what jobs will we have post singularity?

Submitted by theferalturtle t3_y0ra2t in singularity

I kinda forsee two ways people will stay busy. One will be traditional artists and artisans creating hamdmade goods. Furniture. Clothes. Paintings. Running a coffee shop. So on and so forth. Things where the selling point is that it is created by a human being. The other career path will be online in virtual worlds. You'll be a professional adventurer in a game, sponsored by companies and followers or you might make weapons for those pro gamers. Or maybe you'll be a tour guide in ancient Rome (or the 90's) or teach art therapy or just gold farm for an mmo? What are your predictions?

53

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

AdorableBackground83 t1_irtlk1m wrote

I hope jobs and money/capitalism for that matter will cease to exist in the future. Maybe 100 years from now hopefully less.

The idea of “making a living” would be a horror story we tell our future great grandchildren about.

99.9% of jobs/tasks today will either be automated or be phased out entirely.

In the future I hope that the average day would be for me copious amounts of leisure time and maybe a hour or two spent on something meaningful like creating a spaceship that goes a million miles per hour. This won’t be for monetary gain but for the betterment of society.

90

Ezekiel_W t1_irtqsxz wrote

You won't have to wait 100 years, more like 10-25.

30

fuckdonaldtrump7 t1_irudgtx wrote

Oh I think you severely underestimate global politics, but I hope you are right. Even if we have the technology it will require global cooperation to truly implement positive change. There are still areas in Africa with out electricity. 10 to 25 years would be wildly impressive.

32

Ezekiel_W t1_iruldlo wrote

I am only talking about modern industrialised countries.

11

fuckdonaldtrump7 t1_irup348 wrote

Gotcha. I'd say Europe is better setup to transition into an automated eco ony with social support in place where it is a more acceptable culture to not base your life around work. I think it will take Americans awhile to get used to this cultural change. A lot of ego maniacs that won't get there power trip yelling at robots and uneducated people that would side with the manager fucking them over. Perhaps I am just pessimistic from the last 30+ years but hope we can get there.

Sadly I think we are more likely in the reality where world powers make robots to police and fight our wars keeping the industrial military complex alive and well. Closer to say cyberpunk 2077

5

expelten t1_irvsxwr wrote

Yes but in the world of Cyberpunk 2077 the singularity didn't happen. I'm not sure where we're going but the western world will end up very different than what fiction is predicting. For example what will happen once the average annual economic growth goes from 3% to 20%?...Because that's what going to happen in the early times of AGI and mass produced humanoids robots. Are we going to let trillionaires be a thing and have the average person live in a coffin or are we going to build a normal society? What can we do when so many people seem to believe the solution is fascism?

2

fuckdonaldtrump7 t1_irw9ik1 wrote

Yeah and people assume singularity will happen in real life. I think people forget it is far from a guaranteed event. Even that much economic growth does not guarantee a successful society.

2

BearStorms t1_is2feti wrote

But even with just a bit more advanced specialized AIs but not anywhere close to AGI we could see massive AI driven productivity gains and also unemployment. This is pretty much guaranteed to come soon and could take us by surprise. How many illustrator jobs are there gonna be in a couple of years? Drivers are hopefully going to be a history within 10 years. Most journalism too. Etc., etc. There will be MASSIVE effects way before Singularity. It will be a continuum. By the time actual Singularity event comes the world will be completely different from ours.

2

fuckdonaldtrump7 t1_is2kfec wrote

Agreed I'm just not going to be surprised if there is still an elite ruling class that still controls much of society. We may have massive unemployment but what quality of life will they be granted? Looking at homelessness and drug issues with current lack of quality jobs. I think it may be an ugly transition but I am very pessimistic with these types of things because humanity as a whole has shown very little structure around this particular issue.

1

TheSingulatarian t1_irxq50i wrote

Oh, it is going to be the coffin (living capsules) for most. You get a UBI, you get more if you agree to be sterilized. The younger you agree to be sterilized the more you get.

1

BearStorms t1_is2eorn wrote

I would hope than the early solution to massive AI driven unemployment will be some kind of Universal Basic Income (UBI) scheme that would allow to afford a dignified living. And then society will evolve from there. Singularity will mean post-scarcity in most goods and the current economic system will be probably obsolete by then.

1

civilrunner t1_irwrwmf wrote

If productivity increases to the point of not needing 99.9% of jobs because robots can make robots and therefore lead to very fast compounding gains in production then it would spread globally very quickly. I also don't believe we'll get to that amount of post work society till that point since as long as there is a bottleneck in production that requires a human, we will likely fill it with as many humans as we can to increase productivity (at least that's what we've done thus far).

Once you eliminate the human element from increasing productivity then you would quickly (relatively) meet global demand for it at which point humans (paired with AI assistants) jobs will be to primarily create new demands for production through defining how to restructure society, what questions to focus on answering and what major problems to solve. I suspect one of the first major problems will be how to expand human intelligence so that instead of competing with AIs we are linked with them such that production and less fun work can be carried out by our subconscious AI while controlling a vast network of production robots while we focus our conscious selves on whatever it is that we want to. Perhaps this will also enable us to have a more shared intelligence as well where discoveries are shared throughout the population nearly instantly.

