My University admin had decided to go all-in on AI. When I raised concerns during a Dean’s meeting I was told (verbatim quote) “This is happening. Get on board or else”.
I’ve responded by eliminating every place in my classes that AI could possibly touch (chalkboard lectures, no provided notes, in-class pen and paper essay exams). I do not respond well to threats.
(I have no issues with computational AI in research; we use it all the time in my lab for coding assistance and protein prediction. I’m not down with LLMs)
A large number of technical writers at my company got let go. AI didn’t replace all the technical writers, but it allows 1 technical writer using AI to do the work of 2-3 technical writers who don’t use AI.
Also in the call center, its much easier to troubleshoot with AI, which reduces the skill level needed to do the job. So they are outsourcing some of the call center jobs so people with less education can do that.
I feel this is different than the internet. This is more like the industrial revolution. In the industrial revolution it wasn’t uncommon for a business to lay off 80% of its workforce when new machinery was brought in, and this happened across a wide range of industries. Eventually it all worked out, but only after decades and decades of fighting. The US government did everything it could to prevent workers from organizing, including sending the national guard after them.
I predict a lot of Gen Z, Gen Alpha, etc kids living with their parents and grandparents for long periods of time since they can’t find stable employment.
When the US revolution happened, about 90% of Americans worked as farmers. Then by 1900 it was about 1/3 farmers, 1/3 worked in factories. Now only about 2% of Americans work as farmers and maybe 10% work in factories. But with AI, by mid century the number of jobs a human can actually do better/cheaper than an AI or a robot will be massively shrinking. The number of jobs that require a human is going to keep shrinking as time passes. AI and robots won’t create new jobs for people, because there is going to be virtually nothing a homo sapien can do better/cheaper than an AI or a robot. Humans will be replaced from the economy the same way tractors and automobiles replaced horses, oxen and donkeys from the economy. There is nothing a draft animal can do better than an internal combustion engine.
My prediction is there will be a lot of unemployment, job insecurity and wealth consolidation in the next few decades. Maybe by the 2060s+ everything will be straightened out and we have UBI. But sadly, this being America, we will see a resurgence of plutocratic fascism long before we see UBI.
Its sad that the solution is so easy on paper. Either socialize or heavily tax the means of production (AI and robotics) as they displace large numbers of people in the labor market. Then use that wealth to support a social safety net. Much of the developed world will take this approach. In the US, the rich will use AI and their new wealth to keep the public misinformed and divided.
The next few decades are going to suck hard if you don’t have a large financial cushion or have family with a large financial cushion.
Back in 1998, a good friend of mine got some kind of purchasing agent certification and was hired by a restaurant supply wholesaler. As he described it, all he did was order consumables (not food, but stuff like napkins. toothpicks, take-out containers, etc.) for their distribution center. According to him, he sat at a computer and was presented with an item (e.g., toothpicks) and a history of how many were ordered last time, how many were sold, how many were sold last year at the same time, and how many were currently in stock. Then a recommendation was made to order X amount for a delivery in Y days. Almost invariably, he simply approved the order and made sure it got to the manufacturer.
AI? Not really. But it’s easy to see how a great number of purchasing, scheduling, and other mid-level management and administrative tasks can be reduced or eliminated by such systems even back then.
BTW, the pay was pretty good and he got bonuses based on performance. He did it for about two years and then took a better offer for another purchasing position.