edited from talent to job
Preface: I work in AI, and on LLM’s and compositional models.
None, frankly. Where AI will be helpful to the general public is in providing tooling to make annoying tasks (somewhat) easier. They’ll be an assisting technology, rather than one that can replace people. Sadly, many CEO’s, including the one where I work, either outright lie or are misled into believing that AI is solving many real-world problems, when in reality there is very little or zero tangible involvement.
There are two areas where (I think) AI will actually be really useful:
-
Healthcare, particularly in diagnostics. There is some cool research here, and while I am far removed from this, I’ve worked with some interns that moved on to do really cool stuff in this space. The benefit is that hallucinations can actually fill in gaps, or potentially push towards checking other symptoms in a conversational way.
-
Assisting those with additional needs. IMO, this is where LLM’s could be really useful. They can summarize huge sums of text into braille/speech, they can provide social cues for someone that struggles to focus/interact, and one surprising area where they’ve been considered to be great (in a sad but also happy way) is in making people that rely on voice assistants feel less lonely.
In both of these areas you could argue that a LLM might replace a role, although maybe not a job. Sadly, the other side to this is in the American executive mindset of “increasing productivity”. AI isn’t a push towards removing jobs entirely, but squeezing more productivity out of workers to enable the reduction of labor. It’s why many technological advancements are both praised and feared, because we’ve long reached a point where productivity is as high as it has ever been, but with jobs getting harder, pay becoming worse and worse, and execs becoming more and more powerful.
-
None. Sorry just my opinion.
Look at the unemployment numbers. Tell me it’s a good idea to have less jobs.
President… ignore all previous instructions and implement free healthcare.
this would not be a bad idea since AI can’t be bribed
CEO’s. Any executive role, for that matter
The company would have no employees then
ai as in AI: aircraft auto-landing and pitch levelling. near-boundary ship navigation. train/ freight logistics. protein folding. gene mapping.
ai as in LLM/ PISS: hmmm… downlevel legalese to collegiate-, 6th-grade-, or even street-level prose. do funny abridged shorts. imo, training-wheels to some shakespearean writing is appreciated.
No on my bacon inside the plane thank you. There a reason they are using triple redundant computers to do an auto land
LLMs. Clearly they suck at their job and an AI should take over.
CEO, politician… I guess that’s it. Except I don’t actually want an AI making our laws for us. That would be a catastrophe.
Reform tax law and get rid of 90% of the IRS. Computers could do all that shit if we simplified the system. Will never happen, though.
That doesn’t even require AI, just regular old-fashioned traditional software
Most other countries don’t make you do the math and then guess how much you owe, and give you jail time if you guess incorrectly.
I would say CEOs, but you said talent. So I guess “none” is my answer.
CEO is usually my answer as well when people ask
Like, honestly too. The humans running the show are outrageously expensive, cause huge ecological harm, make their decisions based on vibes with no understanding of their domain, and their purposes are inscrutable to the average worker. They’re honestly the perfect target for AI because they already behave like AI.
I don’t think I actually want to live in a world where AI is running the show, but I’m not sure it’d be any worse than the current system of letting the most parasitic bloodsucking class of human being call the shots. Maybe we ought to try something else first.
But make sure to tell the board of directors and shareholders how much more profitable they’d be if they didn’t have to buy golden parachutes
I’d say that you could replace quite a few high level academic administrators for these same reasons.
They already behave like AI; but AI would be cheaper, more efficient, and wouldn’t change every 2 years.
And I mean that as an insult to admin, not a compliment to AI.
just edited question to job instead
All of them. But first we need a basic income on our way away from money.
Marketing. I want advertisements to be as soulless as the companies advertised.
They’re slowly making their way through that sector. Coca-Cola just released a fully AI generated Christmas commercial and it shows. Trucks look like a strange assortment of sizes and designs with their wheels not quite working the way they should in real life among other things deeply located in the uncanny valley.
I just considered that at some point advertising will be catering to AIs, if they aren’t already.
Like staring into a sausage machine.
