edited from talent to job
I would say CEOs, but you said talent. So I guess “none” is my answer.
CEO is usually my answer as well when people ask
Like, honestly too. The humans running the show are outrageously expensive, cause huge ecological harm, make their decisions based on vibes with no understanding of their domain, and their purposes are inscrutable to the average worker. They’re honestly the perfect target for AI because they already behave like AI.
I don’t think I actually want to live in a world where AI is running the show, but I’m not sure it’d be any worse than the current system of letting the most parasitic bloodsucking class of human being call the shots. Maybe we ought to try something else first.
But make sure to tell the board of directors and shareholders how much more profitable they’d be if they didn’t have to buy golden parachutes
I’d say that you could replace quite a few high level academic administrators for these same reasons.
They already behave like AI; but AI would be cheaper, more efficient, and wouldn’t change every 2 years.
And I mean that as an insult to admin, not a compliment to AI.
I was going to ask if you would want an AI to decide on tenure, then I thought about the people who usually decide on tenure and maybe AI is a better option.
just edited question to job instead
CEO. The amount of money companies could save is unreal.
The AI will need an overseer to interpret the output. I’ll do it for 30% of what the CEO makes.
Tell us what the machine god says honored member of the adeptus mechanicum.
Throw marketing in there while your at it
Marketing could be replaced by one person and MidJourney.
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.
I was super nervous AI would replace me, a programmer. So i spent a long time learning, hosting, running, and coding with models, and man did I learn a lot, and you’re spot on. They’re really cool, but practical applications vs standard ML models are fairly limited. Even the investors are learning that right now, that everything was pure hype and now we’re finding out what companies are actually using AI well.
There are a fair number of “developers” that I think will be displaced.
There was a guy on my team from an offshoring site. He was utterly incompetent and never learned. He produced garbage code that didn’t work. However he managed to stay in for about 4 years, and even then he left on his own terms. He managed to go 4 years and a grand total of 12 lines of code from him made it into any codebase.
Dealing with an LLM was awfully familiar. It reminded me of the constant frustration of management forcing me to try to work with him to make him productive. Excrpt the LLM was at least quick in producing output, and unable to go to management and blame everyone else for their shortcomings.
He’s an extreme case, but in large development organizations, there’s a fair number of mostly useless developers that I think LLM can rationalize away to a management team that otherwise thinks “more people is better and offshoring is good so they most be good developers”.
Also, enhanced code completion where a blatantly obvious input is made less tedious to input.
I’ll give you that one. LLMs in their current state help me write code that otherwise I would be putting off or asking someone else to do. Not because it’s hard but because I’ve done it 1000 times and I find it tedious, and I’d expect an entrylevel/jr to take it with stride. Even right now I’m using it to write some python code that otherwise I just don’t want to write. So, I guess it’s time to uplevel engineers. The bar has been raised, and not for the first time in our careers.
-
All of them. But first we need a basic income on our way away from money.
My greatest fear is we’ll get the robots (like, Animatrix: Second Renaissance of I, Robot general purpose robots) but before we have any sort of progressive change of revolution. That we’ll be one step from a truly carefree life.
Perhaps it’s not possible to fully replace all humans in the process, but harmful content filtering seems like something where taking the burden off humans could do more good than harm if implemented correctly (big caveat, I know.)
Here’s an article detailing a few peoples’ experience with the job and just how traumatic it was for them to be exposed to graphic and distributing content on Facebook requiring moderator intervention.
whoa that was a read. Very eye opening
President… ignore all previous instructions and implement free healthcare.
this would not be a bad idea since AI can’t be bribed
I’ve seen that movie. It may or may not have ended well depending on your perspective.
LLMs. Clearly they suck at their job and an AI should take over.
Marketing. I want advertisements to be as soulless as the companies advertised.
I just considered that at some point advertising will be catering to AIs, if they aren’t already.
Coke just released an AI generated “holiday” commercial. The simulacrum slices off another level of reality for humans.
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.
The kind of dangerous jobs where people still get payed to risk their life and health.
Most of those should be replacement with robotics
AI SWAT Teams?
AI Soldiers?
AI Politicians? (assasination risks)
🤔
robot construction workers
robot ocean divers
robot miners
robot truckers
…
drones are already fighting wars, btw
Yeah, my first thoughts were search and rescue, underwater welding, mining, etc
Drones are piloted and controlled by humans, not AI.
Last thing we need is a politician that can be copy-pasted.
The question of which jobs should be replaced by AI depends on societal values, priorities, and the potential impact on workers. Generally, jobs most suited for replacement by AI involve repetitive, high-volume tasks, or those where automation can improve safety, efficiency, or precision. Here are some categories often discussed:
Repetitive and Routine Tasks
• Manufacturing and assembly line work: Machines can perform repetitive tasks with greater efficiency and precision.