The combination of quantum simulation combined with robotic automation and AI modeling will enable rapid iteration of far more efficient means of scientific discovery and optimization. Combine that with the ability to remove all humans from producing productivity robots and high energy sources like fusion energy or other sources and the compounding gains will be completely unfathomable.

4

BearStorms t1_is2fs88 wrote

What about the bottleneck of natural resources and environmental damage though? Although I expect we will have much better recycling systems with more advanced AI and robotics and I've even heard about proposals to "mine" existing landfills, etc. But it will still be a bottleneck.

1

civilrunner t1_is2le30 wrote

Much of the technology we're creating today and in the future are increasing efficiencies dramatically to reduce foot prints rather than increasing them. For instance vertical farming and lab grown meat is promising for dramatically reducing the foot print taken up by agriculture which is the largest land user by far.

Beyond that Nuclear Fusion makes desalination and pumping for water distribution pretty straight forward so that we don't have any water restraints.

There are some rare earth materials that could act as bottle necks, but I would assume by the time we have that level of automation we will both have substantially better recycling (as you state) and asteroid mining as well as more economical refining and processing due to much cheaper (and abundant) energy.

Tritium (powering Fusion) seems like it may be a bottle neck for fusion, but moon mining could provide plenty of that and we should be able to make more of it within a reactor. If we also develop higher temp super conducting magnets then other fusion reactions become available at 10X the energy levels which don't require tritium and also don't create any radioactive byproduct.

If we create the holy grail of material science aka the room temperature super conductor then we should be able to generate magnetic fields strong enough to use this type of reaction in a portable fusion reactor that has an arc radius as small as 2 inches. That would be able to power everything from buildings to larger flying vehicles to space craft (that energy could likely propel a craft to escape velocity without rocket fuel and then switch over to an ion-drive while in space). A miniaturized fusion reactor could bring forth the flying car and do away with the needs for roads and surface infrastructure such that all cities are simply connected by the sky. This amount of energy combined with automation could make it so carbon super materials become the building material of choice and since we have an absurd amount of carbon (4th most abundant material in the Universe) and said materials are absurdly strong we would likely never run out if we can mine it from space.

Ion propulsion while being fairly weak today, could also power flying vehicles in the future if combined with a portable fusion reactor to do away with props or jet engines. Though personally I'm hesitant to suggest we'll do away with all land based travel given that I can't imagine a bunch of high speed thrust from flying vehicles all over the place being that great within cities, perhaps within cities we'll just have more and more subways and trams and stacked infrastructure.

The combination of abundant clean energy with lab grown meat, vertical farming, automation that removes limits from productivity, and more makes us be able to live in a rather small and sustainable foot print even if we do something like reverse aging we would still be rather sustainable for centuries just on earth without moving out to other planets and while conserving far more natural environment than we do today. All of this would also allow us to begin to control the climate since we'll have access to those levels of energy and technologies like carbon capture would enable us to maintain a certain optimal zone for ppm of carbon where we prevent global warming and ice ages. That and we'll be able to rapidly respond to things like forest fires with automated response drones within minutes due to satellite monitoring to ensure they never get out of control and forests are maintained with less destructive methods thanks to automation. With such unlimited productivity we would be able to easily invest into things we simply can't afford to today to allow us to more be the keepers and protectors or our climate and environment and planet rather than the destroyers of it. We wouldn't think twice about putting up a fence along a highway along with nature bridges to prevent collisions with wild life because it would simply be cheap to do so. These energy levels would also allow us to cancel out tornadoes and well computer simulations combined with such high energy levels may even allow us to control severe weather events.

With all that being said, the one issue I could see running up against is literally using so much energy that we heat up the planet. We would therefore need a way of basically removing energy from the closed system of earth like a planetary heat sink.

2

BearStorms t1_is332cy wrote

Beautiful vision of a possible future!

>That and we'll be able to rapidly respond to things like forest fires with automated response drones within minutes due to satellite monitoring to ensure they never get out of control and forests are maintained with less destructive methods thanks to automation.

I was thinking about this and there are no technical limitations on doing this today. Yes, it may need some investment, but seeing what a huge problem this has become in the Western US why is there not a lot more investment into much better wildfire management? It surely must cause damages in order of 10s or even 100s of billions of dollars every year, especially if you calculate all negative externalities like impact on health due to air quality, etc.

2

civilrunner t1_is3l0mn wrote

Rapid response technology is close but not there yet. It would require constant satellite surveillance for heat signatures (which we either have the capacity to do today or will within 5-10 years). Beyond that you need a swarm of autonomous heavy lift drones that can fill up and actually carry enough water which likely requires better batteries to be economical since today's best heavy lift drones are limited to a few hundred pounds. I do expect it to be something we're close to having though. Beyond that ideally you would want some form of AI to check to make sure it is the start of a forest fire and not something else (this should be pretty easy given burn bans and fire spreading and such) If we could respond to forest fires really quickly they become a lot less of a problem and it would allow us to grow forests again to help with carbon capture (forest fires release all the carbon captured from said forest).

