Group items tagged

" To be clear, workers are regularly replaced by automation, but the speed and impact of robots taking jobs is routinely overstated in public discourse; very unlikely to accelerate during a recession; and is one of many other factors that affect or change the nature of work."

"When Reddit user Throwaway59724 had to start working from home because of Covid, they learned how to automate their IT job duties so they don't have to work more than 10 minutes a day to earn their "just-shy-of-90k" salary."

"Over the next few months, Lipkin's assignments dwindled. Managers began referring to her as "Olivia/ChatGPT" on Slack. In April, she was let go without explanation, but when she found managers writing about how using ChatGPT was cheaper than paying a writer, the reason for her layoff seemed clear. "Whenever people brought up ChatGPT, I felt insecure and anxious that it would replace me," she said. "Now I actually had proof that it was true, that those anxieties were warranted and now I was actually out of a job because of AI.""

"Shapiro said that using ChatGPT can be "great" in helping applicants "brainstorm verbs" and reframe language that can "bring a level of polish to their applications." At the same time, she said that submitting AI-generated materials along with job applications can backfire if applicants don't review them for accuracy. Shapiro said Jasper recruiters have interviewed candidates and discovered skills on their résumés that applicants said shouldn't be there or characterizations they weren't familiar with. Checking the AI-generated materials to ensure they accurately reflect an applicant's capabilities, she said, is critical if they're using ChatGPT - especially if the applicant gets hired."

""After cutting me off, the AI would respond, 'Great! Sounds good! Perfect!' and move on to the next question," Ty said. "After the third or fourth question, the AI just stopped after a short pause and told me that the interview was completed and someone from the team would reach out later." (Ty asked that their last name not be used because their current employer doesn't know they're looking for a job.) A survey from Resume Builder released last summer found that by 2024, four in 10 companies would use AI to "talk with" candidates in interviews. Of those companies, 15% said hiring decisions would be made with no input from a human at all."

"Their findings show that currently, only about 23 percent of wages paid for tasks involving vision are economically viable for AI automation. In other words, it's only economically sensible to replace human labor with AI in about one-fourth of the jobs where vision is a key component of the work. "

"AI may displace 3m jobs but long-term losses 'relatively modest', says Tony Blair's thinktank Rise in unemployment in low hundreds of thousands as technology creates roles, Tony Blair Institute suggests"

"AIs do not need more intelligence than humans to transform the job market. They need only enough to do the task well. And that is not far off, Harari says. "Children alive today will face the consequences. Most of what people learn in school or in college will probably be irrelevant by the time they are 40 or 50. If they want to continue to have a job, and to understand the world, and be relevant to what is happening, people will have to reinvent themselves again and again, and faster and faster.""

The writer of a worm that can enter jailbroken iPhones has accepted a job to be a hacker full time. Although he will be doing his work for good, are iPhone owners so happy about the situation?

"But you might not end up reassured. Though it promises robot carers for an ageing population, it also forecasts huge numbers of jobs being wiped out: up to 35% of all workers in the UK and 47% of those in the US, including white-collar jobs, seeing their livelihoods taken away by machines."

"Is AI going to take all of our jobs? The economy is always in a state of flux. In the 1800s, 80% of the labor force worked on farms; today it's 2%, but we don't have 78% unemployment. Entirely new industries may continue to spring up and offer new employment opportunities. Ironically, "smart manufacturing," which is partly AI, is touted by politicians on the right and on the left as critical to saving American manufacturing jobs. If AI makes businesses more efficient, contributing to growth of the economy, there will be more money to invest in new ventures. There are probably going to be entirely new sectors of the economy in 100 years that we can't even imagine right now. It's possible that total employment will fall, but economic growth will continue as we're able to produce more with less."

"That's where the real disruption comes in. If you thought globalization was fun for manufacturing, buckle up. Remote work is about to globalize a bunch of service jobs as well."

"If AI causes mass unemployment among the general populace, it will be the first time in history that any technology has ever done that. Industrial machinery, computer-controlled machine tools, software applications, and industrial robots all caused panics about human obsolescence, and nothing of the kind ever came to pass; pretty much everyone who wants a job still has a job. As Noah has written, a wave of recent evidence shows that adoption of industrial robots and automation technology in general is associated with an increase in employment at the company and industry level."

"The more technology helps make us more efficient, the more we are asked to be more efficient. We - our labour, our time, our data - is mined with increasing rapaciousness. Here's my thing with that Keynes essay. Sure, it looks like he was totally wrong about the future. We didn't end up with so much free time that we all went insane. But, then again, we've never actually tested his theory properly. We never just let the machines take over. Clearly, as we're (re)discovering, everyone finds that idea terrifying. I tend to agree. The idea of a completely A.I.-controlled world makes me uneasy. That said, the trend over the last 100 years - and even more since the dawn of this century - doesn't make me feel much better. What seems likelier to me than us all losing our jobs to A.I. is that the way in which we're already being replaced by machines continues is accelerated. That is, that we become ever more tied to the machines, ever more entwined with them. That our lives, bodies, and brains will become ever more machine-like."

