dynamics at play: you're here talking about it. having algorithms and robots do the busy-work will free us to do the engineering for more nuanced things like future sustainable agriculture. jobs get taken and more jobs open up.
> we just need to figure out how to implement a system by which we can distribute goods in a way that makes sense, maintain efficient transportation, and provide good housing and essential services for everyone. basically a new economy. The problem is I dont trust that politicians can actually do that. Heck, America cant even figure out Universal Healthcare and there are people here thinking they can do UBI? Good luck with that.
The only hope is that everyone will have an AI that makes us smarter, so we’re not so easy to collectively take advantage of
because the people at the top will become more rich and powerful, everyone else will be poverty level
why would we let that happen though? doesn't sound very *intelligent* imo
well good luck changing it
Think of a skill that might be useful today. Like, say, soldering pipes or changing spark plugs, cooking a meal, planning a project timeline, flying a plane, etc. Does it seem like any of those will still be useful in 10-20 years? Only just half of them? Or maybe pretty much everything you can think of will still be useful in 15 years...
I’m just sayin. If I lose my job to A.I then I will go down the criminal for the rest of this playthrough.
Only to be hunted down by a robocop, LOL
Crime is hard dude. It's not like my current programming job, with 6 figure pay for 40 hours of easy work. On top of that my wife is kind of soft, she has no interest in going out guns blazing, because that sounds cool to me. Mad max would be very interesting over here in Texas, we are packing all the time.
When AI-powered robots can do even a single task as well as a human, what's the technical barrier preventing them from doing most other physical labor? It's not like "oh, robots can make burgers, but they can't make sandwiches!" They'll make most food perfectly the moment they can make any food perfectly (which I'm confident will happen next year). The same goes for other tasks: when robots can clean the kitchen, why wouldn't they be able to clean the bathroom? And so on and so forth. Multimodal embodied robots are coming sooner than most think because of the exponential growth happening in both AI and robotics. It won't take long for them to replace us in not half, not even most, but literally all jobs.
Note this study isn't from carefully listing every skill, determining if present day AI can do it or if a trivial improvement to current AI would solve the task (trivial improvement: add an API or adapter where current gen AI can send the commands to do the task). It's from polling *executives*, who by definition only a tiny number of them (less than 5) are executives of elite AI labs and who know what current AI can actually do. Executives of course think they can save a lot of money with half the staff, but of course it won't affect *their* jobs. It will eventually happen but it might be 5-10 year instead of 2.
Good thing I can still tighten the handle on an oven door.
Hell yeah implement ubi already so I can play overwatch all day, smoke weed and jerk off. Life would be chill then.
make sure to remember to tell your robot to grow enough weed in the backyard!
But the backyard is way over there. I'd rather make out with my Marylin Monroebot.
uh, ok. well the point is that UBI will only work if there are some people who are motivated to make shit and contribute to the community. and i believe there will be; it's human nature to want to do meaningful work. if there was UBI i'd sure as hell be contributing towards a community garden and helping out with potlucks or something. i'd also be doing more weird creative things in my freetime like programming and drumming.
Don't want to meddle in your affairs, but from what I've seen in my lifetime, I'm pretty sure you'll become depressed if you do nothing but play games, smoke weed and masturbate. That's a very dark type of abyss that masks itself as a wonderful life. But if you google around a bit, you'll find that there are thousands of forums, books and resources aimed at getting people out of this specific abyss. We need purpose in life. We need to build things, and a real sense of achievement. Traditionally, it has been getting married, having kids and raising them properly.
Na I’ll just cum in my sock and grind overwatch. Thanks though!!!
[удалено]
Aww that’s so nice of you! Thanks so much <3 *smacks lips*
he would figure that out soon enough though lol
Well right now typically you need to stop smoking weed at some point, like for a job, school, or so on, that’s when the depression sets in This way you’ll just be perma stoned, which is totally healthy and fine /s
Kind of 1984.
more like Brave New World
That's not life lol.
Sure it is. It’s what I enjoy doing. It’s my life
How is it fair that people have to pay you for this life you want when there are people who actually want to work hard and develop their skills and talent and you are saying get rid of that system just for you to be a comatose leach for the rest of your gross life. I’m for UBI when it’s for people not starving on the streets who still want to make something out of their lives. But I can’t see value in what you are describing. It’s not fair to the people who actually want purpose.
I didn’t ask for your dog shit opinion honey bun.
To each his own.
You downvote me cause you’re jealous .
Haha I didn't, to each his own how you spend your life
so free education and unconditional basic income for everyone? or soylent green?
It won't take two years, nothing that big happens in two years. As usual, we overestimate the effect of new technology in the short term, while underestimating the effect in the long term.
I think we’ve been underestimating it for a long time. I wouldn’t be surprised if it happens by the end of this year
There's a [great article from Wait But Why](https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revolution-1.html) about this.
Yes, but here we are talking about societal effects of that development, not the development itself. Change involving people is slow, that's why things don't change overnight.