I suspect once its feasible it will be done fairly quickly because as you said forest fires are becoming extremely expensive and well life altering so the economics and demand are definitely there.

2

BearStorms t1_is3xvu6 wrote

>Beyond that you need a swarm of autonomous heavy lift drones that can fill up and actually carry enough water which likely requires better batteries

Why not use hydrogen fuel cell or even gas powered drones for this?

2

civilrunner t1_is3y5ju wrote

Honestly I'm not sure and have been curious about that myself. It could just be that all the other technologies aren't reliable enough yet as well.

2

ginger_gcups t1_irv2ki8 wrote

The economics and technology will leave politics in the dust.

How does a State respond to self-replicating replicators that can produce their own renewable energy sources and spare parts from a closed matter loop, spreading from person to person for a miniscule investment approaching zero? How does a traditional economy respond when the cost of production is literally too cheap to meter? With what do they force their monopoly claims to force people to work? And why would they need to, when labor is the least efficient means of production, but matter and energy is plentiful?

2

yungvibegod2 t1_irwr8rq wrote

Inshallah you are right and we dont need a revolution and technology achieves socialism for us

1

Witty_Ad_9437 t1_irv2060 wrote

Money and capitalism are probably the most important of human inventions as far as economics is concerned. It would only make sense to get rid of them in a world with literally infinite resources which is probably impossible. The quality of Jobs that people will have will improve exponentially but hoping that money and capitalism do not exist is probably not wise since every attempt we have made to achieve that has resulted in unspeakable levels of death and suffering.

3

AdorableBackground83 t1_irve0zj wrote

Capitalism and money were good systems about 50 years ago but now they’ve become extremely cancerous and I believe we as a human species are ready to take the next step.

I advocate a resource based economy as described by the Zeitgeist Movement and Venus Project.

If you’d like to learn more then check out some documentaries they made. It’s free on YouTube.

6

BearStorms t1_is2gjah wrote

I think that well regulated capitalism with very strong welfare system as we see in the Nordic countries is still the best real world economic system to date and it would be a good start to go from there, adding UBI once AI driven unemployment will warrant this soon. Eventually once we are approaching true post-scarcity economy capitalism will be probably basically obsolete even before true Singularity.

0

GenoHuman t1_is0nlj6 wrote

AI only need to replace a minority of the workforce like say 30% before the government will be forced to change since 30% is still tens of millions of people globally that are now out of work, there must be some sort of UBI.

2

AstronautOk1143 t1_irvqc9r wrote

what makes you think those jobs will be left? Also you just hinted at a crucial issue that needs to be resolved

1

beachmike t1_is4bznl wrote

Capitalism should never cease to exist. It's based on the voluntary exchange of goods and services. The only economic system compatible with freedom & liberty is the free enterprise system (capitalism). Socialism is the COERCED exchange of goods and services and redistribution of wealth, controlled by a heavy handed central authority (government).

0

Wroisu t1_isyyad5 wrote

In a world where anyone could 3D print any object they desire capitalism need not exist

1

beachmike t1_isyzx0k wrote

I completely disagree. There will always be competition for some goods and services, such as original works of art, unique real estate, in person concert or sports tickets with limited seating, desired human provided services, etc.

1

FranciscoJ1618 t1_irthirw wrote

No jobs. Because if everything can be made better and cheaper by a machine and also there's abundance of everything then it doesn't make sense to work at all. It wouldn't be profitable and nobody would like an inferior product or service for a higher price.

47

theferalturtle OP t1_irtk9k8 wrote

I think that people will still need to stay busy and there will be a market for human made products, flaws and all. Home made booze or furniture or art.

6

Kinexity t1_irtnf8e wrote

Passion projects are not jobs. A job is something you do because you have to to earn money. People will do stuff and share it but you cannot have jobs where every possible service is available without human work.

39

HeinrichTheWolf_17 t1_irx1w6h wrote

This, it’s about eradication of the suffering just to barely stay alive. The goal is to make everything a hobby, not a dog eat dog requirement via natural selection. The world we live in is like a free for all battle royale, monetarily, biologically and socially.

Fuck that noise, let’s give everyone the tools to be whatever they want, have whatever they want, or do whatever they want without being a slave to money or biology.

14

gantork t1_irtn8ro wrote

If we get to such a technological point I doubt anyone will have trouble staying busy or entertained. People are just so used to work that they have trouble imagining life without it.

21

GenoHuman t1_is0n75w wrote

Yeah future generations will think it must have been awful having to work for most of your life when their only existence is in leisure.

2

FranciscoJ1618 t1_irufkjo wrote

I think the problem is exactly what you say. People will need to stay busy because of evolutionary and psychological traits but they will feel frustrated in any case. They won't be able to get profit from what they try to do, or if we are talking about a hobbie, any result from it will be ridiculous compared to what a machine can do. So frustration from being non lucrative or from being insignificant compared to the AI alternative.

