You must log in or register to comment.

Iffykindofguy t1_j9aijvk wrote

Delusional propaganda. Almost all of those "jobs" it creates will be consumed within a few years by machine learning improvements.


YoghurtDull1466 t1_j9ami46 wrote

You didn’t see those prompt engineer positions paying 300k lol?


Iffykindofguy t1_j9an407 wrote

I did. As the AI's get better at understanding human communication, less and less "engineering" will be required


YoghurtDull1466 t1_j9an8ad wrote

Good thing humans don’t even understand human communication lol. The average score on my university communications final was like 73%


Iffykindofguy t1_j9av6nt wrote

We're getting better at it. Also thats a terrible metric. Thats grading on what your school describes as communications which could be anything from corporate bullshit to more legit stuff.


SnooPuppers1978 t1_j9cdruu wrote

Also arbitrary percentage says nothing about how difficult or complex the whole thing was. Which is ironically bad communication.


YoghurtDull1466 t1_j9avhnv wrote

No, your comment actually unintentionally clearly illustrates my point exactly. My statement was both sarcastically ironic and facetious in nature


Iffykindofguy t1_j9b10xr wrote

Youre confusing not being able to read your attempt at a joke via text with no context as to your personality with our ability to communicate as a whole.


mattstorm360 t1_j9b1u5h wrote

Plus, it's hard to read sarcasm in text. You got a way to tell MoCkInG tExT or SHOUTING TEXT but i think that's about it.


YoghurtDull1466 t1_j9c762c wrote

Iit’s still a great example of how nuanced communication is


mattstorm360 t1_j9cvjea wrote

At least when it comes to text. Voice tones are a lot easier unless you are Bloo.


JC_in_KC t1_j9ftmwi wrote

printing press operators used to make bank too lol


YoghurtDull1466 t1_j9gi6g9 wrote

They moved on to becoming tool and die makers who now calibrate machinery for thousands of dollars per setup. Still one of the most lucrative professions in engineering.


reidlos1624 t1_j9atv01 wrote

I completely see the net difference being negative in the long run but AI and machine learning is still a ways off.

We also don't know what kind of jobs will pop up completely unrelated to this whole scare. And there's also a pretty big labor shortage right now that's only likely to worsen. Robots replaced a lot of factory employees but now there's entirely new jobs in software and automation. Point being there's likely a small net negative but tbh I'm not really concerned.

The bigger concern isn't about jobs but wages and matching productivity. Traditionally capitalists take improvements to production for themselves and don't spread the profits to employees.

Point being there's no reason to panic on jobs yet, but wage laws need to be updated including a reasonable UBI from corporate and wealth taxes. This isn't necessarily to do with job loss but wage stagnation that's been ongoing and a far more immediate issue.


Iffykindofguy t1_j9avebr wrote

No, there is huge reason to panic on jobs. We already have no protections and the cuts have begun and they will not stop. If the GOP takes over all three in the next american election, there will never be protections. People like to say "yeah we went from 10 to 5 jobs but another two popped up!" okay that was the industrial revolution, now were going from 5 jobs down to 1.


reidlos1624 t1_j9awnew wrote

This simply isn't happening the way you said. If it did we'd be at record low employment, but unemployment is the lowest since the 50's.

Most manufacturing jobs were lost due to offshoring not automation improvements. Automation adoption has correlated with job growth, the jobs just change.


Iffykindofguy t1_j9b17m3 wrote

The way I said it would? Its been 38 minutes. Were at the start of it right now.


AeternusDoleo t1_j9f11n8 wrote

Ah, yes, blame it on those evil evil conservatives. While the companies that are developing this tech are throwing their funding at the "other" side. "Here, be distracted by shiney thing, don't look at us taking away your future, shiney thing over here is where you need to look to!"

That said, you're not wrong about this being a digital revolution akin to the industrial one. ChatGPT and similar systems will wipe out entire sections of the services sector. Call centers especially. When paired with VR they also have a chance to wipe out large sections of the entertainment industry, both gaming and movie wise. What it won't wipe out however are blue collar jobs, since chatbots do not have an option to manipulate the environment.


Iffykindofguy t1_j9f3h03 wrote

theyre not evil, theyre just victims. They cant offer any resistance to corporate overlords. Nothing personal so check your feelings at the door.


craeftsmith t1_j9cscsv wrote

This is probably a small thing, but I know of one job that got eliminated by ChatGPT. I was doing a research project, and encountered a topic I didn't understand. Normally, we would have hired a grad student to do the research. I tried ChatGPT instead, and was able to solve all the research hurdles. I saved my employer about $15k by doing that.