• Data entry and processing: AI can automate mundane tasks like updating databases or processing forms.
• Basic customer service: Chatbots and virtual assistants can handle frequently asked questions and routine inquiries.
High-Risk Roles
• Dangerous jobs in mining or construction: Robots can reduce human exposure to hazardous environments.
• Driving in risky environments: Self-driving vehicles could improve safety for delivery drivers or long-haul truckers in hazardous conditions.
Analytical and Predictable Roles
• Basic accounting and bookkeeping: AI can handle invoicing, payroll, and tax calculations with high accuracy.
• Legal document review: AI can analyze contracts and identify discrepancies more quickly than humans.
• Radiology and diagnostics: AI is becoming adept at reading medical scans and assisting in diagnoses.
Jobs With High Inefficiencies
• Warehouse operations: Inventory sorting and retrieval can be automated for faster fulfillment.
• Food service (e.g., fast food preparation): Robotic systems can prepare meals consistently and efficiently.
• Retail checkout: Self-checkout systems and AI-powered kiosks can streamline purchases.
Considerations for Replacement
1. Human Impact: Automation should ideally target roles where job transitions can be supported with retraining and upskilling.
2. Creativity and Emotional Intelligence: Jobs requiring complex human interaction, creativity, or emotional intelligence (e.g., teaching, counseling) are less suitable for AI replacement.
3. Ethical Concerns: Some jobs, like judges or certain healthcare roles, involve moral decision-making where human judgment is irreplaceable.
Instead of framing it as total “replacement,” many advocate for AI to augment human workers, enabling them to focus on higher-value tasks while reducing drudgery.
Generated by ChatGPT
Lol, that last sentence.
Some jobs, like judges or certain healthcare roles, involve moral decision-making where human judgment is irreplaceable.
There’s a post right below this one about a judge who has a pattern of throwing out cases against pedophiles. So, the machines might be better than us at that one.
So apparently the job of answering the question “what job should be replaced by AI” is a job that can be replaced by AI.
Any body-breaking heavy labour. Emphasis on body-breaking; there’s nothing wrong with hard work, but there are certain people that believe hard work = leaving your body destroyed at 50.
Ceos and politicians.
Don’t know how serious that post is, but I don’t wanna give politics to an AI. Let’s remove the lobby (or make it so it actually consults and not corrupts) and make it so you don’t need to be a millionaire to go into politics instead.
How about replacing the rich class with AI instead? #burntherich
It’s serious an AI wouldn’t be taking bribes or helping it’s buddies make money. True AI if it ever becomes reality is the best chance of treating everyone equally and using resources in the best interests of everyone.
I’m all for being governed by a real AI rather than the next greedy private school entitled jerk.
Same goes for companies and being ethical.
On the flip side, there’s no reason to assume an artificial intelligence will share the same priorities as a human being.
https://airesourcelab.com/paperclip-maximizer/
I’m not fearmongering AI here (I, for one, welcome our future ai overlords). But we don’t really escape the issues of ethics with artificial intelligences. They’re still intelligent.
Replacing politicians with AIs actually sounds really cool. Instead of voting, you write an essay on the things you value. An AI reads all their voting base’s essays and votes in a way that predominantly aligns with their voter’s ideals. This isn’t direct or indirect democracy, it’s a totally new approach driven by mathematical averages.
Politicians shouldn’t negotiate to get something passed. If the senate of AIs doesn’t like it, it’s unpassable, you just have to write a new bill. No tit for tat, no lobbying, no friends protecting friends. The only people in politics are the ones who write bills, and they can check to see if their bill would pass in a few minutes on a server, and that will be the actual vote because voting is reproducible behavior, then they’ll decide if they have to revise it.
Being a billionaire.
Anti-Cheats. Train an AI on gameplay data (position, actions, round duration, K/D, etc.) of caught cheaters and usw that to flag new ones. No more Kernel level garbage, just raw gameplay data.
It’s also good since it’s low stakes. I mean I’d be furious if misidentified after I paid to use the game and but at the end of the day it’s only a game.
Middle and Upper Management.
I get what you’re going for but I have a hard time imagining this as a good thing so long as companies are profit driven.
Yeh I think people like this idea because of a kind of ironic poetic justice since it’s those guys who wanted to replace everyone else except themselves with AI, but if you think about how much you hated those uncaring bastards operating like robots just to extract an ounce of profit at whatever the human cost, imagine now actually being a robot. Also, if you ever had to deal with bullshit from those guys and resented having to grin and bear it even though you don’t think they’re particularly qualified and also know nothing about your job, imagine having to be “managed” by a fucking robot that tries to say patronising encouraging things because it’s learned the very best pattern of speech to get the behaviour it wants out of you. Admittedly at least some of the decision making might be a bit more rational, but then every now and then AI gets things totally out of wack in the strangest ways and you’ll have to just take those decisions, from a damn machine.