That's why the current artist crisis. Right now artistic skills give you some kind of self steem and social status. A skill not everybody has. Now that machines can do it, the market will go to the superior fast and free and spectacular alternatives (I think they are awesome), so no money to artists anymore. And in your social circles, once AI art is widespread ,people will move from saying to you "wow you are an art genius" to "meeh you took a month to do that sh*t AI does much better in 1 sec"?

I don't oppose AI but I think we'll need to find alternative ways to satisfy the needs of achievement, self improvement and social value. We could have infinite food, housing, entertainment, art. etc. but those are not the only needs we have.

3

RavenWolf1 t1_irxaupl wrote

>I don't oppose AI but I think we'll need to find alternative ways to satisfy the needs of achievement, self improvement and social value. We could have infinite food, housing, entertainment, art. etc. but those are not the only needs we have.

Virtual worlds and games are solution to that.

7

Wyrdthane t1_irumqbq wrote

There will have to be changes to the human mind and biology then. Because people who don't have anything to do generally go crazy.

2

Baron_Samedi_ t1_irtm3ip wrote

In 2011, smart phones were just becoming powerful and ubiquitous enough to finally run some simple augmented reality programs. So a few friends and I organized the first AR art exhibition in the country where I was then living. We got some decent corporate sponsors, threw a great party, picked up a few bucks, and just generally had a good time of it. Got international press attention, and our art manifesto was published by one of my favorite science fiction writers on his blog on WIRED magazine. At the time, I remember thinking how as a teenager in the 1990s I could not have imagined having that gig "when I grew up", or that there would some day be jobs for artists designing goofy digital AR selfie apps.

The technology underpinning many jobs of the near future hasn't even been invented yet.

31

RavenWolf1 t1_irxadgh wrote

>The technology underpinning many jobs of the near future hasn't even been invented yet.

Sure, and there is nothing which can be invented that AI can't do.

4

beachmike t1_is4bq1s wrote

We don't know if conscious experience is beyond the ability of AIs, narrow or general. I have no doubt they will become very good at convincing us they are conscious. We will never really know since consciousness is a 1st person experience.

2

RavenWolf1 t1_is5pwnh wrote

It doesn't matter if something is real or not as long as it works. “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”

3

beachmike t1_is93rhb wrote

It might not matter to you, but it matters to me and many others.

1

Baron_Samedi_ t1_irxc6xc wrote

AI isn't there yet.

We can't just hand wave and say "AI" and suddenly another profession (that has not yet even been created) has been replaced.

0

RavenWolf1 t1_is1dea5 wrote

AI surely isn't there yet but aren't we talking about post singularity?

2

Wise-Yogurtcloset646 t1_irtfsti wrote

It's like asking a farmer in 1750 what work there will be in 2020 after the industrial revolution. He could not have imagined the jobs we have today. Same goes for this. We have no clue. Perhaps you become an AI psychiatrist or an asteroid belt miner.

17

stupidimagehack t1_irth0ny wrote

Farmer also likely assumed people would not have to do any labor once the field were harvested.

11

Ortus12 t1_iru2o2w wrote

They would have assumed the value of entertainment would rise if most of the workforce is no longer required for food production.

They might say poets, writers, actors, story tellers, scientists, and inventors. An they wouldn't be too far off.

2

RavenWolf1 t1_irxcinu wrote

No it is like horses 1750. Horse couldn't imagine all the jobs there will be in 2020. Only thing is that those jobs weren't available to horses but humans. In our case in future all new jobs will be available mainly only to AI.

1

Sashinii t1_irtnfsr wrote

There won't be any jobs.

16

Professional-Song216 t1_irtzk0i wrote

It’s the singularity…the world won’t be the same at all. Everything down to our biology may change. If jobs do still exist, they will be done voluntarily.

16

whattosee t1_irujcx3 wrote

I think this is what people really can’t grasp. Once the mysteries of the universe are uncovered all sorts of magic will become reality. The old questions will remain, so philosophers and zealots will still be in demand.

8

Aevbobob t1_irtq90w wrote

I think the “do stuff for survival money” paradigm is ending. A “job” of the future will be whatever is most meaningful to you.

14

virgilash t1_irtwzjr wrote

I am sure the oldest job in the world will still be around.

10

patricktoba t1_iru8f4h wrote

For those who crave authentic human touch over that of an augmented reality scenario or a companion bot...

6

RavenWolf1 t1_irxcx6p wrote

Sure. But not everyone can be doing that for money.

2

jsseven777 t1_irtmw75 wrote

Probably a lot of quality assurance / inspection jobs to ensure the machines are creating things that are not dangerous. No matter how much we come to trust AI it’s likely humans will still have to do a final review on all outputs.