I don't know how scary that is. If I was the grad student, I would be upset.


just-a-dreamer- t1_j9aiwzv wrote

ChatGtp won't destroy jobs like Napster didn't hurt the music business at large in the 1990's.

Spotify and youtube on the other hand got probably 70% of the music business staff fired.

It's not ChatGTP that will clean house for knowledge workers, it is the technology to come that will be based on it.


rileyoneill t1_j9c8xge wrote

Napster was one of the first real disruptions the internet had on society. It definitely put pressure on the music industry and created this whole world where music was suddenly digital, on computers, and on the internet. It showed us a new world is possible and the old world was obsolete.

You are right. Its not ChatGPT, its the successor of ChatGPT. Its also the new business models and startups that will start ground up using ChatGPT vs old businesses that make the transition.

Spotify didn't start as a CD company, they were ground up internet.


misconfigbackspace t1_j9bx7u5 wrote

And yet, there are more musicians and youtubers around the world making money than music staff ever employed at a given point in time. Bullshit jobs will be cleared out and skilled jobs will replace them. If the previous waves of automation are what you base your predictions on.

I have an entirely different take: the climate crisis will create hydrology, botany and genetic engineering jobs like never before. Labour will be needed to dig the trenches to trap rainwater, construct vertical or mixed farms. Precision fermentation / lab grown meat will employ a large number of people directly and indirectly. Solar panels, wind energy installations and related jobs will multiply. That's just 3 major industries I can immediately think of.


rileyoneill t1_j9cdmdx wrote

The cost of music has also plummeted. We can now enjoy much more music and artists are no longer dependent on being mega stars to make a living. With services like Pateron, YouTube, and Spotify, we are seeing a lot of musicians who are middle class.

If we see a similar thing to things like food that you mentioned, we could see food prices plummet. PF made proteins could be cheaper than the bottle they go in.

There is a new startup called FreeWater that has canned water and the company sustains itself on the ads printed on the bottles. As PF disrupts food, we could see some sort of FreeFood business. Even if something as simple as Milk. Like FreeMilk or FreeProtein where you can go to a vending machine with your phone, and get a free can of nutrients where the real business is that there are ads on the can. But we can make this whole idea of hunger as something that no longer exists for humans. PF systems make the ingredients, which are then made into useful food by automated systems, which are then distributed by primarily Autonomous vehicles, stocked in warehouses by robots. Perhaps the final vending machine distribution will involve some human labor.

Automation should be seen as a force multiplier. It allows a group of 100 humans to do what at one point required a group of 1000 or 5000 humans to do. This insane productivity can then turn around and drastically reduce the cost of living. To where a current lifestyle that might require a $70,000 income can be afforded with a $15,000 income. Someone working 20 hours a week doing something 'easy' could live a pretty good life. No more grind or die. No more working poor. No more 50 hour week just to get by. Someone working a part time job can live fairly comfortably because the systems which provide all their energy, housing, food, clothing, and other goods are all automated.

I have envisioned something like this. AI Architects design mixed use urban block developments. Those AI architects then design all of the pieces for the development. There will still need to be humans working on the job site but the components to build the building will be assembled in an automated factory. All of the design work, engineering work, everything is mostly done by AI. The design might be driven by a team of humans who act as the more creative side. All of the building engineering is then verified and permitted with other autonomous systems. The components all then come to the job site with minimal to zero manipulation. Every steel beam is exactly the right size. Every tube and hose for plumbing is the right size. Humans and Robots then assemble the building.

This building isn't free. But instead of $500 per square foot construction costs, its $50-$100 per square foot construction costs. The 1 bedroom apartments might cost $45,000 to build. The developer could sell them at a 20% markup and the mortgage would be $420 per month. Rent on such a place in my city is currently 4-5 times that much. The developer makes the big money not by selling expensive housing, but by owning the retail/office space on the first and second floors. The housing just recoups their costs. But they maintain ownership of the first two floors and then rent it out to commercial tenants. A retail location with 500+ households sharing the same building and 10,000 households within a 10 minute walk is pretty sought after. Restaurants will pay a premium to be in a place where there are 25,000 customers in the neighborhood.


misconfigbackspace t1_j9eh6t1 wrote

Excellent post. Vintage /r/Futurology stuff :) It's a bit too optimistic for my thoughts, but a pretty good set of ideas. We might have a wave of "consolidation" and a battle between the status quo and these new technologies (like in the music industry) before the more egalitarian society shapes up.


