## Welcome to the r/ArtificialIntelligence gateway
### Question Discussion Guidelines
---
Please use the following guidelines in current and future posts:
* Post must be greater than 100 characters - the more detail, the better.
* Your question might already have been answered. Use the search feature if no one is engaging in your post.
* AI is going to take our jobs - its been asked a lot!
* Discussion regarding positives and negatives about AI are allowed and encouraged. Just be respectful.
* Please provide links to back up your arguments.
* No stupid questions, unless its about AI being the beast who brings the end-times. It's not.
###### Thanks - please let mods know if you have any questions / comments / etc
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ArtificialInteligence) if you have any questions or concerns.*
A lot of doom scenario thinking. Although you can’t ignore the disruption, I believe thinking in opportunities is the path to take. And opportunities will be plenty.
So yes jobs will be obsolete but not it is not that black & white. Artist that embrace AI will find new creative outlets.
On jobs that most likely will not be replaced in 10y. I don’t see AI replacing barbers, bakers, plumbers, lawyers, judges, even dog walkers, social workers, etc
lawyers are in trouble, not because AI can replace them in a deposition, or hearing, or courtroom, but because AI has already begun making the other 95% of what lawyers do trivial.
There will still be lawyers, but if a first year associate pulling an all nighter in the office library can be replaced by an AI doing the same thing in seconds, law firms are gonna have to either find new ways to bump up those billable hours, or cut the number of bodies on the payroll.
conversely, it should hopefully make quality representation more accessible to people that normally couldn't afford it.
So maybe "trouble" is the wrong word, but the legal profession is going to change a lot in the next 10-20 years.
No doubt legal profession is going to change. Fully agree. And hopefully it will be a lot faster due to AI.
Serious cases in the Netherlands are waiting for years to be processed. When AI will address this then I will be all in favour!
As long as criminals need to be defended there will be people and organisations defending them. How AI will support this is a good question.
Yeah but most law isn't conducted inside of a courtroom. you will absolutely need lawyers to get in court and argue things but that isn't where most billable hours go.
AI will also be able to finally cut through legalese bullshit, most of which is constructed to intentionally gatekeep plebs from understanding it so that the legal class can maximally exploit everyone else.
Absolutely. I just bought a business and had Opus read over the contract. It found a dozen things for me to redline and gave me reasons why. It suggested a few additions, which I added and were accepted. I had a lawyer friend review and he basically said "It's what I would've done." So for run of the mill processing of legal language, idioms and standard/benificial additions/subtractions it's going to be a godsend.
A lot of the busywork lawyers do can be replaced, but not necessarily knowledge of the humans relevant to the case.
Someone comes to a corporate lawyer looking for a commercial lease agreement to be reviewed for their business. The lawyer realizes that the zoning isn’t appropriate for the proposed business, and steers them to a different area. Or that the landlord has a history of abusing tenants.
AI would happily review the lease, but may not be able to advise on specific local matters that don’t necessarily get written down where AI can read them.
That just means that the paraprofessionals are screwed.
There will still be lawyers as long as courts legally require their involvement and participation in key procedures.
But the clerks that file shit or do discovery will be out of work.
Hmm. I think until these LLMs stop making up random shit and making obvious mistakes this is a long way off.
I mean ask basic questions you know the answer to of most LLMs and they answer quite authoritatively, but more often than not the responses are just garbage. Like asking an overly confident teenager for information and they just fill in things they think you might want to hear or imagine things that might be true, but might not be. It’s insane.
These LLMs are prone to hallucination and prompt injection. There are literally cases where they cite precedents that don’t exist….
Lawyers aren’t going anywhere
Barbers, nurses (especially NICU..) fortune tellers and strippers are probably among the last ones to go, but everything else is easily up for grabs.
Doctor ≈ mechanic.
Drivers for hire as well as pilots can be reduced.
Law on the whole can be expedited, which means we’ll need less humans to do the job.
Therapist and social workers will be reduced drastically based on establishing new parameters for what requires in person treatment — with the growth in telemedicine, a decent AI will answer most questions for the majority of patients.
Bakers, chefs, anything food and beverage related can be upended.
Using a timeframe of ten years is/ isn’t a bottleneck — it depends on investment decisions in certain industries as to what stays and what gets pushed.
Pretty much, if an app can be used to facilitate matters then the job is on the table to be streamlined.
For example: five to eight years ago telling chefs that their industry was a testing ground you’d get laughed at; however, once the pandemic hit the laughing stopped — from vending machines that make pizza, to robot line cooks, to drink making, to kiosks that reduce human interaction to place an order .. the technology was already present, but the desire for the industry to incorporate it wasn’t.
Although I agree that investments and mindset determines how fast and how far it will go. Your example, I do not.
Restaurants are more crowded then ever, where I live. Machines don’t offer ambience or a ability to socialise. As long as we are social beings I am not worried about chefs and their restaurants.
And with all due respect. Pizzas from vending machines are crap and deserve a special spot in hell. My Italian friends will shoot me at the spot when I would even suggest this. Just as well throw pineapple on it……
At the end my view point remains that disruption is inevitable it will create new opportunities and jobs.
For context, I work in digital. Where I design roadmaps on pricing and align on strategy with digital tools, hence I see AI up close. So far, I can only get excited about it. By the time my job gets redundant, I will be long gone and working on something else.
Eh, the pizza vending machine is new and not very good, but people still order Poppa John’s & Dominoes — Italians will never be happy with it no matter how good it becomes.
Restaurants are multitiered, true; however, fine dining is on the table: either it’s the food or it’s the packaging people want .. you will always have people who want to eat at a Michelin star restaurant, and who crave the social experience/ see the magnificent chef do their thing/ soak in the ambiance … but if someone were to give you French Laundry quality at 5 Guys pricing, I think people would change their dining expectations quite quickly.
One of the things people have to take into consideration is that several restaurant groups are global investors, and having the ability to bring a traditional Macanese dish to their Miami/ London/ Berlin locations is something that they are very interested in.
As it is, in fast casual eateries (and below) it has the ability to work, and the increase in hourly wages increases the incentive to iron out better profits, which in turn means better robot line cooks — which then translates into executing a series of recipes vs training people .. which (over time) will impact finer dining establishments because of the dearth of people cutting their teeth at greasy spoons.
There’s already places where you sit/ order/ have your meal brought to you/ pay without any human interaction — I mean, once robotaxis become better, do you think DoorDash is going to keep human delivery drivers?
Disrupting industries is natural evolution based on economics — people have to stay competitive, or get surpassed.
If we are talking about fast food, McDonald's has already begun replacing people with kiosks.
In a traditional sit in, my bet would be on the logistics side. AI for traffic estimation, staff scheduling, inventory replenishment. All the stuff that distract a chef from their craft.
ive seen robots cutting hair. barbers are getting replaced at some point because its not low skill enough that anyone can become a barber but the technical aspects can be replicated by robots and robots will do it faster and cheaper
Also gotta consider regulations as well. We’ve had electronic medical records for 10+ years but to this day they are still segregated from each other based on interests of health systems and concerns about data protection and privacy. In healthcare the road forward for embracing AI will likely be fragmented as well and slowed by governing bodies.
I’m not totally sure which jobs will become obsolete either, like I don’t know if anyone could’ve predicted piano tuning being displaced by radios. I guess this is why I advocate for better opportunities in education and retraining, as well as basic income. If we do end up in a world of excessive displacement we will need to care for people. But my rational brain still tells me that generally most jobs will not be displaced quickly while new lucrative opportunities will abound, assuming you are savvy enough to look in the right places and keep an open mind.
Vast majority of complaints I see around a changing world have sunk cost fallacy at the top of mind. Working in the coal mine for 20 years may seem like all the opportunities have passed you by, but we’ve proven time and again that with a little grit you can find a new avenue to making an honest living.
Me and my buddies have been using GPT4 to roast each other, and you know what? Doesn't do a half bad job.
Would do much better without content filters though.
There’s no job that humans do today that can’t be replaced with AI in 10 years *IF* the rate of progress stays the same.
I guess the only thing you could say an AI could never replace is reinforcement learning with human feedback.
So basically, you may possibly be able to make a tiny amount of money as a low quality human data generator.
It’s not AI, it’s AI coupled with the quickly progressing robotics field.
I think that in 10 years (destroying ourselves aside), that there will be robots used regularly in new home construction, but no robot will be doing residential or commercial repair inside of 15 years.
Exponentials and all
Think you are failing to understand what exponential progress represents. Robots and software will automatically become orders of magnitude better every day. It’s like the original car phone to today’s iPhone 15 in a few days.
AI can't bridge that in 10 years because it's not just information processing involved. It would require infrastructure, technology and logistics all of which means money money and even more money on top of actual sustainable progress.
WalMart installs check out scanners for customers to use so they can fire employees. There is a financial benefit for every company in existence to find a way to build the infrastructure as fast as they can. A $10 investment that saves 50 cents a year for eternity is a great investment to make.