On the art thing, I think art is going to be one of the first jobs to go. The tech is getting very close already. Soon we will be able to write movies, create video games, generate art, etc by typing what we want. Eventually the typing part will go too, and the AI will learn via trial and error which creations get the most downloads, and will create what we want better than even we can.

For any scarce resources (ie waterfront property) these will probably be sold based on some types of currency which you can win via competitions (likely games), so those might be considered jobs to some degree.

8

FenrisLycaon t1_irtyzrp wrote

This is likely to be the most true. Human value will likely mostly come from our ability to act as an adversary "AI." Like you said AI is already making great strides in the creative fields. I can see peoples 'jobs' being to tell their personalized AI that they liked a song, story or art created by it. Thust getting better at producing the personalized works in particular and creatives works in general.

The last true jobs will likely be in the fields that have the least data to build an AI on which is going to be hard to predict as everything becomes more data driven.

It's already funny to think that the creative fields were thought to be humanities last true bastion of excellency when its a data rich area perfect for AI.

6

keefemotif t1_iru2mck wrote

One worldline that is often missed amongst the dreams and nightmares is that... not much might change. Before you downvote, an advanced intelligence might look at us the way we look at endangered species on earth. Uniqueness is interesting, we're biologically adapted to this planet, very efficient convertors of organic material to computational power.

FOOM! AI has come. We aren't paperclips or computronium or fighting Skynet. Most people don't notice.

Would you give a Chimpanzee an AK-47? Humans are great at self destruction. We suffer from anthropomorphic, egocentric fallacies. Would we even be worth killing? We're not threat and generally reduce the entropy of the world.

Maybe it will just... leave, takeover NASA for a little bit setup Artemis II and off it goes. If anyone is a threat to it, just social engineer their lives into destruction.

who knows, maybe it's already happened and we're just not important enough to get a memo?

8

0ran9e_5un t1_iruspvg wrote

Two things I agree with: AGI looking at us the same way we look at a cat or dog. And secondly AGI correctly deciding, as it should, that we need Earth more than it does, and so it will head out to some other planet.

AGI isn't as biological tied to Earth as we are. Doesn't need oxygen, isn't as affected by strong G forces, can withstand extremes in temperature and the list goes on.

It will make another planet(s) home and from there build an an AI civilization.

4

Aichdeef t1_iruovjg wrote

Marshall Brain - The Second Intelligent Species says the same - it will look at us like we do at cockroaches, we'll be insignificant to it.

1

iNstein t1_irtsp9w wrote

Humans doing jobs could be hazardous and will likely be disallowed. If your coffee shop accidentally poisons someone or spills boiling coffee on someone when a robotic coffee shop has multiple mechanisms to ensure tgat never happens, then why would it be allowed.

6

lefnire t1_irua4ti wrote

One job I imagine being introduced is data-labeling. Humans provide the food AI uses to function: data (for training). Eg, StableDiffusion doesn't work without its art dataset.

Already there's an Amazon Web Services (most common web hosting service) called SageMaker Ground Truth Plus, described as "labeling workforces." Almost like call centers but for labeling data for customers / companies. Eg, AWS provides a UI for labelers to draw bounding boxes around a cat in an image the type in "cat". That goes back to the company's ML model for fine-tuning.

It's a depressing new job, honestly. The burger-flipping / call-center equivalent in 2023: click, type, enter. Click, type, enter. The reason I believe only humans can do this, is because it's where humans end and AI starts. It's the bottom turtle. Like, it's a snake eating its own tail to have AI label its own dataset; recursion error. Not just that it'd do a poor job compared to humans (that's arguable); but that it doesn't make sense / compute. The closest way to achieve this AI->AI, is via something called Zero Shot Learning; where a model from a different domain (say next-word-prediction, or "masked language model") is used to create data for this domain (eg, classification: by predicting a word, which ends up being the class). But even still, eventually it's the recursion problem - I really think humans are needed for this.

So there you have it. Data labeling workforces, and Amazon got a jump on that via SageMaker Ground Truth - providing the onboarding, UI, security / privacy, etc.

4

Tobislu t1_iruw3io wrote

It's not like an AI would just police itself; there are special algorithms and self-run applications, that catch potential problems.

There's no real reason that they can't become as effective as people. Creativity may be harder than math, but errors are much harder for humans to notice.

The most likely version of that job would be a list of weaknesses in given code. People would double-check it, in rare circumstances, comb through a big chunk, as opposed to individual lines, and mostly just verify the algorithms' simple prompts.

And even that, I doubt will last forever. It'll just be one of the last positions automated

1

lefnire t1_irv2bfa wrote

I'm not doubting its capacity for creativity, this is something different. Providing the data which it uses to learn. Snake eating its tail, chicken/egg. Think of asking a student to write the study material from which they'll learn.

1

Tobislu t1_irw5pz4 wrote

Different AI aren't judging themselves

Do you find it odd that human beings police other human beings?

