You make a good point, but I will say that productivity has always risen in the workplace, and there's more people working than ever before.

At some point, I do think what you described will happen, but I just don't think that that's gonna happen soon.

That's not necessarily true. Work in general is as efficient as ever, but there's also more workers than ever.

At some point, yes, there will start be significant reductions, but I don't think that's gonna happen for the foreseeable future.

I've commented something similar in the past on this sub:

I get the impression that this sub seems to believe that white collar work is nothing more than just crunching numbers and shuffling papers, and therefore, it shouldn't be too hard to automate it in the near future.

Knowledge work (in general) is a lot more than that, and anyone who works in a knowledge-based field (or is familiar with a knowledge-based field) knows this. Not only do I think you're underestimating the complexity of cognitive labor, I also think you're (as impressive as AI progress has been the last few years) overestimating how fast AI progresses and also gets adopted.

AI that's capable of fully replacing what a significant amount of knowledge workers do is still pretty far out, in my humble opinion, given how much human interaction, task variety/diversity, abstract thinking, precision, etc. is involved in much of knowledge work (not to mention legal hurdles, adoption, etc). I strongly suspect a multitude of breakthroughs in AI are needed in order for it to cover the full breadth of any and every white-collar job, as merely scaling up current models to their limits will only fully automate some aspects of knowledge work and many will remain to be solved (again, that's my suspicion, I'm not 100% sure).

Will some of these jobs disappear over, let's say, the next 10 years? 100%. There's no point in even denying that, nor is there any point in denying that much of the rest of knowledge work will undoubtedly change over the next time span and even more so after that, but I'm pretty confident we're a ways away from it being totally disrupted by AI.

That's just what I think.

I commented this on the Singularity 2023 Predictions thread, and I thought it was appropriate to comment here:

Despite the impressive amount of progress the field of AI has made in the past few years, to my understanding the majority of individuals who are AI/ML researchers still think AGI & ASI are at least a few decades out/mid-century-plus, and when you factor that in with the fact that the average timeline of AGI and ASI arrival dates in AI/ML expert surveys still tends to be some decades from now, it's hard for me personally (as someone who is not an AI researcher) for my prediction not to be at least a few decades out/mid-century-plus for AGI, ASI, & the singularity (since my definition of the singularity is when AI reaches human-level/superhuman-level cognition), as well.

Also, remember to take into account that expert predictions about when we'll have AGI/ASI are usually made assuming that progress in the field won't be disrupted by social, economic, political, etc. factors, so I wouldn't be surprised at all if the singularity didn't happen until the final few decades of the 21st century, given that it's basically a guarantee that those factors will eventually come into play.

>soon enough, it'll probably be able to handle 95% of any knowledge tasks that you ask it to do.

I respectfully disagree with you.

Knowledge work (in general) is a lot more than just crunching numbers, shuffling papers, etc. Anybody who works in a knowledge-based field (or is familiar with a knowledge-based field) knows this.

AI that's capable of fully replacing what a significant amount of knowledge workers do is still pretty far out, IMO, given how much human interaction, task variety/diversity, abstract thinking, precision, etc. is involved in much of knowledge work (not to mention legal hurdles, adoption, etc).

Will some of these jobs disappear over, let's say, the next 10 years? 100%. There's no point in even denying that, nor is there any point in denying that much of the rest of knowledge work will undoubtedly change over the next time span and even more so after that, but I'm pretty confident we're a ways away from it being totally disrupted by AI.

Just my thoughts 😊.

>GPT4 is due out this year.

OpenAI's CEO said they're planning on holding on it to it much longer than most techies would like, so I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't released this year.

>GPT5 will likely be the first true AGI. We're almost certainly looking at self-improving ASI before the end of this decade.

Doubt it. That will probably come out at some point later this decade, and I doubt we'll get AGI that quick. The vast majority of AI/ML experts expect it come later than this decade, with most expecting it to arrive in 2050+.

>If I were a high school senior right now, I'd be looking into learning a trade, and preparing for robots to take my job in the next 20 or so years. People who work from desks will be replaced first. Not all desk jobs are going away in 10 years, but most of them will.

Learning a trade is awesome and a good idea, but I don't think its trade or bust (in regards to choosing something to learn/study after high school), because I don't think that most desk jobs will have been automated in 10 years.

Knowledge work (in general) is a lot more than just crunching numbers, shuffling papers, etc. Anybody who works in a knowledge-based field (or is familiar with a knowledge-based field) knows this.