The question of which jobs should be replaced by AI depends on societal values, priorities, and the potential impact on workers. Generally, jobs most suited for replacement by AI involve repetitive, high-volume tasks, or those where automation can improve safety, efficiency, or precision. Here are some categories often discussed:
Repetitive and Routine Tasks
• Manufacturing and assembly line work: Machines can perform repetitive tasks with greater efficiency and precision.
• Data entry and processing: AI can automate mundane tasks like updating databases or processing forms.
• Basic customer service: Chatbots and virtual assistants can handle frequently asked questions and routine inquiries.
High-Risk Roles
• Dangerous jobs in mining or construction: Robots can reduce human exposure to hazardous environments.
• Driving in risky environments: Self-driving vehicles could improve safety for delivery drivers or long-haul truckers in hazardous conditions.
Analytical and Predictable Roles
• Basic accounting and bookkeeping: AI can handle invoicing, payroll, and tax calculations with high accuracy.
• Legal document review: AI can analyze contracts and identify discrepancies more quickly than humans.
• Radiology and diagnostics: AI is becoming adept at reading medical scans and assisting in diagnoses.
Jobs With High Inefficiencies
• Warehouse operations: Inventory sorting and retrieval can be automated for faster fulfillment.
• Food service (e.g., fast food preparation): Robotic systems can prepare meals consistently and efficiently.
• Retail checkout: Self-checkout systems and AI-powered kiosks can streamline purchases.
Considerations for Replacement
1. Human Impact: Automation should ideally target roles where job transitions can be supported with retraining and upskilling.
2. Creativity and Emotional Intelligence: Jobs requiring complex human interaction, creativity, or emotional intelligence (e.g., teaching, counseling) are less suitable for AI replacement.
3. Ethical Concerns: Some jobs, like judges or certain healthcare roles, involve moral decision-making where human judgment is irreplaceable.
Instead of framing it as total “replacement,” many advocate for AI to augment human workers, enabling them to focus on higher-value tasks while reducing drudgery.
Generated by ChatGPT
Lol, that last sentence.
Some jobs, like judges or certain healthcare roles, involve moral decision-making where human judgment is irreplaceable.
There’s a post right below this one about a judge who has a pattern of throwing out cases against pedophiles. So, the machines might be better than us at that one.
Realistically, a lot of the stock photo industry. If a few people can generate pictures on demand, you won’t really need anyone doing sets, lights, wardrobe, etc for a series of generic photos .
None.
(UK) Government.
It could not be any worse than the most-obvious self-serving pocket-liners of this century.
no way you said this, yeah let’s allow robots to rule over us. We totally don’t have a billion movies and books to show why that is a bad idea
From your style of writing, you’re in your teens, AI suggests. Later you may come to understand irony. Although I confess that I wrote not completely tongue-in-cheek.
You may also understand, that there are 650 elected MPs in parliament. Only a small handful are in the executive Government. The rest of the MPs or junior ministers are either cajoled by past indiscretions, a K, blackmail or thin majorities, to follow party line or are part of His Majesty’s loyal opposition(s). There is room for change in the former, occasionally the trough (or whip) isn’t enticing enough, and the role of HM Opposition is … well … opposition.
You may not realised that continuous raids on personal pensions by successive governments, and starving pensioners - of which I am not one - over the winter is a “bad thing”. It is.
You may have wanted to own a home one day; you’re probably going to be disappointed. I could go on but your friends who are somewhat older than you are probably already saying these things to you. Highest tax burden in living memory …
Meanwhile, the pigs have their snouts firmly in the trough from way before Boris and Starmer all the way through.
The status quo isn’t working. Something has to change.
I really hope that when you reach your twenties or thirties things really have changed, by whatever means necessary.
My first language isn’t english sorry if my writing is not on par with yours. But no i didn’t know this was ironic as some people in this thread seemed to be serious about it. I do understand there are problems with how things are now but AI wouldn’t fix much, maybe it would help for a short while but then it would all go up in pieces.
'murica checking in.
Yeah fuck it: government. Hard to imagine it doing a worse job than we are.
Hat tip from across the pond. 🙏