"Some experts see platforms like Appen as a new form of data colonialism, says Saiph Savage, director of the Civic AI lab at Northeastern University. "Workers in Latin America are labeling images, and those labeled images are going to feed into AI that will be used in the Global North," she says. "While it might be creating new types of jobs, it's not completely clear how fulfilling these types of jobs are for the workers in the region." Due to the ever moving goal posts of AI, workers are in a constant race against the technology, says Schmidt. "One workforce is trained to three-dimensionally place bounding boxes around cars very precisely, and suddenly it's about figuring out if a large language model has given an appropriate answer," he says, regarding the industry's shift from self-driving cars to chatbots. Thus, niche labeling skills have a "very short half-life." "From the clients' perspective, the invisibility of the workers in microtasking is not a bug but a feature," says Schmidt. Economically, because the tasks are so small, it's more feasible to deal with contractors as a crowd instead of individuals. This creates an industry of irregular labor with no face-to-face resolution for disputes if, say, a client deems their answers inaccurate or wages are withheld. The workers WIRED spoke to say it's not low fees but the way platforms pay them that's the key issue. "I don't like the uncertainty of not knowing when an assignment will come out, as it forces us to be near the computer all day long," says Fuentes, who would like to see additional compensation for time spent waiting in front of her screen. Mutmain, 18, from Pakistan, who asked not to use his surname, echoes this. He says he joined Appen at 15, using a family member's ID, and works from 8 am to 6 pm, and another shift from 2 am to 6 am. "I need to stick to these platforms at all times, so that I don't lose work," he says, but he struggles to earn more than $50

"First of all, in the short term I agree with arguments that comparative advantage will continue to keep humans relevant and in fact increase their productivity, and may even in some ways level the playing field between humans. As long as AI is only better at 90% of a given job, the other 10% will cause humans to become highly leveraged, increasing compensation and in fact creating a bunch of new human jobs complementing and amplifying what AI is good at, such that the "10%" expands to continue to employ almost everyone. In fact, even if AI can do 100% of things better than humans, but it remains inefficient or expensive at some tasks, or if the resource inputs to humans and AI's are meaningfully different, then the logic of comparative advantage continues to apply. One area humans are likely to maintain a relative (or even absolute) advantage for a significant time is the physical world. Thus, I think that the human economy may continue to make sense even a little past the point where we reach "a country of geniuses in a datacenter"."

"The purpose of handing the economy off to the synths is so that we can do the kinds of tasks that every human would wake up in the morning eager to do. There should not be any human doing a task they find a waste of their talent. If it is a job where productivity matters, a human should not be doing it. Productivity is for robots. Humans should be doing the jobs where inefficiency reigns - art, exploration, invention, innovation, small talk, adventure, companionship. All the productive chores should be handled by the billions of AIs we make. Therefore our task right now - as humans - is to make sure that in the following decades as our biological numbers start to shrink on this planet, that we can repopulate it with a sufficient number of synthetic agents, bots, and robots with sufficient intelligence, grit, perseverance, and moral training to take over the economy in time to keep our living standards rising. We are not replacing existing humans with bots, nor are we replacing unborn humans with bots. Rather we are replacing never-to-be-born humans with bots, and the relationship that we have with those synthetic agents and ems, will be highly mutual. We build an economy around their needs, and propelled by their labor, and rewarding their work, but all of this is in service of our own definition of progress and human success."

"It seems highly likely that competition between the various companies developing these technologies will produce practical, self-driving trucks within the next five to 10 years. And once the technology is proven, the incentive to adopt it will be powerful: in the US alone, large trucks are involved in about 350,000 crashes a year, resulting in nearly 4,000 fatalities. Virtually all of these incidents can be traced to human error. The potential savings in lives, property damage and exposure to liability will eventually become irresistible. There's only one problem: truck driving is one of the most common occupations in the US. "

"Those changes happened relatively slowly, but it seems to me that employment disruption is accelerating. A large reason for this is that what used to be a room-sized super computer now fits in my pocket. Over the last two decades, I have observed a fundamental change in how we can apply advanced algorithms to sensing and controlling systems-the kinds of technology that enable more sophisticated robotic manufacturing. I can remember discussing various algorithms and believing they were well beyond what we could ever implement. Now these same algorithms are considered elementary. They are just some of the changes that have fueled the revolution in manufacturing."

"Advances in technology have long been recognised as a threat to manual labour. Now highly skilled, knowledge-based jobs that were once regarded as safe could be at risk. How will they adapt to the digital age?"