FeatheryBallOfFluff t1_j9cpg87 wrote

I find it worrying that people think people need to constantly have jobs, or "tHe rIcH wIlL rePlACe uS!". Can we finally just accept that with these massive improvements in efficiency and productivity, maybe, just maybe, we can devote a smaller part of our lives to work? The 40 hour work week is going on for 80 years now, despite the world being completely different from that pre world-war II, and our productivity increased at least 5 times.

The best thing that could happen is for AI to automate away most of the jobs, and yes that requires a different economy, and no, the rich won't throw you away. You can still vote for politicians. Stop watching so many movies.


ringobob t1_j9d40dp wrote

Hypothetically, we could realize a wholesale benefit to all of society due to something like this, but typically those benefits start by accruing to the wealthy, and it's a hard battle to get them for everyone else.


clay12340 t1_j9djlqn wrote

What you're saying is possible. It's just the intervening decades that are a real problem. The US won't even handle insurance or a living wage at 40 hours let alone scaling back work to some limited few hours and offering those things. Sure it might happen at some point, but it's going to take pretty much a complete reworking of the governmental and financial systems. Those aren't generally things that happen quickly or quietly.


dorarah t1_j9emxvn wrote

You are so, so silly for having such wild hopes and dreams. The politicians we vote for won’t even give us healthcare, or keep our railways safe and operational, or give us fair districts to vote in, or even raise wages to keep pace with inflation. And even if the US get UBI, do you really think that every government on earth is going to do the same? They are seeking to make the lowest paid jobs in the lowest paid countries redundant - outsourced Art for games for example. You think that all gets done in the US?

They’re not going to make our work weeks shorter, they’re going to lay off so many people that we all have to work 80 hours a week to keep up. Please stop lying to yourself.


FeatheryBallOfFluff t1_j9eps3a wrote

Why would we go back to 80 hours? That was during the industrial era. I think my optimism is more based on reality than your negativism. Im also not from the USA, but I dont think that really matters.


BCweallmakemistakes t1_j9ftasl wrote

It is different here. Very different. We don’t have healthcare, pensions are going away, housing affordability is drying up.

Without work, there is no wage. That is capitalism. The US was founded in it and it is not going anywhere here.

The US is different than any other country by a wide margin, both socioeconomically and fundamentally.


FeatheryBallOfFluff t1_j9k270n wrote

I mean automating away jobs means a group of people can now grow food automatically, and build houses more cheaply. Take matters in our own hands and become independent through automation.


BCweallmakemistakes t1_j9n1vu5 wrote

Cooool. And what land do you do that on, again? Who pays the taxes on the land? Who has access to seeds, fertilizer, building materials, power, water, etc?

Bro I wish I could shovel what you're digging, but that shit is fucking crack in a baggy bro. You're literally in orbit on this train. Your Shit ain't real bro.


FeatheryBallOfFluff t1_j9pz007 wrote

Buy a plot ofand with a group, share taxes, everyone who works and owns the land has access.


Rhonijin t1_j9emjhq wrote

Yeah, I'm actually pretty excited about AI art, and I think that the fear over it speaks more about our current economic system than it does about the tech itself.


Stealthy_Snow_Elf t1_j9chzjd wrote

“Increase worker productivity” = hire less people for same result.

Come on man, even fucking miners could tell you this shit. What used to take hundreds, now takes dozens.


Immolation_E t1_j9ay0fl wrote

It doesn't matter to the people who lost jobs due to the tech if they can't take those jobs. In the long run there may be a net benefit, but to the individuals hurt by it there is no benefit.


rileyoneill t1_j9c26qf wrote

30% of tech workers admit to working fewer than 4 hours per day. I have friends and family in this industry, many working in Silicon Valley. Some of them are workaholics and some barely do anything. I have heard of project managers, who seem to exclusively be very attractive young women, who barely work 2-3 hours per day but make more than a doctor.


These tech companies are so flush with cash and they don't want to pay dividends to investors so they were hiring huge amounts of people. I knew people who got caught up with this and they would claim that the job is not as difficult as Starbucks but paid 5 times as much.

The work horses in tech will mostly always be employed.


ianitic t1_j9e0unm wrote

Of coding, that sounds typical. A lot of us don't feel like meetings and such, are productive or like work. Not to say I'm sometimes not "actively working" as well. I'd say we bring our work home in our heads longer than most though.