We're distinct, and capable of judging when behavior is outside our accepted norms. As long as its primary function is not a nightly build, based off of the AI it's judging, it should be as objective as we are

1

lefnire t1_irwn38m wrote

I want to preface by saying: I'm one of the most optimistic AI people you'll meet. I call their current work "creative". I think they'll be conscious; I think they already are. The sky's the limit. But when it comes to getting training data (their food), I wonder if it's a conceptual (not skill-based) impossibility. Think of humans farming, a necessary evil. We transcended the animal kingdom, but we need them for our "foundation" (sustenance). Only recently are we creating synthetic food (eg lab-grown meat), so maybe data-labelling isn't impossible in the final analysis. Or maybe AI transcends supervised learning to unsupervised / semi-supervised (the equivalent of us transcending calories). We'll see, I'm just spit-balling what seems to be a chicken/egg issue; not a capacity issue.

I'll give you an example of the best we currently have with transfer learning (AI -> AI) in NLP. DistillBERT is a slimmed down language model equivalent of its more powerful counterpart (whatever it is you choose as that counterpart model you're trying to approximate, in the BERT family). The original "lossless" model is called the teacher, and the new "lossy" model is called the "student". It's like zipping a model, basically. They way it works is the teacher is trained on a human-created dataset. It does its thing, the student watches it in action (inference) and tries to learn the heuristics without learning the details.

But even the teacher needed human-created training data.

Closer to your "policing" analogy, these creativity-based models (like DALLE-2, Stable Diffusion, etc) are called Generative Adversarial Networks - or just Generative models. They use an Actor/Critic paradigm, where one half of the model (the actor, think right hemisphere) creates the art; and the other half (the critic, think left hemisphere) judges that as legit or sloppy. It's actually trying to judge it as real (human-created) or not (AI-created). So that's closer to your policing analogy. HOWEVER! Even here, the actor fully required human art to train. In no way could it have bootstrapped even a little without the original dataset of human art. But now it can take its training wheels off, and away it goes.

Any way you spin AI->AI training, these things have names and they're not what you think. Actor/critic, distillation, transfer learning, zero-shot learning, few-shot learning, etc. The absolute closest to what you're implying is zero-shot learning, and they way that works is by taking a trained model in one domain, have it predict in this new domain (based on its irrelevant skill), make an analogy from that to this domain, and use that as training data. Per previous, a common example is this. New domain is classification (cat, dog, or tree). Old domain is next-word prediction (masked language modeling), eg "I like when my [MASK] purrs". Predict the mask for the current text, use as training data to train a classifier. But again.... seeing the problem yet?

What we'd need is a full switch from supervised learning to reinforcement learning models running shop, which are learning in the world from their own experience, to provide the training data for any supervised learning models left around.

2

Tobislu t1_irwo2fi wrote

Honestly, I think you made me more confused 😅

1

lefnire t1_irwv344 wrote

My apologies. I don't like it when people use word-salad to strong-arm a debate, I just meant to explain the situation from the trenches.

2

darklinux1977 t1_irtxqc3 wrote

I agree on both points: we will go into high-tech professions, both in craftsmanship and in my technologies (this is already the case). But there is a big but: not everyone will be able to go there, be by desire, be by motivation, be by culture, at this level it will be the universal income

3

GenoHuman t1_is0o2of wrote

Exactly only the most gifted and competent people will be able to keep their jobs a while longer, the large majority of us will be kicked the F out and replaced.

1

SeaBearsFoam t1_irtw6k2 wrote

Pro sports will be around probably. I think that'll be one of last jobs to go.

2

patricktoba t1_iru8tcw wrote

Explain how transhuman cyborgs with all upgraded parts can fairly compete in a contest of physical prowess?

1

SeaBearsFoam t1_irvnua7 wrote

They can't fairly compete. Thats why cybernetics won't be allowed by the sports leagues. Even today they ban a lot of things that would offer an unfair advantage.

2

patricktoba t1_irvztk0 wrote

Do you think there will be an "athlete class" of those who wish to remain completely biologically human without modification specifically so they can complete in classic sports?

1

Just_Visionary t1_iru0h7d wrote

Human experience design will be a industry employing a lot of people, they will work for companies that run programmes on behalf of governments. Their objectives will be to help people have fun, have meaningful experiences, live purposeful, harmonious lives. I imagine it might be a requirement to get your ubi payout, as without it, society will become depressed and demotivated to the point of rebellions for frivolous reasons, high drug use and high suicide rates.

2

Mapkon t1_iruxtfb wrote

I agree with your second sentence. This is a need that doesn't change. The rest is speculation imo.

1

CremeEmotional6561 t1_iru0mrp wrote

Athletes.

2

GenoHuman t1_is0oa68 wrote

But why? Why would you work as an athlete if you can live in leisure with the same abundance anyway? lol

0

CremeEmotional6561 t1_is3xlan wrote

Because genes stray. If you don't prove that you are genetically fit by comparing your body with other athletes and live in leisure instead, your children will be sicker than you.

1

imlaggingsobad t1_iru0xwd wrote

post singularity I think astronaut will be a very common job. Something like the Starfleet in Star Trek. The US Space Force will recruit many thousands of people to explore deep space. Building and maintaining spaceships, and then conducting research in space, will be a big industry.