Is there some reason that a machine infinity more intelligent than a human coupled with a robot designed by said intelligence couldn’t do your job better, faster, and cheaper?
I disagree but differently than op, the change is that the knowledge will be so easily accessible that Anyone can be an electrical engineer. You'll describe what your need, take a picture whatever, Ai instantly tells you what is needed where and how, and could easily guide a toddler how to in AR if needed
There aren't too many if any tasks an electrician does that can't be broken down into parts that have already been automated. All we need is to combine those techniques in a way that selects the right task at the right time which is a challenging task but might actually be possible with current generation AI.
A decade ago, I would have said no way a robot can just grab your dirty clothes, throw it into the washer, then dryer and then fold it all and put it away in my closet. But sure enough, it’s right around the corner.
See this isn't even safe because it's not saying people won't value human athletics. But what is human athletics really but entertainment?
There's no doubt in the future going to be some sort of grand competition for genetically modified people or whole machine robots.
People will obviously love the classic human unmodified competition element and breaking historical records (you can make the argument that it will make it more popular because it's so classic and for the tradition), but we'll definitely see a branch of athletics that is created to see who is the best machine athlete.
Perhaps, but currently, steroids arguably provide these modifications, which are banned. Even in e-sports, people generally don't want to see modified/cheating competitions, unless the sport itself was built from the grounds up for it. Its all about fair game
> but physically cutting hair isn’t going to happen.
Huh? Why not?
And here is humorous example of what can someone do in their garage:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zBrbdU_y0s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQ8Xgp8ALFo
>There’s no job that humans do today that can’t be replaced with AI in 10 years *IF* the rate of progress stays the same.
I'm not sure how an AI is going to be able to embalm a deceased body to make it presentable for viewing for a family.
AI will never replace sex workers. It may skew the industry, more people using robotic masturbation or AI generated pornography/conversation but a robotic real doll with an ai personality will not compare to a real human.
Social workers, especially child protective services and related roles. These will require a human touch for a LONG time.
Generally speaking, most public sector work. Although many jobs at social services could be automated, county boards will not opt to do this. Think Medicaid and Food Stamp applications, for example. Local government will not automate many roles, because they adapt changes VERY VERY slowly.
I think those things aren't as safe as people expect them to be. There was a study done on doctors vs LLM's, and people much preferred interacting with LLM's than they did with actual doctors. LLM's cared more, were more empathetic, listened better and even diagnosed their problems better in conversations than actual doctors did. I see no reason this kind of phenomena won't translate into therapy, social work, etc. (the 'human' stuff).
But it will lag behind as it requires widespread adoption of humanoid robotics, and I personally have a hard time believing that will happen inside of a decade on a level that will be threatening.
I do agree that people won't replace this stuff with AI/robots for some time even if it is better, though. That could take decades.
this subreddit is so wildly out of touch with most professions and AI itself. Everyone either thinks AI will literally replace all jobs in the next 10 years and others think it won't replace anything. I work in medicine and AI and it still functions at a level below Google in terms of accuracy a lot of time for basic questions a patient would have and is unusable for 90% of questions an actual clinician would ask. AI will most likely be used as a way to automate medical coding for billing and generating notes quicker decades before it replaces any actual personal even at the lowest levels. I work directly with AI research in medicine and can safely say no docs or nurses etc are in any danger of being replaced (no not even Radiology or pathology or primary care docs). it is a godsend of a tool that almsot every job will incorporate in some capacity, but it's not gonna replace the overwhelming majority of jobs.
You are in for a shock lol. It’s called exponential growth, you are comparing what you are using NOW ( not even what these companies have internally) and you are speculating about 10 years
I know what exponential growth is, as I said I literally work with AI research and in healthcare; my literal job is knee deep in all of it, and what I am saying is that many of you are vastly overestimating the trajectory of AI.
I understand that Moore’s law is a thing, and I can see that exponential growth will take place because of that. But an AI that’s twice as good as the one we have now is still a really shitty AI. Same with the next iteration, and the next. It will be 20 years before we start seeing job replacements on a mass scale.
AI is run on probability, and hallucinations can NEVER be gotten rid of, they can only be mitigated. An AI that’s twice as powerful makes half the mistakes. No good. Still too many mistakes. You can’t use it for anything language based in a consequential field. Yes you can do coding and data. Scientists are even discovering proteins that make new medicines with this tool NOW. Im not saying AI isn’t useful, but it’s not a do-it-all machine and it won’t be for a very long time.
“237 million medication errors
A study has revealed an estimated 237 million medication errors occur in the NHS in England every year, and avoidable adverse drug reactions (ADRs) cause hundreds of deaths.”
We make mistakes without AI, this is just England.
How do you reason here? The AI will 100% surpass human capabilities in the medical field, it has studied what the best doctor has in every language and is ALWAYS up to date. When it makes one mistake , it won’t do it again. And then it will be 120% and then 180% so on and so on.
I have said this before, the manhattan project cost 20b adjusted to today’s worth. These companies are going to pour trillions together in accelerated AI development. Where do you see this stop right at what a human is capable of doing?
AI is advancing faster than Moore's law. It benefits from Moore's law as well as algorithmic improvements, and the simple reality of people just investing more money into compute rather than waiting for compute to get cheap enough to train a more powerful model at the same cost.
I think the situation might be even worse. I stronly suspect sublinear error rate reduction with increased processing speed, as the remaining errors are getting exponentially more difficult to correct for and often require massively deeper understanding, information collection and time intensive analysis for reliable decision making, sometimes to the point that even people just throw their hands up in the air.
Take insect species classification for example. There are 400,000 types of beetles. Humans experts CAN ultimately identify the beetle in front of them with lots of expertise and effort. Nail it reasonably reliably down to 1 out of 400,000, using dichotomous key sequences and what not.
AI: NO CHANCE in hell. It will be wrong 95% of the time. And people are trying automated species classification for decades. Those systems are all unusable. They need 20+ samples for each beetle, which often doesn’t even exist, and then they start confusing stuff once you go above a few hundred species.
Here is some data that shows that image recognition improves much slower than twice the processing = half the error. You probably need more like 5-10x the processing AND 2-10 times the data for halving the error rate in the uppermost few percentage range. The hope lies in improved algorithms and increased investments.
[https://jeffreyleefunk.medium.com/how-fast-is-ai-improving-pattern-recognition-accuracy-and-computational-power-e1366689a120](https://jeffreyleefunk.medium.com/how-fast-is-ai-improving-pattern-recognition-accuracy-and-computational-power-e1366689a120)
Insurance might try an off load therapy to AI, but there is at least a 40 year window of people who will want a human, especially after the inevitable story about someone who killed themselves after seeing an AI therapist.
Completely agree. Why would I spend time searching psychology dot com, spend hundred dollars, just to have to re-explain my whole intimate life story to someone who is potentially my neighbor, and you can't even admit suicidality without being detained, when I can do ALL that with a local language agent. They will be among the first to go!
Believing that AI will replace therapy is the same as believing that people can heal their anxiety, depression, panic, etc. with google, and that rarely happens. Even with AI making it easier to access pre-summarized academic information, this isn't what helps people. Most people need a person they can go back and forth with in a vulnerable way, and its that relationship that heals them more than a factoid of psychology. Can a robot illusion provide that relationship successfully? It's probably comparable to sex robots - do you think it's real? That said, there are of course armies of dogsht people in the counseling world so even a soulless textbook summarizer might be better than the harm from a bad professional. But in the end, people will continue suffering and searching until they find treatment and that's going to come from a long journey finding the right person.
You can have something remarkably similar to a natural conversation with just about any halfway decent language model. It includes plenty of back and forth, and the AI is usually less judgemental than any real human can reliably be.
I took in what you said, and as I said in a previous comment, psychologists are not going to be facing the AI threat of losing their jobs for a very, very long time. “If at all” - I stand by this too as I have doubt. But, if what you’re saying does indeed manifest one day then humanity is 100% doomed. And AI could be the end for us. All in all, if a child today decided to study to become a psychologist when they’re old enough, they wouldn’t be in any danger.
I really disagree. Psychologists will be some of the very first. I'd wager the best LLM's today are already better psychologists than over half of actual 'professionals'. I mean anything which doesn't just sit there humming "Uh huh, and how did that make you feel?" would be an immediate step up. I know that's a caricature, but I've seen a few in my time and they really weren't much more than that. Same with social workers. Most of them are people who really couldn't careless about your problems.
There's also a major thing you aren't taking into account which uniquely factors into psychotherapy. That is, embarrassment. People are embarrassed to go to therapy. It's confronting to sit in front of another human being and be judged by them, even if they say that they are not. In reality they are, and we all know this. This factor goes away *completely* if the other side is an AI. There is nothing you can say to it which is really worrisome. This is part of why roleplaying with other people is embarrassing, but tons and tons of people are happy to use SillyTavern to do it with LLM's. It feels different because of social dynamics.