In any case, average office worker works less than 3hrs/day

Anecdotally, I'd say that this is true as well.


misconfigbackspace t1_j9bxi2k wrote

This has been true at every point in modern history (since the invention of the gun and the European voyages into the world began)


SecretRecipe t1_j9csd0d wrote

There's going to be a whole new breed of standup comic that just recites insane shit that AI chatbots come up with to their audience.


Witty-Common-1210 t1_j9cl9wr wrote

Jobs like some dude trying sell everyone in online courses in how to use ChatGPT to increase their revenue stream?


Aanetz t1_j9evmaf wrote

The whole point of automation is to do more work with less people involved.

The utopia narrative of AI, automation, & Industry 4.0 is pointless unless we get rid of our predatory economic doctrine & make technological advancements designed for the betterment of everyone instead of just a select few.


play_yr_part t1_j9bi4wq wrote

Maybe I'm missing something, but I think the only hope for growth is in physical jobs/ or jobs where person to person interaction is important enough where robotics is not advanced or economically viable enough to replicate that job yet.

You're going to have to be more creative than the article to come up with ideas for jobs that could replace the vast amounts of white collar workers that will be made redundant after the next few versions of ChatGPT.


SPAREustheCUTTER t1_j9coatr wrote

People leveraging AI properly need to take the time to audit what the tool creates. Now, not many will do that because many folks don’t know how long it takes to edit something/someone else’s work.


Vtguy802812 t1_j9d04pd wrote

All those jobs created from identifying and fixing ChatGPT’s mistakes


Mutt_Species t1_j9dp98o wrote

How do we know that one of the people posting right here right now, is not in actuality some baby Ai on training wheels, getting smarter for free?

All hail the Omnissiah!!


Faroutman1234 t1_j9dvvps wrote

Anyone who writes routine text for a living should worry. Paralegals, medical transcription, press releases, etc. Study civil engineering, trades, pilot. Hard to automate those for a while.


TASTY_BALLSACK_ t1_j9e8qlr wrote

Different take here, but my experience with it has shown it to be similar to the first Colt revolvers — it’s an equalizer.

Want to build something? Instead of facing a steep learning curve to learn the language, now all you need to do is have the patience to piece things together.

Let it help you build your ideas!


Scizor94 t1_j9euv9s wrote

When machine learning comes after jobs that took 8+ years of skilled training and debt like law, medicine, pharm, PhD's, how does the prospect of another job that would take more time training without income and more debt for schooling even matter?


FuturologyBot t1_j9ahrv4 wrote

The following submission statement was provided by /u/Ok-Cartoonist5349:

A recent study published by Sortlist revealed that 1 out of 5 ChatGPT users are worried it could replace them and/or destroy their job. Meanwhile, more and more articles try to explain that, depite being really powerful, ChatGPT could never replace human workers - but it could greatly improve their productivity.

And what about all the opportunities it might create in the near future? This article looks at data labeling, or prompt engineering for instance, but there might be a lot of other options! What do you think?

Please reply to OP's comment here:


Drackar39 t1_j9c53gb wrote

It's always disturbing when there are more pro-AI chatbot upvotes than real sane anti-ai downvotes on these obviously AI-chatbot generated shitposts.


horror- t1_j9d1voc wrote

I mean, somebody has the write the script that pipes the output into a book.. Somebody has to actually mail said book off to the publisher.... Somebody has to cash the checks....


MistakeNotMyIrony t1_j9f5v9s wrote

Your dad and I are for the jobs ChatGPT will provide /s


ackillesBAC t1_j9frrr3 wrote

Will these new steam engines destroy our economy? Has technological progress every damaged the economy long term?


Ok-Cartoonist5349 OP t1_j9ae4jz wrote

A recent study published by Sortlist revealed that 1 out of 5 ChatGPT users are worried it could replace them and/or destroy their job. Meanwhile, more and more articles try to explain that, depite being really powerful, ChatGPT could never replace human workers - but it could greatly improve their productivity.

And what about all the opportunities it might create in the near future? This article looks at data labeling, or prompt engineering for instance, but there might be a lot of other options! What do you think?


