The actual headline: “AI Set to Replace Workers Across 41% of Companies in the Next Five Years”
That’s very different from the OP’s headline (41% of jobs).
“Plans” is way different from “set to.”
I have no idea what the course of AI development will be over the next 5 years. It’s not guaranteed that there won’t be a ChatGPT-style breakthrough that leads to AGI that can do a lot of jobs. But “plans” is different from “set to,” and this is clickbait.
Are self checkout lanes working yet?
Yes?
So long as after the person does self checkout you have someone manually confirm they scanned all the items.
I applaud the massive theft from Walmart people pissed off with having to pay and scan their own shit have been pulling off.
That doesn’t happen here. They do spot checks sometimes on big scan and go shops where they pick 5 or so random items to scan to confirm you’ve done it right but you only get selected like 10% of the time.
Manual confirmation of ALL checkouts is like manual audit of ALL tax filings. Neither happen, but the occasional audit of 1 out of 200 keeps people honest.
Vice’s headline highly misrepresents the statistic in the body of the article. Body says 41% of employers are looking to use AI to replace [some?] jobs. Doesn’t say all jobs under those employers. Even if 41% of employers wanted to replace all the jobs under them, that still doesn’t mean 41% of all jobs are getting replaced.
Imagine a world in which there’s only 100 companies. The largest 59 companies each employ one thousand people. The smallest 41 companies each employ one person. All of those bottom 41 companies replace all of their employees with AI. The world now has 59,000 employed people, and 41 unemployed individuals. 0.069% of people are then unemployed, not 41%.
And of course employers will claim they’re replacing workers in a survey, in order to send the message to their employees that they’re replacable and shouldn’t be too confident in salary negotiations.
It’ll be a while before AI can do general contracting though, my newly unemployed customers can’t really afford to hire me either.
Also, 41% of employers planning to replace positions with AI doesn’t exactly mean that 41% of jobs are going away.
Automation. Not ai. Ai in its current form is still crap.
SO many things could be automated. My guess is the vast majority of jobs exist not because someone has to do them, but because you can pay humans less then the cost to automate.
Thus, most of humanity toils not to produce, but to save the owners money. We could almost have a workless utopia if we set the minimum wage to $100/hour for a while, but the transition would see the vast majority of people become unemployed.
They could have replaced me with a call center in India years ago, that didn’t happen because the quality was too low.
AI could probably displace a lot of call centers in India and the Phillipines though.
That should hasten the revolution a bit.
Turn out the Luddites were actually pretty reasonable.
It’s just back then the wealthy owned the media too, so they painted them as crazies.
Probably jobs that didn’t need to exist in the first place. Unfortunately, people need the money, even if the jobs themselves aren’t necessary. It’s like in the Soviet Union where they would create superfluous jobs so that everyone could have a job, and an income.
So when do I get my robot girlfriend?
deleted by creator