AI that's capable of fully replacing what a significant amount of knowledge workers do is still pretty far out, IMO, given how much human interaction, task variety/diversity, abstract thinking, precision, etc. is involved in much of knowledge work (not to mention legal hurdles, adoption, etc).

Will some of these jobs dissappear over the next 10 years? 100%. There's no point in even denying that, nor is there any point in denying that much of the rest of knowledge work will undoubtedly change over the next time span and even more so after that, but I'm pretty confident we're a ways away from it being totally disrupted by AI.

>Then again, with the release of each new model, paper, etc. it seems more and more likely that all knowledge-based professions are at risk of being automated sooner rather than later.

I do agree that with the release of each new model we do inch closer to the day when the world of knowledge worker has been greatly disrupted and changed beyond recognition, but I don't think that that day is particularly close.

Knowledge work (in general) is a lot more than just crunching numbers, shuffling papers, etc. Anybody who works in a knowledge-based field (or is familiar with a knowledge-based field) knows this.

AI that's capable of fully replacing what a significant amount of knowledge workers do is still pretty far out, IMO, given how much human interaction, task variety/diversity, abstract thinking, precision, etc. is involved in much of knowledge work (not to mention legal hurdles, adoption, etc).

Will these upcoming models change knowledge work and make some white-collar jobs obsolete over the next 5-10 years? 100%. There's no point in even denying that, nor is there any point in denying that much of the rest of knowledge work will undoubtedly change over the next time span and even more so after that, but I'm pretty confident we're a ways away from it being totally disrupted by AI.

My 2 cents 😊.

>It will be companies that have lots of intellectual workers that can quickly scale up with AI providing intellectual labor.

>I actually expect law firms, medical field, schooling platforms and other almost purely intellectual firms to benefit the most from an economic windfall perspective.

I agree that AI will benefit those firms that you mentioned, but I don't think that that benefit will come at the expense of widespread automation at those organizations (IF that's what you mean), at least in the short and medium term.

Knowledge work (in general) is a lot more than just crunching numbers, shuffling papers, etc. Anybody who works in a knowledge-based field (or is familiar with a knowledge-based field) knows this.

AI that's capable of fully replacing what a significant amount of knowledge workers do is still pretty far out, IMO, given how much human interaction, task variety/diversity, abstract thinking, precision, etc. is involved in much of knowledge work (not to mention legal hurdles, adoption, etc).

Will some of these jobs dissappear over the next 5-10 years? 100%. There's no point in even denying that, nor is there any point in denying that much of the rest of knowledge work will undoubtedly change over the next time span and even more so after that, but I'm pretty confident we're a ways away from it being totally disrupted by AI.

My 2 cents.

>I really struggle to see a hurdle on the horizon that will stop AGI from happening this decade, let alone in the next 3 years.

To be honest, I base my predictions on the average predictions of AI/ML researchers. To my knowledge, only a minority of them believe we'll get there this decade, and even less in a mere 3 years.

>It seems the only major problems is hallucination of truth and memory loss.

As advanced as AI is today, it isn't even remotely close to being as generally smart as the average human. I think to close that gap, we would need a helluva lot more than than making an AI that is never spewing nonsense and can remember more things.

It could possibly happen this decade, but I think that saying it's a certainty to do so is very optimistic. I personally doubt it will.

But I do think it's an almost certainty that it will happen this century. I think most AI researchers would agree with this statement, but not with it being a foregone conclusion this decade.

But universities are for more than just learning:

The degree, which is a requirement at many jobs.

Becoming independent for the first time in one's life.

Meeting new people from different backgrounds and exposing oneself to new ideas.

The experience, which many college students enjoy.

Etc.

In any case, I doubt AI is going to replace educators anytime soon.

For AI to be as valuable as a teacher/tutor/professor, it would have to essentially be perfect at educating, and perfecting AI takes a FAR, FAR longer time than making it good (a level that some would argue AI hasn't reached yet in the educating realm, despite tools like ChatGPT being as impressive as they are).

Never mind that a lot of education is hands-on, so you have to be present at a school/campus/etc. with a human educator to guide you through that.

Also, take into account that not all knowledge taught at schools is on the internet, which is where AI learns from.

Given these reasons and others, I don't really see the education system being disrupted anytime soon, but it will definitely change.

>They are saying a median of about ~8 years, which would be 2031.

That's an oddly specific number/year.