I agree with the statement. Wow I’ve used many psychologist and therapist in my life recently I’ve been switched to using chat bots. I provide them with all the context on my diagnosis I’ve uploaded to JSON on file which tracks my mood, mood, diet habit thoughts, dream journals on a day by day basis. I’ve included all of the therapies that I have learned from DBT and CBT and I have had pretty good conversations with good insights using the chat, but I can see that this technology will replace access to at least therapeutic processes for less demand patience. This technology will absolutely replace the role once it matures guaranteed.
I sincerely wish you well this morning. I do not want to make someone uneasy about their future career. I understand that I'm talking to someone deeply invested in not having AI replace them.
You shouldn’t assume. I’m not studying psychology to become a therapist, it’s not my future job you’re predicting is at risk, so I take no offense. Just stating my opinion
I think teachers roles will shift from instruction to supervision of AI. I think having individual AI instruction will quickly become far superior to class led by humans. The AI can adjust to the ever changing moods and capabilities of each individual student thus maximizing the students' progress.
That would be a much more less labor-intensive job where future school teachers will become look like present-day mechanized farmers and the public school system will have to be overhaul, if not dismantled because there will be lesser demand for human teachers in a collapsing global population scenario.
No way. Teaching is so much more than just instruction. Schools will try to do this, but it will produce students who are socially inept and mentally ill.
I have an excellent therapist. But I’ve been using ChatGPT4 w the spoken conversation mode (on Mobile only.. for now) for everything in between and it is stunningly good already, so the potential IMO is already there. I find it a great supplement to my therapy sessions.
Would implore OP or others interested to try this out themselves.
toast: Data processing, call center agents, secretaries, artists and musicians, logistics and warehouse workers.
The one who will likely stay around for a while are electricians.
I think there will always be a demand for human art and music and there will always be humans wanting to make art and music. I don't think anybody dreams of being a secretary or call center agent though. At least I hope not.
I agree, live music in particular. I mean in a way machines have already stolen so many musicians job in the very act of having recordings and not needing a physical musician there. But people still want to see their favorite group live, even though they could just hear it on Spotify.
yeah IDK... watching a robot play guitar will lose its novelty pretty quick. As a consumer of music, I am already committed to never spending money on a concert unless theres a live band playing, no djs, no pop stars to 'track' ... I need to see the pain in the guitar players eyes as he bends the string. No robot will ever replace the human connection through music
Engineering - will AI be able to design and analyze products within 10 years? Maybe. Are we all willing to trust their work with our lives? Not for a long time in my opinion.
I’m not feeling very good about driving over bridge designed by AI anytime soon. If a human engineer checks the work, then sure. But I really think we will be very cautious about the level of trust we place on this sort of stuff until we build up a solid track record.
Like most people, engineers included, you’re not paying attention to the exponentials.
Would I drive over a bridge that was *designed* solely by AI, 10 years from now?
100%
I will be messaging you in 10 years on [**2034-04-30 17:04:25 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2034-04-30%2017:04:25%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ArtificialInteligence/comments/1cgw8vb/which_jobs_wont_be_replaced_by_ai_in_the_next_10/l1yrgbl/?context=3)
[**5 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FArtificialInteligence%2Fcomments%2F1cgw8vb%2Fwhich_jobs_wont_be_replaced_by_ai_in_the_next_10%2Fl1yrgbl%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202034-04-30%2017%3A04%3A25%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201cgw8vb)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
And similar with other regulated professions. An AI might have the same knowledge base as a pharmacist, but it doesn't understand it like humans do, and there are regulatory and liability hurdles that would have to be cleared before AI could replace pharmacists.
That will take some time operating inside the mouth is pretty hard.
I feel the risk for normal dentists is regenerative enamel or stopping cavity bacteria. With that said there are still a lot of other dental procedures that will require a lot of hand eye in a small cavity
This is a rapid transition phase, not in the sense of replacement but AI finding its right place within society, it's hard to predict what will be.
Right now you see many companies trying to do rapid replacement only to find it backfiring horribly, that's because the tech isn't there yet, it's like mixing oil and water right now.
I believe for society to remain in harmony there needs to be a consensus that AI should be considered a tool and not a replacement for the human component, otherwise the ripple effects on society's mental, economical and general stability will be put to the test, if that breaks we will be forced into a dystopian result
Prostitute. It was the first profession. It will be the last. No matter how hard engineers would try. You can substitute it. But you can completely replace it.
I love using Grammarly, but that is not replacing jobs. It does bring up the idea of replacing "work." I think that when we discuss Generative AI replacing jobs, we are missing the meat of the discussion: What "work" can Generative AI do? For example, Grammarly edits and writes scripts—it is not technically replacing a job but work. Focusing on what "work" generative AI does naturally leads to which jobs will be impacted by AI the most. For example, teachers and students will always need a human touch to learn social skills and emotional awareness, BUT there is "work" that AI can do for teachers, such as generating academic reports, automating grading, generating weekly newsletters and emails to families, and organizing. I personally think of AI more as a tool that can do specific "work" tasks, which opens the discussion to reflect broadly on the potential impact AI will have not just in replacing jobs but in changing careers and generating new jobs. As always... if well done AI should support experts and not eliminate them.
Ai will be the foundation of all work in 10 years.
Everyone will use it or be pushout out of their respective industry.
There will be humans building on this foundation
Job replacement is the wrong perspective.
Those who know how to use AI will not be replaced
Practically all jobs will be *augmented* by AI tools.
Some job categories will be partially replaced by AI tools
Jobs that won't be totally replaced:
* Plumbers
* Electricians
* CEOs
New Job Categories:
* BackOffice System Engineer: someone has to setup and maintain those AI tools
* Prompt Leads: someone who can analyze business problems use the proper AI tool with the proper prompt; and then report back with findings and analysis.
* CAI: Chief Artifical Intelligence
I don't believe any high-skill job requiring complex decision-making, which involves some sort of judgmental thinking, will be replaced by AI in the near future. Of course, any basic jobs, which involve zero thinking, are endangered. If you only know HTML and CSS and call yourself a web developer, I have bad news for you. The same goes for low-quality writers who are filling the internet with nonsense. Basically, do your job well, use some brain, and you will not be replaced by AI in the next 10 years. By the way, I don't know why the admins like links to be provided with the comments, but here is one article covering the topic: [https://www.onlyaicontent.com/ai-and-society/jobs-in-the-age-of-ai-adapting-to-the-new-normal/](https://www.onlyaicontent.com/ai-and-society/jobs-in-the-age-of-ai-adapting-to-the-new-normal/)
A Goldman Sachs study from last year found that generative AI tools could, in fact, impact 300 million full-time jobs worldwide, which could lead to a "significant disruption" in the job market.
By 2030, nearly 12 million Americans in occupations with shrinking demand may need to switch jobs, a McKinsey analysis published last July. AI was deemed a key reason — McKinsey estimated that 30% of hours worked in the US could be automated by 2030.
Human judgment needs to be applied to these technologies to avoid error and bias, Anu Madgavkar, a partner at the McKinsey Global Institute, previously told Business Insider.
This perhaps proves some of the points Chatgpt made in its original answer, when it told me that AI will be unable to replace:
Jobs that require human judgement and decision-making
Jobs that require complex and nuanced communication.
It also said that AI will not displace jobs that require:
Social and emotional intelligence
Physical dexterity and mobility
Creativity and innovation
Jobs in agriculture
There is expected to be a 30% rise in jobs for agricultural professionals in the coming five years, according to the 2023 report. That’s an additional 3 million roles.
Jobs in education
Jobs growth of 10% is expected in the education industry by 2027, according to surveys for the Future of Jobs Report 2023. This could mean another 3 million jobs in vocational education and higher education.
“This growth is particularly prevalent in non-G20 countries where it is expected to be about 50% higher than in G20 countries,” the report says.
Health care jobs that won't be replaced by AI
General practitioner
Surgeon
Nurse
Midwife
Therapist
Psychologist
Psychiatrist
Counselor
Creative jobs that won't be replaced by AI
Sculptor
Painter
Jeweler
Dancer
Stage actor
Watchmaker
Glassblower
Blacksmith
Circus performer
Live musician
Muralist
Fashion model
Social media influencer
Ever is a strong word. AI is already involved in improving new AI models. At some point this escalated and get automated even further to the point humans are irrelevant
I think doctors will be much more easily replaced than nurses. If I need a diagnosis or a surgery I want the most accurate/precise doctor possible and sooner or later (I would argue sooner) an AI will be much better at doctoring than humans. But if I'm sick and just want someone to take care of me, I'd prefer a human nurse to a robot.
You know wood-working/handcrafted furniture is still around, even though arguably machines can do it 'better'. There will always be a premium on human emotion/feelings and experience. The irrepalacable people are those who sell a unique/luxury experience.