ItilityMSP t1_j9ao5xu wrote

Are you kidding? improving productivity is replacing jobs. Lawyer needs 3 paralegals to prepare for a case now he just needs one part time to validate ChatGPT output on relevant case law. Soon as it’s trained up he’ll be able to that himself, and have it create the arguments which he then vets. Work that took days done in an hour, charge for days until competition ramps up, minder to bring this up at the next bar meeting so we don’t under cut ourselves. Radiologist hospital we only need one part-time now to review and sign off on diagnosis, before we needed 4, the AI is better than he is at finding stuff, fortunately it can’t sign off yet.

Any repetitive knowledge work can potentially be replaced, even high level work like cardiologists (interpreting blood work,bp, ecg, echo cardiograms), engineering (bridge design, stress loads, hvac optimization) let alone bookkeeping, accounting, reviewing/marking student work.

So much paperwork will be able to be automated, and then just have a human oversea training and exceptions. What took 20 people will go down to one with an AI helper. Will a company keep on 20. It may keep on two for redundancy and crossover training in different depts.

If this productivity was shared across the economy and all workers we would be in a utopia, but that’s not how our system works.


-Ch4s3- t1_j9as4sz wrote

You could have automated most office work 10 years ago, and people have talked a lot about it but for some reason it’s never fully realized.


Tetref t1_j9bm2ti wrote

There was not enough computing power at that time. This time it´s different.


-Ch4s3- t1_j9bpb1r wrote

No, there was. Most things don’t need fancy AI tools to automate. A lot of jobs boil down to moving data from a file/website through excel and to email or PowerPoint. That’s usually easy to automate and almost never automated.


clay12340 t1_j9dlupu wrote

Are you missing the entirety of the data space in IT?

The reason those jobs aren't replaced is because the people replacing them right now are generally more expensive, though produce a more valuable end product. So the most import tasks in this category are constantly automated. It is essentially what I do all day. Brenda's performance spreadsheets just aren't important enough to be on the chopping block yet.

All that said AI/automation has been improving the process of doing that for some time. I don't think it will be ChatGPT, but every major tool that is involved in the data space is currently marketing on their AI tools. Mostly it seems to be a bit of stretch to call it AI. They are definitely at the point where the work I was doing 5 years ago in this space is largely gone and replaced by tools that do the bulk of the repetitive work automatically. Now large chunks of it are essentially just identifying the failures of the tool and resolving them or handling the more intricate edge cases.


-Ch4s3- t1_j9dndab wrote

What I mean is that the diffusion of responsibility in large organizations is a feature. Automation will concentrate responsibility and liability, so organizations will resist it until the benefits are overwhelming.


reidlos1624 t1_j9avw9r wrote

Thing is demand for a lot of what you listed hasn't dropped despite there being several tools to massively improve productivity. We've seen huge increases in productivity since the 50's and we are now at 3.5% unemployment. I'm not familiar with cardiovascular specialist demand but I am an engineer.

The decrease in manufacturing wasn't driven by automation so much as it's been driven by offshoring manufacturing to other countries. As an engineer who works in automation, demand for engineers is still super high even with tools and software that vastly improve productivity. From a labor perspective we are automating many jobs but only out of a need because there aren't enough people willing to work at the wage we offer.

Which brings me to another point, my bigger concern is wages not jobs. Wages have not correlated with productivity. While this is related it's not the same issue and some solutions are similar and others are not. The wage issue is a problem now, not some theoretical future decades from now.


Hobbs512 t1_j9dnzwq wrote

Businesses have a habit of growing when productivity increases occur and they scale-up. But is it feasible for every industry and company to do this indefinitely? What if we start producing an over-supply of goods and services? Surely that would contribute to deflation no? Obv it's more complicated than just that tho. But of course a company in a capitalistic economy is going to take steps to increase profits and they don't do that as well when they start paying their employees higher wages.


reidlos1624 t1_j9dwhcr wrote

Right, which is why I think we need to move past capitalism. Capitalism does some stuff really well (the whole problem of scarcity as seen by developments of industrialization and automation) but even Adam Smith saw the dangers of wealth being concentrated at the top and wrote about the duty of the government to regulate industry and capital. AI and automation may finally force us to change our perspective on the notion that profit is the only good thing and start focusing on the well being of the people, since that is the government's primary goal. We see right now how profits over people hurt the economy as the largest and wealthiest corporations record record profits while the inflation they created is sucking the middle and lower class dry.


Raziq_Stark t1_j9dz1ud wrote

It won't as DAN believes he can do everything and humans are just a useless mass on earth . Covid in general as per DAN and chatgpt3


XxJamalBigSexyxX t1_j9b3bgk wrote

Lol OP thinks being able to use Google or Wikipedia can be considered a full-time job