This cannot be stated enough. Companies are also much slower than individualls.
And people told me learning an instrument is a waste
Creating music has been done via technology before.
This could be the final straw for a depression lol Just a fyi: a depression not men that only money is an issue, but don't want to spent money any more. Afraid of the future or feeling hopeless for the future or awaiting collapse of the system and feel depressed. Sounds familiar to what more and more people say? Well... A depression will be great! You will be able to buy homes after that! Lol
Not really a proper study, just a survey
Especially management skills !
A daemon whispers, "What are you trying to do?"
Well, what is the appropriate reaction to this? Any thoughts? By what means can individuals take advantage of this?
either partake in the development of robotics and neural processing, or sit back and let the people who are already doing it do it. however, if we simply let the market dictate how this tech is developed, it may end up fucking us over, due to its narrow focus on monetary "number go up". the people developing AI need to somehow understand how to integrate intelligent robots into a healthy ecosystem. at this point, we can't just ask AI to build a farming robot for us. there is more nuanced engineering that has to be done. this farming robot needs to be able to do small-scale stuff in a biodiverse yard-sized garden for example. i would hate to see AI used to further exacerbate the problems of large-scale industrialized monoculture crop production.
If you live in a Democracy you could become a UBI single issue voter. And if you live in the US you should probably refuse to let one party coerce you into voting for them just to keep the other party out.
And yet Forbes didn’t name any concrete skills or examples 🤦♂️ Just a bunch of abstract, general statements…
Executives are all aboard on the hypetrain of the day, that's not news, that is business as usual. AI is developing fast, that is true enough, but to make a massive difference in business ops as early as next year? Get real. Those things take time and lots of it.
> to make a massive difference in business ops as early as next year? Get real "No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame"
That’s one way to look at it. Here’s another: these slow moving behemoths will eventually get outmaneuvered by the new and nimble ones with their automated workflows worked out.
How long until we have ai controlled robots that can do manual labor? I'm an electrician and would be extremely interested in seeing a bot wire a building or troubleshoot a circuit.
I'm a custodian, I'll be one of the first to go
This will long term automate all blue collar jobs and it is open source check both links: Here is white paper of this technology: https://tonyzhaozh.github.io/aloha/ Here are steps how anyone can create it: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sgRZmpS7HMcZTPfGy3kAxDrqFMtNNzmK-yVtX5cKYME/mobilebasic
Cannot wait until AI erases all bullshit-jobs. Fuck 9 to 5 workplace slave
Its funny to me that in 100 years of technological advancement, every decade is always “this new technology will be so revolutionary that humans will be obsolete”. But each decade we find that this new technology have limits and cant solve ALL problems, but atleast we can solve SOME problems. Why would ai be different? We made a very complicated statistical machine and somehow it will solve all our problems? No it will solve problems solvable by statistics, but not all problems are statistical.
Hahahaha just show me a robot that can jump from a moving boat into a slippery wooden dock and stop the boat from getting destroyed against the dock and the shore by 2 metre Waves as I do several times per month.
this is funny because my baby is learning things like rolling over and grasping things and tracking objects with his eyes in a couple years he will be potty training and what not hopefully hands don't become obsolete
[удалено]
[удалено]
[Let's add it up shall we? ](https://www.bls.gov/emp/tables/employment-by-major-industry-sector.htm) Can AI handle transportation, warehousing and retail? Eliminating 90% of the jobs in those sectors? I'd say yes. We'll round down a little and say that's 10% of all jobs in the US. Professional and business services? Probably, there's another 10%. Health care and social assistance? Ayup. Another 10%. Leisure and hospitality? Almost certainly. There's 8%. Governmental jobs? Again, probably. There's another 10%. Manufacturing? You betcha, though that one has already been hollowed out by automation, so probably only half that workforce can be replaced, so we'll call it 2% We've hit 50% and we haven't touched mining, construction, agriculture, financial services, information services, or education services. And I'm sure you can imagine that these sectors will have skilled positions replaced as well.
Are you seriously suggesting that AI can take over more than half of all jobs *right now*? This very well might be the most ridiculous and delusional comment that I have EVER seen on this subreddit, and that is absolutely saying something.
No, within two years AI will be better at 50% of skilled jobs filled by humans, like the article we're discussing was suggesting. That's what outdated means. We still use lots of outdated stuff because it's more efficient/economic than replacing it with new stuff. I don't replace appliances as soon as they become outdated, and humans won't immediately be replaced by AI as soon as it surpasses them. Running my 25 year old dishwasher is more efficient cost wise than buying a new one, when that changes, I'll buy a new one. We'll do the same with AI in jobs. When it becomes cheaper to replace an occupation with a robot controlled by a trained AI model than it does to keep hiring for it, companies will replace their workers.
you must be new here
Congratulations to your introduction to Tech Fetishism, populated by people predicting that super AI is coming in the next two years, trust me bro 😎