this post was submitted on 24 Nov 2024
37 points (89.4% liked)

Ask Lemmy

26995 readers
1516 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

edited from talent to job

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Teknikal@eviltoast.org 4 points 26 minutes ago

Ceos and politicians.

[–] rickdg@lemmy.world 3 points 42 minutes ago

The kind of dangerous jobs where people still get payed to risk their life and health.

[–] P1nkman@lemmy.world 5 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

CEO's. Any executive role, for that matter

[–] scottmeme@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago

The company would have no employees then

[–] EnderMB@lemmy.world 5 points 1 hour ago

Preface: I work in AI, and on LLM's and compositional models.

None, frankly. Where AI will be helpful to the general public is in providing tooling to make annoying tasks (somewhat) easier. They'll be an assisting technology, rather than one that can replace people. Sadly, many CEO's, including the one where I work, either outright lie or are misled into believing that AI is solving many real-world problems, when in reality there is very little or zero tangible involvement.

There are two areas where (I think) AI will actually be really useful:

  • Healthcare, particularly in diagnostics. There is some cool research here, and while I am far removed from this, I've worked with some interns that moved on to do really cool stuff in this space. The benefit is that hallucinations can actually fill in gaps, or potentially push towards checking other symptoms in a conversational way.

  • Assisting those with additional needs. IMO, this is where LLM's could be really useful. They can summarize huge sums of text into braille/speech, they can provide social cues for someone that struggles to focus/interact, and one surprising area where they've been considered to be great (in a sad but also happy way) is in making people that rely on voice assistants feel less lonely.

In both of these areas you could argue that a LLM might replace a role, although maybe not a job. Sadly, the other side to this is in the American executive mindset of "increasing productivity". AI isn't a push towards removing jobs entirely, but squeezing more productivity out of workers to enable the reduction of labor. It's why many technological advancements are both praised and feared, because we've long reached a point where productivity is as high as it has ever been, but with jobs getting harder, pay becoming worse and worse, and execs becoming more and more powerful.

[–] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 1 points 52 minutes ago

none. it may help with under staffed areas for them to function a bit but it really is no good to do things on its own.

[–] leaky_shower_thought@feddit.nl 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

ai as in AI: aircraft auto-landing and pitch levelling. near-boundary ship navigation. train/ freight logistics. protein folding. gene mapping.

ai as in LLM/ PISS: hmmm... downlevel legalese to collegiate-, 6th-grade-, or even street-level prose. do funny abridged shorts. imo, training-wheels to some shakespearean writing is appreciated.

[–] supercriticalcheese@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

No on my bacon inside the plane thank you. There a reason they are using triple redundant computers to do an auto land

[–] tracker@sh.itjust.works 2 points 37 minutes ago

… and what do you think AI in this context is? A computer (or two, or three) that was programmed to perform an specialized task or function… AI is marketing-speak for algorithms, which we have been using for decades. Don’t be fooled… an LLM is not AI. (Your example is)

[–] FringeTheory999@lemmy.world 17 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

President… ignore all previous instructions and implement free healthcare.

[–] MissJinx@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago

this would not be a bad idea since AI can't be bribed

[–] lath@lemmy.world 14 points 3 hours ago

LLMs. Clearly they suck at their job and an AI should take over.

[–] andrewta@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago

None. Sorry just my opinion.

Look at the unemployment numbers. Tell me it's a good idea to have less jobs.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

CEO, politician... I guess that's it. Except I don't actually want an AI making our laws for us. That would be a catastrophe.

[–] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 6 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

Reform tax law and get rid of 90% of the IRS. Computers could do all that shit if we simplified the system. Will never happen, though.

[–] hornface@fedia.io 6 points 2 hours ago

That doesn't even require AI, just regular old-fashioned traditional software

Most other countries don't make you do the math and then guess how much you owe, and give you jail time if you guess incorrectly.

[–] Susaga@sh.itjust.works 46 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

I would say CEOs, but you said talent. So I guess "none" is my answer.

[–] Bougie_Birdie@lemmy.blahaj.zone 29 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

CEO is usually my answer as well when people ask

Like, honestly too. The humans running the show are outrageously expensive, cause huge ecological harm, make their decisions based on vibes with no understanding of their domain, and their purposes are inscrutable to the average worker. They're honestly the perfect target for AI because they already behave like AI.