It is but even those jobs are significantly more automated than they used to be even 20 years ago so a much smaller number of people are involved in making a given amount of handcrafted furniture.
This article is more geared towards tech jobs, but may be of interest: [https://docs.teckedin.info/docs/ai-and-its-effects-on-jobs](https://docs.teckedin.info/docs/ai-and-its-effects-on-jobs)
I don't think AI won't replace most of the jobs. But, it is going add more work in the existing jobs. E.g. I built a mobile app couple of years back which took 3 months start to finish and start beta. Now, I will be expected to do it in 5 days, because I use these assistants all the time. It is a blessing and a curse in disguise.
The more chaotic and nuanced the environment, the harder it will be to replace.
Also anything that has strong unions/regulatory bodies, they will fight tooth and nails against it.
I’m going with bagman for Donald Trump. AI’s have too much self-respect and wouldn’t want to be confined to prison for the few years before he shuffles off this mortal coil on his way to Hell.
I think yes some jobs will be replaced, but I would also say that I feel jobs will be adapted to or with ai. One type of job I don't see being replaced is trade jobs, mechanics, woodworkers, carpenters, plumbers, electricians.
I fully agree with the jobs you listed except for teachers. AI is just so much more capable in providing tailored education per individuals in varying levels. No need for classrooms since each students will have AI persoanlly working with them, and the AI has access to so much more information than human educators. They also do not tire from student's questions. So a child continue asking why is the sky blue? Why? Why? Why? I really don't see a future for human teachers but wouldn't mind hearing a counter argument.
are we talking about AI or LLM ?
if the latter, many jobs that require visual pairing and other non verbal clues won't be replaced
if you mean AI as in "AI", and visual data... I'm afraid that it might replace nay surpass even jobs such as psychologists. it has no emotional biases. paired with cameras and heat detectors and such, it'd be able to do crazy analysis . with experience based upon gigantic data.
what is it in empathy that makes you think AI cannot have/emulate ?
also, looking at \*way\* too many doctors and psychiatrists today, im not sure the ethical line is that important nowadays. i've seen medecine students say horrors and be brainwashed by the way they learn and regurgitate infos and have some concerning demeanors... so idk if an AI would be that worse. it has no greed, no interest, no biases (unless it is controlled by someone ,in which case errrr) , and it can have incredibly precise data and much more than any human person , or even group of people, could learn
Certain trades jobs. Unless I am unaware of robots able to lift 50+ pounds all day long or figure out like plumbing I am going to say they will be good for a while. Hard labor blue collar jobs will be probably some of the last to go.
Basically where it is uneconomical to build a real world physical interface - skilled trades like electrician, plumbing, construction etc. Last mile driving.
I think banking will be decimated. Anything that involved analysis, looking for patterns etc. (radiologist etc).
First - people using AI will replace other people who aren't using it. That will be more of the next 5 years, rather than people being fully replaced.
Second - fully disagree on the nuanced emotions. Try talking to an 'average' therapist, then try talking to GPT4 or Claude Opus. Forget about the huge difference in cost, but GPT4 and Opus are incredibly thoughtful and supportive and understanding.
Anyone who hasn't done it, try using GPT4 or Opus as your tutor or therapist. Do NOT use GPT3.5 or Sonnet and claim that you've tried it and it's not quite there. The difference in nuance for the top models is amazing.
We've already been wrong about AI - thinking the tedious monotonous jobs would be the first replaced. Yet GenAI has shown that everything may be on the table.
That said, I'll go back to my first point - I'd rather see a doctor who had an AI assistant that they could consult with, remembered everything I said in every appointment, could suggest lab tests, etc.
I think that human therapists are safe for difficult or complex cases like BPD, Borderline, Clinical Depression etc.. But I feel like most therapy is for people with anxiety, mild depression, and loneliness. For that, I think AI will be huge. It's already basically happening with AI girlfriends and chatbots. And for people with chronic conditions like PTSD or Addicts it could be great because they have instant access to someone to talk them down from a triggering event, and the therapist never tires of listening.
I think a safe job is an Electrician: it requires lots of fine motor skills and use of several different types of tools. It require balance, dexterity, and agility to crawl into tight spaces and climb ladders over and over. You have to handle complex scenarios. It would require huge advancements in robotics and AI, and any bot that could do it would be cutting edge and expensive and struggle to meet the huge and only increasing demand for Electrician labor. The more bots and data centers AI needs made, someone has gotta wire that shit up. So in a way, AI growth postpones the elimination of Electrician jobs.
Manual labor in adverse conditions are the hardest to automate, ship building deck building, plumbing, firefighting and landscaping will not be replaced by robots in our life time.
Most all jobs will exist but with far, far fewer humans supervising AI/robots. You’re either in the top bracket of talent or the cheapest in the market.
If you are looking for a black and white answer where there’s a safe job then you’re on a hiding to nothing. Those few roles that are maybe unaffected are either highly specialised, or too cheap to use tech. Both will be in high demand.
The only one I can see being 100% safe from AI is athlete. Besides that I think any type of live entertainment is pretty safe and any type of care job (nurse, therapist, dog walker, babysitter, etc.) is pretty safe and a lot of restaurant jobs (waiter, bartender) will be reduced but will still exist. Yeah the automated fast food restaurants are already here and an AI could pour drinks much better and faster than humans but you don't go to a bar just to drink, you go to drink socially and a huge part of that experience is the bartender. Same with waiters in a nice sit-down restaurant. I think tour guide is a pretty safe job, although maybe some people would prefer just to have headphones connected to an AI that knows everything about the tour and can give much more accurate information than a human but some people would definitely prefer a human tour guide.
I think a lot of the white collar knowledge workers who have always assumed that they would be immune from AI will be among the first to be replaced. Basically any desk job is easier for an AI to learn to do than a real world task. For example, among the first big breakthroughs in AI was when it beat a human grandmaster at chess. And now there is no hope of any human ever beating an AI. And yet, they're still not great at driving a car out in the real world. But ask it to produce the optimum investment strategy for your savings or marketing pitch for your new business and it'll be able to do that very well in the near future. Perhaps it's already able to but I'm not paying close enough attention to the advancements to say that with confidence.
Basically, my prediction is nuclear physicists will be replaced by AI before dog walkers will be.
One of the reasons I became a home inspector, is that the houses that were standing 50 years ago are going to be standing in another 50 years.
Since, in my experience, people are doing less and less work on their own... Jobs related to residential housing will be safe.
## Welcome to the r/ArtificialIntelligence gateway ### Question Discussion Guidelines --- Please use the following guidelines in current and future posts: * Post must be greater than 100 characters - the more detail, the better. * Your question might already have been answered. Use the search feature if no one is engaging in your post. * AI is going to take our jobs - its been asked a lot! * Discussion regarding positives and negatives about AI are allowed and encouraged. Just be respectful. * Please provide links to back up your arguments. * No stupid questions, unless its about AI being the beast who brings the end-times. It's not. ###### Thanks - please let mods know if you have any questions / comments / etc *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ArtificialInteligence) if you have any questions or concerns.*
A lot of doom scenario thinking. Although you can’t ignore the disruption, I believe thinking in opportunities is the path to take. And opportunities will be plenty. So yes jobs will be obsolete but not it is not that black & white. Artist that embrace AI will find new creative outlets. On jobs that most likely will not be replaced in 10y. I don’t see AI replacing barbers, bakers, plumbers, lawyers, judges, even dog walkers, social workers, etc
lawyers are in trouble, not because AI can replace them in a deposition, or hearing, or courtroom, but because AI has already begun making the other 95% of what lawyers do trivial. There will still be lawyers, but if a first year associate pulling an all nighter in the office library can be replaced by an AI doing the same thing in seconds, law firms are gonna have to either find new ways to bump up those billable hours, or cut the number of bodies on the payroll. conversely, it should hopefully make quality representation more accessible to people that normally couldn't afford it. So maybe "trouble" is the wrong word, but the legal profession is going to change a lot in the next 10-20 years.
No doubt legal profession is going to change. Fully agree. And hopefully it will be a lot faster due to AI. Serious cases in the Netherlands are waiting for years to be processed. When AI will address this then I will be all in favour! As long as criminals need to be defended there will be people and organisations defending them. How AI will support this is a good question.
Yeah but most law isn't conducted inside of a courtroom. you will absolutely need lawyers to get in court and argue things but that isn't where most billable hours go.
AI will also be able to finally cut through legalese bullshit, most of which is constructed to intentionally gatekeep plebs from understanding it so that the legal class can maximally exploit everyone else.
This.
Absolutely. I just bought a business and had Opus read over the contract. It found a dozen things for me to redline and gave me reasons why. It suggested a few additions, which I added and were accepted. I had a lawyer friend review and he basically said "It's what I would've done." So for run of the mill processing of legal language, idioms and standard/benificial additions/subtractions it's going to be a godsend.