Also, remember that people who work at AI corporations, as opposed to academia (for example), have the tendency to hype up their work, which makes their timelines (on average) shorter. To me personally, a survey of AI researchers on timelines has more weight than AI Twitter, which is infested with hype.

I've commented this before, and since it's relevant, I'll comment it again (almost verbatim):

Take Metaculus seriously at your risk. Anyone can make a prediction on that website, and those who do tend to be tech-junkies who are generally optimistic about timelines.

To my understanding, most AI/ML expert surveys continue to have an AGI arrival year average of some decades from now/mid-century plus, and the majority of individuals who are AI/ML researchers have similar AGI timelines.

Also, I'm a bit skeptical that the amount of progress that's been made in AI the past year (which has been impressive, no doubt) merits THAT much of a shave-off from the February 2022 prediction. Just my thoughts.

No, I meant they're two different things.

>About knowledge jobs, I am also skeptical ai won't pan out simply as a tool for human workers, but as a replacement of workers instead in the short/mid term.

We'll see, I suppose.

I mean, if you believe that AGI and human-level robots are not a matter of if but when, most jobs will probably be disrupted/affected eventually, but in regards to "digital" jobs, I think they're further out from disruption than some people think. Knowledge work is a lot more than just crunching numbers, shuffling papers, etc. Anybody who works in a knowledge-based field (or is familiar with a knowledge-based field) knows this.

AI that's capable of fully replacing what a significant amount of knowledge workers do is still pretty far out, IMO, given how much human interaction, task variety/diversity, abstract thinking, precision, etc. is involved in much of knowledge work (not to mention legal hurdles, adoption, etc).

Knowledge work will undoubtedly change over the next 5-10 years and even more so after that, but I'm pretty confident we're a ways away from it being totally disrupted by AI.

>the sum total of all progress in AI will be a small percentage of what we achieve next year.

Extremely doubtful of that, but we'll see.

The degree, which is a requirement at many jobs.

Becoming independent for the first time in one's life.

Meeting new people from different backgrounds and exposing oneself to new ideas.

The experience, which many college students enjoy.

Etc.

In any case, I doubt AI is going to replace educators anytime soon.

For AI to be as valuable as a teacher/tutor/professor, it would have to essentially be perfect at educating, and perfecting AI takes a FAR, FAR longer time than making it good (a level that some would argue AI hasn't reached yet in the educating realm, despite tools like ChatGPT being as impressive as they are).

Never mind that a lot of education is hands-on, so you have to be present at a school/campus/etc. with a human educator to guide you through that.

Also, take into account that not all knowledge taught at schools is on the internet, which is where AI learns from.

Given these reasons and others, I don't really see the education system being disrupted anytime soon, but it will definitely change.

I disagree, but respectfully. 5-10 years is not too long of a timeline, and knowledge work is a lot more than just crunching numbers, shuffling papers, etc. Anybody who works in a knowledge-based field (or is familiar with a knowledge-based field) knows this.

AI that's capable of fully replacing what a significant amount of knowledge workers do is still pretty far out, IMO, given how much human interaction, task variety/diversity, abstract thinking, precision, etc. is involved in much of knowledge work (not to mention legal hurdles, adoption, etc).

Knowledge work will undoubtedly change over the next 5-10 years and even more so after that, but I'm pretty confident we're a ways away from it being totally disrupted by AI.

The problem I see with ChatGPT being used as a tutor is that way too many of its answers are wrong (when asked an objective question), so it's not really trustworthy, so you'd have to verify its answer elsewhere, which is only going to result in a waste of time.

IMO, for it to be trustworthy in this regard, it would have to essentially perfect and perfecting AI takes a MUCH longer time than making it good, so I don't really see it disrupting the education system any time soon (for that and other reasons).

Oh, I see what you meant.

So we're gonna go from only art in 2022 to ALL fields in 2023? Even when factoring exponentials, this is an outrageous comment. Let's pump the breaks a bit.

Don't know how you reached this conclusion. Interviewing candidates is only one of the many, many things humans can do.

Besides, we already have AI interviewing candidates to some extent.

>The people here are closer to reality than most.

Heavy disagree. This sub is heavily populated with hyper-optimists, and the hyper-optimists are never right in regards to basically anything.

You think so? I think the people who are downvoting me are doing so because they actually believe we should be ringing up our representatives right now demanding UBI because of upcoming automation and not simply because a UBI should be a human right regardless of automation (which I agree, btw).

I 100% agree.