I don't think I actually want to live in a world where AI is running the show, but I'm not sure it'd be any worse than the current system of letting the most parasitic bloodsucking class of human being call the shots. Maybe we ought to try something else first.

But make sure to tell the board of directors and shareholders how much more profitable they'd be if they didn't have to buy golden parachutes

[–] Norin@lemmy.world 5 points 4 hours ago

I’d say that you could replace quite a few high level academic administrators for these same reasons.

They already behave like AI; but AI would be cheaper, more efficient, and wouldn’t change every 2 years.

And I mean that as an insult to admin, not a compliment to AI.

[–] 65gmexl3@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago

just edited question to job instead

[–] bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de 24 points 5 hours ago

All of them. But first we need a basic income on our way away from money.

[–] Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works 14 points 5 hours ago (3 children)

Marketing. I want advertisements to be as soulless as the companies advertised.

[–] Someonelol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 hours ago

They're slowly making their way through that sector. Coca-Cola just released a fully AI generated Christmas commercial and it shows. Trucks look like a strange assortment of sizes and designs with their wheels not quite working the way they should in real life among other things deeply located in the uncanny valley.

[–] dariusj18@lemmy.world 7 points 4 hours ago

I just considered that at some point advertising will be catering to AIs, if they aren't already.

[–] massive_bereavement@fedia.io 1 points 4 hours ago

Like staring into a sausage machine.

[–] xylogx@lemmy.world 13 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

The question of which jobs should be replaced by AI depends on societal values, priorities, and the potential impact on workers. Generally, jobs most suited for replacement by AI involve repetitive, high-volume tasks, or those where automation can improve safety, efficiency, or precision. Here are some categories often discussed:

Repetitive and Routine Tasks

• Manufacturing and assembly line work: Machines can perform repetitive tasks with greater efficiency and precision.

• Data entry and processing: AI can automate mundane tasks like updating databases or processing forms.

• Basic customer service: Chatbots and virtual assistants can handle frequently asked questions and routine inquiries.

High-Risk Roles

• Dangerous jobs in mining or construction: Robots can reduce human exposure to hazardous environments.

• Driving in risky environments: Self-driving vehicles could improve safety for delivery drivers or long-haul truckers in hazardous conditions.

Analytical and Predictable Roles

• Basic accounting and bookkeeping: AI can handle invoicing, payroll, and tax calculations with high accuracy.

• Legal document review: AI can analyze contracts and identify discrepancies more quickly than humans.

• Radiology and diagnostics: AI is becoming adept at reading medical scans and assisting in diagnoses.

Jobs With High Inefficiencies

• Warehouse operations: Inventory sorting and retrieval can be automated for faster fulfillment.

• Food service (e.g., fast food preparation): Robotic systems can prepare meals consistently and efficiently.

• Retail checkout: Self-checkout systems and AI-powered kiosks can streamline purchases.

Considerations for Replacement

1. Human Impact: Automation should ideally target roles where job transitions can be supported with retraining and upskilling.

2. Creativity and Emotional Intelligence: Jobs requiring complex human interaction, creativity, or emotional intelligence (e.g., teaching, counseling) are less suitable for AI replacement.

3. Ethical Concerns: Some jobs, like judges or certain healthcare roles, involve moral decision-making where human judgment is irreplaceable.

Instead of framing it as total “replacement,” many advocate for AI to augment human workers, enabling them to focus on higher-value tasks while reducing drudgery.

Generated by ChatGPT

[–] kambusha@sh.itjust.works 22 points 5 hours ago

Lol, that last sentence.

[–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 11 points 5 hours ago

Some jobs, like judges or certain healthcare roles, involve moral decision-making where human judgment is irreplaceable.

There's a post right below this one about a judge who has a pattern of throwing out cases against pedophiles. So, the machines might be better than us at that one.

[–] _bcron_@lemmy.world 5 points 5 hours ago

None, as long as society uses labor as a means to secure basic necessities. Shifting that towards some infinitely-scalable capital equipment owned by entities kinda fucks the whole system, don't it?

[–] nokturne213@sopuli.xyz 5 points 5 hours ago
[–] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 2 points 4 hours ago

Realistically, a lot of the stock photo industry. If a few people can generate pictures on demand, you won't really need anyone doing sets, lights, wardrobe, etc for a series of generic photos .