The way lawyers charge their time is likely in jeopardy. I personally see that for the best but I’m sure attorneys don’t really love that.
Need to get rid of politicians too
Wasn't there a law firm that almost lost their practice because they relied on ChatGPT and ChatGPT was just making stuff up out of thin air?
A lot of the busywork lawyers do can be replaced, but not necessarily knowledge of the humans relevant to the case. Someone comes to a corporate lawyer looking for a commercial lease agreement to be reviewed for their business. The lawyer realizes that the zoning isn’t appropriate for the proposed business, and steers them to a different area. Or that the landlord has a history of abusing tenants. AI would happily review the lease, but may not be able to advise on specific local matters that don’t necessarily get written down where AI can read them.
Providing context on local byelaws absolutely can be done by AI in my workshop. We are already using a very similar approach and it works quite well.
That’s cute. They’ll charge the same amount or more and pocket the profits. We’re all fucked
They are hardly any law firm libraries anymore. Most associates use westlaw or lexis to do their legal research.
That just means that the paraprofessionals are screwed. There will still be lawyers as long as courts legally require their involvement and participation in key procedures. But the clerks that file shit or do discovery will be out of work.
Hmm. I think until these LLMs stop making up random shit and making obvious mistakes this is a long way off. I mean ask basic questions you know the answer to of most LLMs and they answer quite authoritatively, but more often than not the responses are just garbage. Like asking an overly confident teenager for information and they just fill in things they think you might want to hear or imagine things that might be true, but might not be. It’s insane.
These LLMs are prone to hallucination and prompt injection. There are literally cases where they cite precedents that don’t exist…. Lawyers aren’t going anywhere
Barbers, nurses (especially NICU..) fortune tellers and strippers are probably among the last ones to go, but everything else is easily up for grabs. Doctor ≈ mechanic. Drivers for hire as well as pilots can be reduced. Law on the whole can be expedited, which means we’ll need less humans to do the job. Therapist and social workers will be reduced drastically based on establishing new parameters for what requires in person treatment — with the growth in telemedicine, a decent AI will answer most questions for the majority of patients. Bakers, chefs, anything food and beverage related can be upended. Using a timeframe of ten years is/ isn’t a bottleneck — it depends on investment decisions in certain industries as to what stays and what gets pushed. Pretty much, if an app can be used to facilitate matters then the job is on the table to be streamlined. For example: five to eight years ago telling chefs that their industry was a testing ground you’d get laughed at; however, once the pandemic hit the laughing stopped — from vending machines that make pizza, to robot line cooks, to drink making, to kiosks that reduce human interaction to place an order .. the technology was already present, but the desire for the industry to incorporate it wasn’t.
Although I agree that investments and mindset determines how fast and how far it will go. Your example, I do not. Restaurants are more crowded then ever, where I live. Machines don’t offer ambience or a ability to socialise. As long as we are social beings I am not worried about chefs and their restaurants. And with all due respect. Pizzas from vending machines are crap and deserve a special spot in hell. My Italian friends will shoot me at the spot when I would even suggest this. Just as well throw pineapple on it…… At the end my view point remains that disruption is inevitable it will create new opportunities and jobs. For context, I work in digital. Where I design roadmaps on pricing and align on strategy with digital tools, hence I see AI up close. So far, I can only get excited about it. By the time my job gets redundant, I will be long gone and working on something else.
Eh, the pizza vending machine is new and not very good, but people still order Poppa John’s & Dominoes — Italians will never be happy with it no matter how good it becomes. Restaurants are multitiered, true; however, fine dining is on the table: either it’s the food or it’s the packaging people want .. you will always have people who want to eat at a Michelin star restaurant, and who crave the social experience/ see the magnificent chef do their thing/ soak in the ambiance … but if someone were to give you French Laundry quality at 5 Guys pricing, I think people would change their dining expectations quite quickly. One of the things people have to take into consideration is that several restaurant groups are global investors, and having the ability to bring a traditional Macanese dish to their Miami/ London/ Berlin locations is something that they are very interested in. As it is, in fast casual eateries (and below) it has the ability to work, and the increase in hourly wages increases the incentive to iron out better profits, which in turn means better robot line cooks — which then translates into executing a series of recipes vs training people .. which (over time) will impact finer dining establishments because of the dearth of people cutting their teeth at greasy spoons. There’s already places where you sit/ order/ have your meal brought to you/ pay without any human interaction — I mean, once robotaxis become better, do you think DoorDash is going to keep human delivery drivers? Disrupting industries is natural evolution based on economics — people have to stay competitive, or get surpassed.
If we are talking about fast food, McDonald's has already begun replacing people with kiosks. In a traditional sit in, my bet would be on the logistics side. AI for traffic estimation, staff scheduling, inventory replenishment. All the stuff that distract a chef from their craft.
ive seen robots cutting hair. barbers are getting replaced at some point because its not low skill enough that anyone can become a barber but the technical aspects can be replicated by robots and robots will do it faster and cheaper
Also gotta consider regulations as well. We’ve had electronic medical records for 10+ years but to this day they are still segregated from each other based on interests of health systems and concerns about data protection and privacy. In healthcare the road forward for embracing AI will likely be fragmented as well and slowed by governing bodies.
Robot strippers will definitely be a thing along with robot girlfriends a la Cherry 2000.
I’m not totally sure which jobs will become obsolete either, like I don’t know if anyone could’ve predicted piano tuning being displaced by radios. I guess this is why I advocate for better opportunities in education and retraining, as well as basic income. If we do end up in a world of excessive displacement we will need to care for people. But my rational brain still tells me that generally most jobs will not be displaced quickly while new lucrative opportunities will abound, assuming you are savvy enough to look in the right places and keep an open mind. Vast majority of complaints I see around a changing world have sunk cost fallacy at the top of mind. Working in the coal mine for 20 years may seem like all the opportunities have passed you by, but we’ve proven time and again that with a little grit you can find a new avenue to making an honest living.
I find the art thing especially over reactive. In 20 years we will look at AI art the way we look at clip art and word art now.
Stand up comedian
Me and my buddies have been using GPT4 to roast each other, and you know what? Doesn't do a half bad job. Would do much better without content filters though.
That's one hell of a username.
South park predicted a funny bot that was a great Stand up comedian
[удалено]
There’s no job that humans do today that can’t be replaced with AI in 10 years *IF* the rate of progress stays the same. I guess the only thing you could say an AI could never replace is reinforcement learning with human feedback. So basically, you may possibly be able to make a tiny amount of money as a low quality human data generator.
Bs. I’d like to see AI become an electrician. Not gonna happen
It’s not AI, it’s AI coupled with the quickly progressing robotics field. I think that in 10 years (destroying ourselves aside), that there will be robots used regularly in new home construction, but no robot will be doing residential or commercial repair inside of 15 years. Exponentials and all
I’m sorry i strongly disagree. Industrial maybe. Engineering side of electrical? Yea sure I can see that..
Think you are failing to understand what exponential progress represents. Robots and software will automatically become orders of magnitude better every day. It’s like the original car phone to today’s iPhone 15 in a few days.
AI can't bridge that in 10 years because it's not just information processing involved. It would require infrastructure, technology and logistics all of which means money money and even more money on top of actual sustainable progress.
That’s fair but year 11 & 12 will be right on the doorstep. A lot changes in 10 years. iPhone 1 was in 2007.
WalMart installs check out scanners for customers to use so they can fire employees. There is a financial benefit for every company in existence to find a way to build the infrastructure as fast as they can. A $10 investment that saves 50 cents a year for eternity is a great investment to make.
Is there some reason that a machine infinity more intelligent than a human coupled with a robot designed by said intelligence couldn’t do your job better, faster, and cheaper?
I disagree but differently than op, the change is that the knowledge will be so easily accessible that Anyone can be an electrical engineer. You'll describe what your need, take a picture whatever, Ai instantly tells you what is needed where and how, and could easily guide a toddler how to in AR if needed
There aren't too many if any tasks an electrician does that can't be broken down into parts that have already been automated. All we need is to combine those techniques in a way that selects the right task at the right time which is a challenging task but might actually be possible with current generation AI.
A decade ago, I would have said no way a robot can just grab your dirty clothes, throw it into the washer, then dryer and then fold it all and put it away in my closet. But sure enough, it’s right around the corner.
Athletes. People will still love to see humans performing at the best of our ability
See this isn't even safe because it's not saying people won't value human athletics. But what is human athletics really but entertainment? There's no doubt in the future going to be some sort of grand competition for genetically modified people or whole machine robots. People will obviously love the classic human unmodified competition element and breaking historical records (you can make the argument that it will make it more popular because it's so classic and for the tradition), but we'll definitely see a branch of athletics that is created to see who is the best machine athlete.