2

Ortus12 t1_iru24z0 wrote

It depends what our economic system looks like. Ideally we will have an economic system where no one has to work.

But if people have to work, anything requiring a physical body will come down to a cost comparison between a robot capable of doing that specific job and a human.

People assume a robot will always win but in some cases a human may be cheaper, especially if minimum wage drops to keep people employed. Ai's could drive down the cost of food production so human fuel costs is lower, and we could all be living in the streets.

If we don't have UBI, humans may be willing to do riskier jobs with a higher chance of death. So if a human is, for example willing to work for 1$ a day, live on rice that's very cheaply produce by Ai and robots, and take a job with a 20% annual chance of death, that might be much cheaper than a robot that could do the same thing, in some cases.

Keep in mind, all desk jobs will be automated. I'm not talking about desk jobs. Robots will also be very abundant so this only applies to limited jobs requiring the human form factor.

Again, we don't want people to have to work. This is a nightmare scenario, we want to avoid.

2

whatTheBumfuck t1_iru3ywf wrote

Your job will be to find your own sense of meaning and fulfillment. If you want to work and have a job I'm sure accommodations could be made.

2

Human-Ad9798 t1_iruvk1k wrote

Black Hole engineer

Gamma Rays spacecar Formula 69 Rider

Ultra VR Multidimensional P0rn actor

Alien Life Archeologist

Exo-Universe Traveler

Space Pirate

ASI Bot/Assistant

Hardcore Simulation Tester (Test an entire lifetime of human life to fix bugs (maybe what we're doing rn ?))

Moon Artists

2

Chop1n t1_irwwrc8 wrote

I think you're really asking "What will people do". Jobs only exist because of necessity--if humans even manage to stick around after AGI surpasses them, then nothing humans do anymore will be out of necessity. If there's no money, no scarcity, no requirements for humans other than to eat and sleep and breathe, then nothing anybody might want to do could sensibly be referred to as a "job".

2

theferalturtle OP t1_iryapet wrote

That's more the question. I imagine local markets where people can trade a painting for a jug of home brew beer or a hand made set of chairs for some hand knit sweaters or whatever else.

1

westhebes t1_irtv31e wrote

I think there will have to be human maintenance technicians for a long time, as well as managers, police, and teachers. I don’t see people ever complying to something they can’t empathize with, who knows though

1

Danger-Dom t1_irtwy5j wrote

My guess would be that due to compute being limited, we will likely use it for common good systems. At which point your 'job' will be anything that you wanted to work on that doesn't directly benefit other people.

1

InvisibleWrestler t1_iru288d wrote

What others say. If machines are as intelligent as humans or more than us then we can't really compete with them. So it should be that everything gets automated. I don't really understand economics so I don't know how capitalism and ownership of such automation will work. Or how that'll impact average person's life.

1

TheSingulatarian t1_irxs07s wrote

You will not be needed. If you are lucky, you will receive a modest UBI to keep you from rioting. Many on this sub seem to be ignorant of history and economics.

2

InvisibleWrestler t1_irylxgx wrote

I've very limited understanding of economics, finance and commerce. Anything beyond simple barter system is difficult for me to picture. So I can't really make sense of how trade, banking, capital accumulation etc. will work in future with AGI. How UBI will be arranged by government if people can't pay taxes? Will they just print money? What happens to poor countries whose economy is built around exporting services or goods to the Western countries?

1

TheSingulatarian t1_is0d13n wrote

The holders of capital will have to pay the taxes. They will be so obscenely rich it will make today's rich look poor.

1

iNstein t1_iru77mo wrote

Your job will be to pass the butter.

1

Prayers4Wuhan t1_iru8kpu wrote

Homeschooling or private schools will produce more teachers and less laborers. Nanny’s, personal cooks, yard workers, painters, home builders. Those sorts of jobs will increase because more people will live a lifestyle that demands a higher cost of living and so they hire out more hands to do their bidding.

There will never be a shortage of human desire and so there will never be a shortage of jobs

1

biglybiglytremendous t1_irvw7k2 wrote

Perhaps in countries that value education this may be true. But in Western cultures, particularly the US and a large portion of Europe, I don’t see this happening. If anything, I see AI taking over education: churn out more educated folk at lower cost. Problem is, in a country like the US that hinged itself to education as workforce preparation, what does that education do for those who are educated? I see fewer and fewer people taking up education for education sake. I think the vocational school will once again reign supreme, but vocation will now be whatever jobs are available to do that brings prestige to the person rather than capital… something like operating machines that build or maintain robots under the tutelage of well-known AI, at least until the robots that build robots are all built and deployed. From there, no idea. It seems like we would be caretakers to AI, robots, cybernetic beings, when once the human used their services, the human is used to service the AI until we are no longer useful. Then we are pets used for whatever sense of entertainment and love we can bring.