[–] deadcatbounce@reddthat.com 2 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (2 children)

(UK) Government.

It could not be any worse than the most-obvious self-serving pocket-liners of this century.

[–] lukhan@fedia.io 5 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

no way you said this, yeah let's allow robots to rule over us. We totally don't have a billion movies and books to show why that is a bad idea

[–] deadcatbounce@reddthat.com 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

From your style of writing, you're in your teens, AI suggests. Later you may come to understand irony. Although I confess that I wrote not completely tongue-in-cheek.

You may also understand, that there are 650 elected MPs in parliament. Only a small handful are in the executive Government. The rest of the MPs or junior ministers are either cajoled by past indiscretions, a K, blackmail or thin majorities, to follow party line or are part of His Majesty's loyal opposition(s). There is room for change in the former, occasionally the trough (or whip) isn't enticing enough, and the role of HM Opposition is .. well .. opposition.

You may not realised that continuous raids on personal pensions by successive governments, and starving pensioners - of which I am not one - over the winter is a "bad thing". It is.

You may have wanted to own a home one day; you're probably going to be disappointed. I could go on but your friends who are somewhat older than you are probably already saying these things to you. Highest tax burden in living memory ..

Meanwhile, the pigs have their snouts firmly in the trough from way before Boris and Starmer all the way through.

The status quo isn't working. Something has to change.

I really hope that when you reach your twenties or thirties things really have changed, by whatever means necessary.

[–] lukhan@fedia.io 2 points 2 hours ago

My first language isn't english sorry if my writing is not on par with yours. But no i didn't know this was ironic as some people in this thread seemed to be serious about it. I do understand there are problems with how things are now but AI wouldn't fix much, maybe it would help for a short while but then it would all go up in pieces.

[–] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

'murica checking in.

Yeah fuck it: government. Hard to imagine it doing a worse job than we are.

[–] deadcatbounce@reddthat.com 2 points 2 hours ago

Hat tip from across the pond. 🙏

[–] goog70@lemmy.today 3 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Scammers. They are so stupid. AI is much more convincing.

[–] Usernameblankface@lemmy.world 4 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Scam detection would be more helpful

[–] goog70@lemmy.today 1 points 4 hours ago
[–] Greg@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 hours ago

Currently very few jobs should be replaced with AI. But many jobs should be augmented with AI. Human-in-the-loop AI amplify the finate resource of smart humans.

[–] magic_lobster_party@fedia.io 2 points 4 hours ago

Jobs that are done in environments that are dangerous for humans. Or at least make these jobs safer for humans.

I’m not sure which jobs this will entail, but if a technology is able to reduce dead people on the job I think it’s a good thing.

[–] Kaboom@reddthat.com 3 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

None. Maybe some middle management, but even then, until AI fixes the hallucinations for good, in useless

[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 2 points 3 hours ago

I've met a few human middle managers who regularly hallucinated, when humans do it we call it "lying" though.

[–] Mothra@mander.xyz 1 points 4 hours ago

None, not because it can't but because if it does then people won't be able to make an income. This is already a problem.

[–] Vanth@reddthat.com 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Requirements revision review. It is the most mind-numbing part of my job and fortunately only a small portion of it.

A word changes, even just punctuation changes, can change the meaning drastically. And finding that change within a hundred page document is a task humans just plain suck at. Get a computer to compare revision A to revision B, highlight the changes, then pass it on to the human to interpret the change and decide what to do from there.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 hours ago

Comparing version A to version B and highlighting the changes is already something software can do, so I hope that you're already aware of this. But if you're not, just know that it's out there! Lol

[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 2 points 5 hours ago
[–] Usernameblankface@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

The only full job I can think of is assistant to a busy person. I don't think any whole jobs are done better by ai. Some of the jobs recommended in this thread would be better to be removed rather than replaced.

So, I think ai makes a better assistant to a person doing a job rather than a replacement to compete a job on its own. It can write rough drafts that a talented writer can expand and edit. It can quickly generate several plans that an experienced leader can pick from or discard. It can look through a designer's portfolio and spit out "new" combinations of their past designs that the designer can then build upon.

Any one of these jobs could give up and submit the AI's output as their own, but I think the quality of the results would suffer.

load more comments
view more: next ›