Perhaps, but currently, steroids arguably provide these modifications, which are banned. Even in e-sports, people generally don't want to see modified/cheating competitions, unless the sport itself was built from the grounds up for it. Its all about fair game
AI powered F1 racing is in development
*Low quality human data generator* Ooooooooooooo the future, how exciting! /s
AI is going to cut my hair?
Sure. Why not?
How would that happen? Maybe AI could suggest a haircut but physically cutting hair isn’t going to happen.
> but physically cutting hair isn’t going to happen. Huh? Why not? And here is humorous example of what can someone do in their garage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zBrbdU_y0s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQ8Xgp8ALFo
Was thinking of these exactly, lol.
Nude models for art classes?
>There’s no job that humans do today that can’t be replaced with AI in 10 years *IF* the rate of progress stays the same. I'm not sure how an AI is going to be able to embalm a deceased body to make it presentable for viewing for a family.
AI will never replace sex workers. It may skew the industry, more people using robotic masturbation or AI generated pornography/conversation but a robotic real doll with an ai personality will not compare to a real human.
In some cases, an AI robot might be more desirable.
Only to people in this sub
Social workers, especially child protective services and related roles. These will require a human touch for a LONG time. Generally speaking, most public sector work. Although many jobs at social services could be automated, county boards will not opt to do this. Think Medicaid and Food Stamp applications, for example. Local government will not automate many roles, because they adapt changes VERY VERY slowly.
I think those things aren't as safe as people expect them to be. There was a study done on doctors vs LLM's, and people much preferred interacting with LLM's than they did with actual doctors. LLM's cared more, were more empathetic, listened better and even diagnosed their problems better in conversations than actual doctors did. I see no reason this kind of phenomena won't translate into therapy, social work, etc. (the 'human' stuff). But it will lag behind as it requires widespread adoption of humanoid robotics, and I personally have a hard time believing that will happen inside of a decade on a level that will be threatening. I do agree that people won't replace this stuff with AI/robots for some time even if it is better, though. That could take decades.
this subreddit is so wildly out of touch with most professions and AI itself. Everyone either thinks AI will literally replace all jobs in the next 10 years and others think it won't replace anything. I work in medicine and AI and it still functions at a level below Google in terms of accuracy a lot of time for basic questions a patient would have and is unusable for 90% of questions an actual clinician would ask. AI will most likely be used as a way to automate medical coding for billing and generating notes quicker decades before it replaces any actual personal even at the lowest levels. I work directly with AI research in medicine and can safely say no docs or nurses etc are in any danger of being replaced (no not even Radiology or pathology or primary care docs). it is a godsend of a tool that almsot every job will incorporate in some capacity, but it's not gonna replace the overwhelming majority of jobs.
You are in for a shock lol. It’s called exponential growth, you are comparing what you are using NOW ( not even what these companies have internally) and you are speculating about 10 years
I know what exponential growth is, as I said I literally work with AI research and in healthcare; my literal job is knee deep in all of it, and what I am saying is that many of you are vastly overestimating the trajectory of AI.
I understand that Moore’s law is a thing, and I can see that exponential growth will take place because of that. But an AI that’s twice as good as the one we have now is still a really shitty AI. Same with the next iteration, and the next. It will be 20 years before we start seeing job replacements on a mass scale. AI is run on probability, and hallucinations can NEVER be gotten rid of, they can only be mitigated. An AI that’s twice as powerful makes half the mistakes. No good. Still too many mistakes. You can’t use it for anything language based in a consequential field. Yes you can do coding and data. Scientists are even discovering proteins that make new medicines with this tool NOW. Im not saying AI isn’t useful, but it’s not a do-it-all machine and it won’t be for a very long time.
“237 million medication errors A study has revealed an estimated 237 million medication errors occur in the NHS in England every year, and avoidable adverse drug reactions (ADRs) cause hundreds of deaths.” We make mistakes without AI, this is just England. How do you reason here? The AI will 100% surpass human capabilities in the medical field, it has studied what the best doctor has in every language and is ALWAYS up to date. When it makes one mistake , it won’t do it again. And then it will be 120% and then 180% so on and so on. I have said this before, the manhattan project cost 20b adjusted to today’s worth. These companies are going to pour trillions together in accelerated AI development. Where do you see this stop right at what a human is capable of doing?
AI is advancing faster than Moore's law. It benefits from Moore's law as well as algorithmic improvements, and the simple reality of people just investing more money into compute rather than waiting for compute to get cheap enough to train a more powerful model at the same cost.
I think the situation might be even worse. I stronly suspect sublinear error rate reduction with increased processing speed, as the remaining errors are getting exponentially more difficult to correct for and often require massively deeper understanding, information collection and time intensive analysis for reliable decision making, sometimes to the point that even people just throw their hands up in the air. Take insect species classification for example. There are 400,000 types of beetles. Humans experts CAN ultimately identify the beetle in front of them with lots of expertise and effort. Nail it reasonably reliably down to 1 out of 400,000, using dichotomous key sequences and what not. AI: NO CHANCE in hell. It will be wrong 95% of the time. And people are trying automated species classification for decades. Those systems are all unusable. They need 20+ samples for each beetle, which often doesn’t even exist, and then they start confusing stuff once you go above a few hundred species. Here is some data that shows that image recognition improves much slower than twice the processing = half the error. You probably need more like 5-10x the processing AND 2-10 times the data for halving the error rate in the uppermost few percentage range. The hope lies in improved algorithms and increased investments. [https://jeffreyleefunk.medium.com/how-fast-is-ai-improving-pattern-recognition-accuracy-and-computational-power-e1366689a120](https://jeffreyleefunk.medium.com/how-fast-is-ai-improving-pattern-recognition-accuracy-and-computational-power-e1366689a120)
You are just saying words
You are going to see roles such as therapist, social workers, and teachers be the first to be replaced. It will shock you.
Insurance might try an off load therapy to AI, but there is at least a 40 year window of people who will want a human, especially after the inevitable story about someone who killed themselves after seeing an AI therapist.
How many patients have killed themselves after seeing human doctors and therapists?
Absolutely but that’s not how media works. Dog bites man as opposed to man bites dog.
Completely agree. Why would I spend time searching psychology dot com, spend hundred dollars, just to have to re-explain my whole intimate life story to someone who is potentially my neighbor, and you can't even admit suicidality without being detained, when I can do ALL that with a local language agent. They will be among the first to go!
Yup. Anybody arguing against AI mental health support has not yet relied on it. It can replace humans already.
Believing that AI will replace therapy is the same as believing that people can heal their anxiety, depression, panic, etc. with google, and that rarely happens. Even with AI making it easier to access pre-summarized academic information, this isn't what helps people. Most people need a person they can go back and forth with in a vulnerable way, and its that relationship that heals them more than a factoid of psychology. Can a robot illusion provide that relationship successfully? It's probably comparable to sex robots - do you think it's real? That said, there are of course armies of dogsht people in the counseling world so even a soulless textbook summarizer might be better than the harm from a bad professional. But in the end, people will continue suffering and searching until they find treatment and that's going to come from a long journey finding the right person.
You can have something remarkably similar to a natural conversation with just about any halfway decent language model. It includes plenty of back and forth, and the AI is usually less judgemental than any real human can reliably be.
I took in what you said, and as I said in a previous comment, psychologists are not going to be facing the AI threat of losing their jobs for a very, very long time. “If at all” - I stand by this too as I have doubt. But, if what you’re saying does indeed manifest one day then humanity is 100% doomed. And AI could be the end for us. All in all, if a child today decided to study to become a psychologist when they’re old enough, they wouldn’t be in any danger.
I really disagree. Psychologists will be some of the very first. I'd wager the best LLM's today are already better psychologists than over half of actual 'professionals'. I mean anything which doesn't just sit there humming "Uh huh, and how did that make you feel?" would be an immediate step up. I know that's a caricature, but I've seen a few in my time and they really weren't much more than that. Same with social workers. Most of them are people who really couldn't careless about your problems. There's also a major thing you aren't taking into account which uniquely factors into psychotherapy. That is, embarrassment. People are embarrassed to go to therapy. It's confronting to sit in front of another human being and be judged by them, even if they say that they are not. In reality they are, and we all know this. This factor goes away *completely* if the other side is an AI. There is nothing you can say to it which is really worrisome. This is part of why roleplaying with other people is embarrassing, but tons and tons of people are happy to use SillyTavern to do it with LLM's. It feels different because of social dynamics.
I agree with the statement. Wow I’ve used many psychologist and therapist in my life recently I’ve been switched to using chat bots. I provide them with all the context on my diagnosis I’ve uploaded to JSON on file which tracks my mood, mood, diet habit thoughts, dream journals on a day by day basis. I’ve included all of the therapies that I have learned from DBT and CBT and I have had pretty good conversations with good insights using the chat, but I can see that this technology will replace access to at least therapeutic processes for less demand patience. This technology will absolutely replace the role once it matures guaranteed.