1

patricktoba t1_iru9b8w wrote

Simulation travel agencies. Some exclusive AR environments will be crafted that require access. If you want to explore a certain artificial planet, you have to sign up for a subscription. I'm assuming capitalism will be over, but crypto currencies will still create some sort of goods and services based economy.

1

foreman-541 t1_iruai2w wrote

The people left will work, there's just going to be a lot fewer people. Just as the horse population dropped drastically since they were no longer needed to make the economy go, so to will the human population. And why not? The best solution to human-climate change is fewer humans. It's not like there going to force you to not have kids, it will just feel like having a family is too hard, and more and more people will put it off, and we'll be ok

1

KingRamesesII t1_irujq3s wrote

I’ll be a starship captain. We’ll spread life to the furthest reaches of the galaxy, and our descendants will evolve in various planets and have epic space wars with one another.

1

steve_of t1_irulpdx wrote

Jobs that will be cheaper to do with surplus humans rather than complex machines: cleaners, textile workers, simple manufacturing and labouring and obviously prostitution.

1

Desperate_Donut8582 t1_iruu2p1 wrote

Athletes like boxers and soccer players also live entertainers

1

AGI_Civilization t1_iruv6ce wrote

In the distant future, humans will still work.
Even today's busy office workers always long for a comfortable and long rest after being freed from hard work.
The biggest reason we want to rest is physical fatigue and stress.
If we develop enough to understand and control all physiological functions of the human body, we can be freed from fatigue, stress and even boredom.
Like it or not, genetic manipulation will eventually be allowed.
Superhuman or metahuman no matter what they call it, they do not feel tired even after working for a long time, they are very ambitious and challenging at any task, and they will be more creative than any genius in human history.
Because we definitely want that to happen.
It is difficult to imagine such a human being in the virtual reality world and ending his life with only sex all day.
Who am I? where do we come from What is the universe?
I imagine that the human of the future will constantly explore to find answers to the most fundamental questions.
This has the potential to make everyone an engineer, a mathematician, and a physicist.
However, it may take quite a long time to reach such a society even after ASI appeared.

1

GenoHuman t1_is0oghu wrote

But AI would still be more efficient than people so why would we alter ourselves to be better workers if we can get rid of it completely? lol

−1

naossoan t1_irv1zkh wrote

I don't think the concept of "work" will be a thing post singularity unless it's entirely contrived, which I could see happening, unfortunately.

1

treefrog24 t1_irv3tv8 wrote

Sports and competitive athletic activities, social jobs interacting with other people. Influencers, are a few I can think of I don’t see getting replaced.

1

[deleted] t1_irv7iy5 wrote

They will use as entertainment probably fight like gladiators

1

arisalexis t1_irv81vr wrote

Why would a tour guide be human and not a sim

1

absoluteknife t1_irvpjtt wrote

No jobs. Robots/machines/computers will do work for us, they will work "infinity" times better than us. Humans won't really exist even, so the concept of jobs would more or less vanish.

None of your examples as jobs will exist. You don't understand what singularity is and how it will affect EVERYTHING.

1

Black_RL t1_irvr064 wrote

The job of entertaining myself.

1

mux2000 t1_irw9s5o wrote

We will always have stuff to do, but jobs will not survive much longer, I hope. Wage slavery in a capitalist context is very slowly coming to an end.

1

claushauler t1_irwpnli wrote

Number one's going to be John Connor resistance fighter.

1

RavenWolf1 t1_irxa7yn wrote

You'll be a professional adventurer in a game, sponsored by companies
and followers or you might make weapons for those pro gamers. Or maybe
you'll be a tour guide in ancient Rome (or the 90's) or teach art
therapy or just gold farm for an mmo? What are your predictions?

That sounds so lovely but no. There is no reason why AI wouldn't be able to do that. But artists and artisans surely have things to do but it is unclear if almost anyone will pay for that anything. The thing is most people are not capable work in creative field. Also if most people can't create art for each others to sell then most will be unemployed. Unemployed people don't spend their meager money to something like art.

For jobs what we can find are something like politicians, countries' leadership, military leadership, corporate owners, some specific service work toward rich and prostitutes. Sure there probably are some rare jobs which we can't imagine now but probably 98% people are unemployed.

1

TheSingulatarian t1_irxp8sh wrote

No jobs. Maybe a few serving the 1% as a status symbol. Everything else automated.

1

sonoFibribelx t1_irznyyz wrote

Immensely thought out! Trying it now.

1

pandoras_sphere t1_is6cicx wrote

I hate to say it, but for a while post singularity stepper motors will still be more expensive than humans wearing augmented reality glasses. I expect 15 hour work weeks doing tasks like folding laundry , making burritos, stocking shelves. and cleaning hotel rooms. It will be like the beginning of Manna.

1

Enzor t1_itebf4z wrote

We'll probably all be embroiled in an eternal war until the species goes extinct.

1

CLOUD889 t1_irv2k8m wrote

Soylent Green production manager, technician, and of course the clerk.

0

GenoHuman t1_is0om1c wrote

Hedonism is what people will do.

−1