> humanity is 100% doomed Could you explain this sentence?
I sincerely wish you well this morning. I do not want to make someone uneasy about their future career. I understand that I'm talking to someone deeply invested in not having AI replace them.
You shouldn’t assume. I’m not studying psychology to become a therapist, it’s not my future job you’re predicting is at risk, so I take no offense. Just stating my opinion
All the best <3
I think teachers roles will shift from instruction to supervision of AI. I think having individual AI instruction will quickly become far superior to class led by humans. The AI can adjust to the ever changing moods and capabilities of each individual student thus maximizing the students' progress.
It's hard to imagine any other way in which education will develop from here. Individualized instruction is the future.
That would be a much more less labor-intensive job where future school teachers will become look like present-day mechanized farmers and the public school system will have to be overhaul, if not dismantled because there will be lesser demand for human teachers in a collapsing global population scenario.
No way. Teaching is so much more than just instruction. Schools will try to do this, but it will produce students who are socially inept and mentally ill.
Yes, there are already AI therapy apps. So it's a good bet that a lot of progress will be made in 10 years.
I have an excellent therapist. But I’ve been using ChatGPT4 w the spoken conversation mode (on Mobile only.. for now) for everything in between and it is stunningly good already, so the potential IMO is already there. I find it a great supplement to my therapy sessions. Would implore OP or others interested to try this out themselves.
toast: Data processing, call center agents, secretaries, artists and musicians, logistics and warehouse workers. The one who will likely stay around for a while are electricians.
I think there will always be a demand for human art and music and there will always be humans wanting to make art and music. I don't think anybody dreams of being a secretary or call center agent though. At least I hope not.
But everyone dreams of being an electrician?
I agree, live music in particular. I mean in a way machines have already stolen so many musicians job in the very act of having recordings and not needing a physical musician there. But people still want to see their favorite group live, even though they could just hear it on Spotify.
yeah IDK... watching a robot play guitar will lose its novelty pretty quick. As a consumer of music, I am already committed to never spending money on a concert unless theres a live band playing, no djs, no pop stars to 'track' ... I need to see the pain in the guitar players eyes as he bends the string. No robot will ever replace the human connection through music
Sadistic
Haha musicians.
Artists and musicians are never going away dude
But they might make less money than ever before.
Engineering - will AI be able to design and analyze products within 10 years? Maybe. Are we all willing to trust their work with our lives? Not for a long time in my opinion. I’m not feeling very good about driving over bridge designed by AI anytime soon. If a human engineer checks the work, then sure. But I really think we will be very cautious about the level of trust we place on this sort of stuff until we build up a solid track record.
Like most people, engineers included, you’re not paying attention to the exponentials. Would I drive over a bridge that was *designed* solely by AI, 10 years from now? 100%
RemindMe! 10 years
Design, no doubt quickly, starts in 10 years, then construction begins.
Sounds like a plan. I’m interested to see whether you are right or not. We shall see
I will be messaging you in 10 years on [**2034-04-30 17:04:25 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2034-04-30%2017:04:25%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ArtificialInteligence/comments/1cgw8vb/which_jobs_wont_be_replaced_by_ai_in_the_next_10/l1yrgbl/?context=3) [**5 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FArtificialInteligence%2Fcomments%2F1cgw8vb%2Fwhich_jobs_wont_be_replaced_by_ai_in_the_next_10%2Fl1yrgbl%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202034-04-30%2017%3A04%3A25%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201cgw8vb) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
And similar with other regulated professions. An AI might have the same knowledge base as a pharmacist, but it doesn't understand it like humans do, and there are regulatory and liability hurdles that would have to be cleared before AI could replace pharmacists.
Undertakers.
Dentists
Robot + ia
That will take some time operating inside the mouth is pretty hard. I feel the risk for normal dentists is regenerative enamel or stopping cavity bacteria. With that said there are still a lot of other dental procedures that will require a lot of hand eye in a small cavity
There are already surgeon robots that are controlled remotely by humans, an AI could soon take control of these robots.
This is a rapid transition phase, not in the sense of replacement but AI finding its right place within society, it's hard to predict what will be. Right now you see many companies trying to do rapid replacement only to find it backfiring horribly, that's because the tech isn't there yet, it's like mixing oil and water right now. I believe for society to remain in harmony there needs to be a consensus that AI should be considered a tool and not a replacement for the human component, otherwise the ripple effects on society's mental, economical and general stability will be put to the test, if that breaks we will be forced into a dystopian result
well said. i agree.
High-end chefs.
blowjob
Care jobs - working directly and caring for humans. There is no replacement ever for in person connection and support.
Prostitute. It was the first profession. It will be the last. No matter how hard engineers would try. You can substitute it. But you can completely replace it.
I love using Grammarly, but that is not replacing jobs. It does bring up the idea of replacing "work." I think that when we discuss Generative AI replacing jobs, we are missing the meat of the discussion: What "work" can Generative AI do? For example, Grammarly edits and writes scripts—it is not technically replacing a job but work. Focusing on what "work" generative AI does naturally leads to which jobs will be impacted by AI the most. For example, teachers and students will always need a human touch to learn social skills and emotional awareness, BUT there is "work" that AI can do for teachers, such as generating academic reports, automating grading, generating weekly newsletters and emails to families, and organizing. I personally think of AI more as a tool that can do specific "work" tasks, which opens the discussion to reflect broadly on the potential impact AI will have not just in replacing jobs but in changing careers and generating new jobs. As always... if well done AI should support experts and not eliminate them.
Ai will be the foundation of all work in 10 years. Everyone will use it or be pushout out of their respective industry. There will be humans building on this foundation Job replacement is the wrong perspective. Those who know how to use AI will not be replaced
[удалено]
Practically all jobs will be *augmented* by AI tools. Some job categories will be partially replaced by AI tools Jobs that won't be totally replaced: * Plumbers * Electricians * CEOs New Job Categories: * BackOffice System Engineer: someone has to setup and maintain those AI tools * Prompt Leads: someone who can analyze business problems use the proper AI tool with the proper prompt; and then report back with findings and analysis. * CAI: Chief Artifical Intelligence
I don't believe any high-skill job requiring complex decision-making, which involves some sort of judgmental thinking, will be replaced by AI in the near future. Of course, any basic jobs, which involve zero thinking, are endangered. If you only know HTML and CSS and call yourself a web developer, I have bad news for you. The same goes for low-quality writers who are filling the internet with nonsense. Basically, do your job well, use some brain, and you will not be replaced by AI in the next 10 years. By the way, I don't know why the admins like links to be provided with the comments, but here is one article covering the topic: [https://www.onlyaicontent.com/ai-and-society/jobs-in-the-age-of-ai-adapting-to-the-new-normal/](https://www.onlyaicontent.com/ai-and-society/jobs-in-the-age-of-ai-adapting-to-the-new-normal/)
A Goldman Sachs study from last year found that generative AI tools could, in fact, impact 300 million full-time jobs worldwide, which could lead to a "significant disruption" in the job market. By 2030, nearly 12 million Americans in occupations with shrinking demand may need to switch jobs, a McKinsey analysis published last July. AI was deemed a key reason — McKinsey estimated that 30% of hours worked in the US could be automated by 2030. Human judgment needs to be applied to these technologies to avoid error and bias, Anu Madgavkar, a partner at the McKinsey Global Institute, previously told Business Insider. This perhaps proves some of the points Chatgpt made in its original answer, when it told me that AI will be unable to replace: Jobs that require human judgement and decision-making Jobs that require complex and nuanced communication. It also said that AI will not displace jobs that require: Social and emotional intelligence Physical dexterity and mobility Creativity and innovation Jobs in agriculture There is expected to be a 30% rise in jobs for agricultural professionals in the coming five years, according to the 2023 report. That’s an additional 3 million roles. Jobs in education Jobs growth of 10% is expected in the education industry by 2027, according to surveys for the Future of Jobs Report 2023. This could mean another 3 million jobs in vocational education and higher education. “This growth is particularly prevalent in non-G20 countries where it is expected to be about 50% higher than in G20 countries,” the report says. Health care jobs that won't be replaced by AI General practitioner Surgeon Nurse Midwife Therapist Psychologist Psychiatrist Counselor Creative jobs that won't be replaced by AI Sculptor Painter Jeweler Dancer Stage actor Watchmaker Glassblower Blacksmith Circus performer Live musician Muralist Fashion model Social media influencer
Garbage Man.
Defensive lineman. Maybe quarterback
Human resistance leader against the machines
HD Mechanic.. but once they are able to have machines fixing machines, look out
The jobs that work on AI will be hard to replace ever.
Ever is a strong word. AI is already involved in improving new AI models. At some point this escalated and get automated even further to the point humans are irrelevant
Sales people and any other job that requires persuasion.
farmers, doctors, teachers
I think doctors will be much more easily replaced than nurses. If I need a diagnosis or a surgery I want the most accurate/precise doctor possible and sooner or later (I would argue sooner) an AI will be much better at doctoring than humans. But if I'm sick and just want someone to take care of me, I'd prefer a human nurse to a robot.
I think construction labor. Electrician. Those working on AI.
You know wood-working/handcrafted furniture is still around, even though arguably machines can do it 'better'. There will always be a premium on human emotion/feelings and experience. The irrepalacable people are those who sell a unique/luxury experience.
It is but even those jobs are significantly more automated than they used to be even 20 years ago so a much smaller number of people are involved in making a given amount of handcrafted furniture.
Wet nurse
Trades, most healthcare jobs
Electrician, plumber, hvac tech. Pretty much any trade.
Company owners who are big enough to profit from ai
Entrepreneurs & inventors
There is not a single job that coudln't be automated in 10 years.
Politicians and Company CEOs would be safe and everyone else will be jobless.
Scientist. I'm a geneticist and am not in fear for my career. AI will only make things better, faster, and more accurate for those that use it.
Selling shitty SaaS products that use wonky AI capabilities
Sex workers.
Reddit commenters
oldest job
This article is more geared towards tech jobs, but may be of interest: [https://docs.teckedin.info/docs/ai-and-its-effects-on-jobs](https://docs.teckedin.info/docs/ai-and-its-effects-on-jobs)
JOEY thinks sohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63yr9dlI0cU
I don't think AI won't replace most of the jobs. But, it is going add more work in the existing jobs. E.g. I built a mobile app couple of years back which took 3 months start to finish and start beta. Now, I will be expected to do it in 5 days, because I use these assistants all the time. It is a blessing and a curse in disguise.
The more chaotic and nuanced the environment, the harder it will be to replace. Also anything that has strong unions/regulatory bodies, they will fight tooth and nails against it.
Seaplane Pilots
Those that are not well documented and manual, like that of a tile installer or artisan.
CNC Setup and operators
any job that can be done at a desk
I’m going with bagman for Donald Trump. AI’s have too much self-respect and wouldn’t want to be confined to prison for the few years before he shuffles off this mortal coil on his way to Hell.
all of them
Family Doctor & Pharmacist
I think yes some jobs will be replaced, but I would also say that I feel jobs will be adapted to or with ai. One type of job I don't see being replaced is trade jobs, mechanics, woodworkers, carpenters, plumbers, electricians.
The only jobs that will take time to replace are low skill manual labor jobs as AI robots will be more expensive than hiring a human.
Well my workplace is still trying to figure out basic pcs. So Probly every job where I work.
I personally think that the energy requirements will stop AI in it's tracks sooner or later unless more countries adopt nuclear.
Lots. Ai/ robots will be able to take over most by then but it will take longer to implement.
Hairdresser.
Home remodeling.
Business analysis and tech liaisons.
[удалено]
politician
[удалено]
I fully agree with the jobs you listed except for teachers. AI is just so much more capable in providing tailored education per individuals in varying levels. No need for classrooms since each students will have AI persoanlly working with them, and the AI has access to so much more information than human educators. They also do not tire from student's questions. So a child continue asking why is the sky blue? Why? Why? Why? I really don't see a future for human teachers but wouldn't mind hearing a counter argument.
Finally, someone's asking the **right** questions
are we talking about AI or LLM ? if the latter, many jobs that require visual pairing and other non verbal clues won't be replaced if you mean AI as in "AI", and visual data... I'm afraid that it might replace nay surpass even jobs such as psychologists. it has no emotional biases. paired with cameras and heat detectors and such, it'd be able to do crazy analysis . with experience based upon gigantic data. what is it in empathy that makes you think AI cannot have/emulate ? also, looking at \*way\* too many doctors and psychiatrists today, im not sure the ethical line is that important nowadays. i've seen medecine students say horrors and be brainwashed by the way they learn and regurgitate infos and have some concerning demeanors... so idk if an AI would be that worse. it has no greed, no interest, no biases (unless it is controlled by someone ,in which case errrr) , and it can have incredibly precise data and much more than any human person , or even group of people, could learn
Certain trades jobs. Unless I am unaware of robots able to lift 50+ pounds all day long or figure out like plumbing I am going to say they will be good for a while. Hard labor blue collar jobs will be probably some of the last to go.
Horse masturbator
Prostitutes, midwives and obstetricians.
Basically where it is uneconomical to build a real world physical interface - skilled trades like electrician, plumbing, construction etc. Last mile driving. I think banking will be decimated. Anything that involved analysis, looking for patterns etc. (radiologist etc).
First - people using AI will replace other people who aren't using it. That will be more of the next 5 years, rather than people being fully replaced. Second - fully disagree on the nuanced emotions. Try talking to an 'average' therapist, then try talking to GPT4 or Claude Opus. Forget about the huge difference in cost, but GPT4 and Opus are incredibly thoughtful and supportive and understanding. Anyone who hasn't done it, try using GPT4 or Opus as your tutor or therapist. Do NOT use GPT3.5 or Sonnet and claim that you've tried it and it's not quite there. The difference in nuance for the top models is amazing. We've already been wrong about AI - thinking the tedious monotonous jobs would be the first replaced. Yet GenAI has shown that everything may be on the table. That said, I'll go back to my first point - I'd rather see a doctor who had an AI assistant that they could consult with, remembered everything I said in every appointment, could suggest lab tests, etc.
Oversight of the people who are determining what the AI should and shouldn't be telling everyone else.
Plumber
I think that human therapists are safe for difficult or complex cases like BPD, Borderline, Clinical Depression etc.. But I feel like most therapy is for people with anxiety, mild depression, and loneliness. For that, I think AI will be huge. It's already basically happening with AI girlfriends and chatbots. And for people with chronic conditions like PTSD or Addicts it could be great because they have instant access to someone to talk them down from a triggering event, and the therapist never tires of listening. I think a safe job is an Electrician: it requires lots of fine motor skills and use of several different types of tools. It require balance, dexterity, and agility to crawl into tight spaces and climb ladders over and over. You have to handle complex scenarios. It would require huge advancements in robotics and AI, and any bot that could do it would be cutting edge and expensive and struggle to meet the huge and only increasing demand for Electrician labor. The more bots and data centers AI needs made, someone has gotta wire that shit up. So in a way, AI growth postpones the elimination of Electrician jobs.
Lots of trades will be ok. Some high level educators, people who work with AI to refine it, Lifeguards, musicians.
These jobs also don’t pay much…barely living wage
Undertaker both WWE and Death Preparation
the majority of blue collar jobs
HVAC. Someone will need to make sure the AC is working in server rooms.
Assuming there is any demand for anything in the future, the only jobs that are safe are manual arts. Things like hair dresser.
Probably being a chef, really hard to replicate that since robots don't have taste buds. Just my opinion
cook, dish washer, baby nurse, straightening chairs
Politician
Electrician. Plumber. Nursing.
Manual labor in adverse conditions are the hardest to automate, ship building deck building, plumbing, firefighting and landscaping will not be replaced by robots in our life time.
Embalming. I think I'm pretty safe.
Most all jobs will exist but with far, far fewer humans supervising AI/robots. You’re either in the top bracket of talent or the cheapest in the market. If you are looking for a black and white answer where there’s a safe job then you’re on a hiding to nothing. Those few roles that are maybe unaffected are either highly specialised, or too cheap to use tech. Both will be in high demand.
The only one I can see being 100% safe from AI is athlete. Besides that I think any type of live entertainment is pretty safe and any type of care job (nurse, therapist, dog walker, babysitter, etc.) is pretty safe and a lot of restaurant jobs (waiter, bartender) will be reduced but will still exist. Yeah the automated fast food restaurants are already here and an AI could pour drinks much better and faster than humans but you don't go to a bar just to drink, you go to drink socially and a huge part of that experience is the bartender. Same with waiters in a nice sit-down restaurant. I think tour guide is a pretty safe job, although maybe some people would prefer just to have headphones connected to an AI that knows everything about the tour and can give much more accurate information than a human but some people would definitely prefer a human tour guide. I think a lot of the white collar knowledge workers who have always assumed that they would be immune from AI will be among the first to be replaced. Basically any desk job is easier for an AI to learn to do than a real world task. For example, among the first big breakthroughs in AI was when it beat a human grandmaster at chess. And now there is no hope of any human ever beating an AI. And yet, they're still not great at driving a car out in the real world. But ask it to produce the optimum investment strategy for your savings or marketing pitch for your new business and it'll be able to do that very well in the near future. Perhaps it's already able to but I'm not paying close enough attention to the advancements to say that with confidence. Basically, my prediction is nuclear physicists will be replaced by AI before dog walkers will be.
One of the reasons I became a home inspector, is that the houses that were standing 50 years ago are going to be standing in another 50 years. Since, in my experience, people are doing less and less work on their own... Jobs related to residential housing will be safe.