5 ms·

We're always hearing "there will be new kinds of jobs", but never what those jobs will be , how many they could be in number or any relevant detail to that clai

We're always hearing "there will be new kinds of jobs", but never what those jobs will be , how many they could be in number or any relevant detail to that claim. Why is that ?have we no sense of imagination ? Or is it that the claim is just an easy comforting truism(that preservers the current order) and nothing but ?

gipp 12y ago
Do you think people in Turing's time could have possibly envisioned the existence or proliferation of the role of "developer"? Not saying you're right or wrong, but our inability to envision future jobs, or lack thereof, doesn't mean much one way or the other.
- JeremyReimer 12y ago
  It's hard to see developer jobs (as awesome as they are) replacing displaced jobs on a massive scale. I was listening to an NPR podcast where they estimated that only one percent of workers in the United States are employed as software developers.
- marcosdumay 12y ago
  > Do you think people in Turing's time could have possibly envisioned the existence or proliferation of the role of "developer"? Yes, I do. Before that there were already people that spent most of their time creating algorithms, and programming machines.
thinkingkong 12y ago
Perhaps there is net job creation but not for the people who are immediately displaced. The jobs figures are treated like some pool, and it ignores the fact that many people can't adapt their existing skill set to the jobs that were created. For example, 100,000 truckers are put out of work by a truck that drives itself. There might be 100,000 other jobs created - we might all get to work less one day - but for those 100,000 truckers, the number of them becoming automation developers is probably pretty low.
- seanflyon 12y ago
  It seems to me that the new jobs will require more and more education, which could be a problem for the uneducated. I am optimistic though, because when I look at the past people have always been able to adapt to the new jobs and benefited significantly. Just think of all the poor hunters and gatherers who were put out of work by the advent of farming.
ModernMech 12y ago
I believe as the robotics industry grows, an appropriate support network will need to grow with it to handle the inevitable growing pains. For instance, I believe a "robotics mechanic" will be a job of the future, analogous to an automotive mechanic. Today there are experts/specialists in different automotive systems like transmissions, electrical, etc. Likewise, robots will need specialists in perception, locomotion, cognition, etc. But robots of the future will not be designed to do one thing, as cars are (press throttle, move forward). They will be complex, autonomous decision-making machines, something the world really has never dealt with. I imagine the support infrastructure needed to deal with such machines would more closely resemble the healthcare industry than the automotive industry. For example, you would have your highly trained specialists as I mentioned, but also generalists skilled at diagnosing and repairing common issues, and of course support staff needed to assist them in their jobs. Thus you have tiers of skill so that if a robot displaces a housekeeper(for instance) he doesn't have to get a PhD in order to find a new job in the robotics industry that made him obsolete.
- JoeAltmaier 12y ago
  Its unlikely that disruptive changes in the robotics situation will magically leave room for everyone, or even for most people, to still have meaningful work. We'll have to decide what to do about that. And it will take more than hopeful trickle-down theories. Probably a basic income or work program solution of some kind.
- _random_ 12y ago
  "robotics mechanic" - sounds like a job for fully automated robotic robot service centers.
recalibrator 12y ago
This question intrigued me, so did some research and started designing "future-proof" business plans and brands that people can use right away. It's still a work in progress, but it's here if anyone wants a look: http://startjumper.com http://startjumper.com.
john_b 12y ago
It's simply a historical observation. If it was obvious what kind of jobs there would be in the future, companies would have already sprang up around those ideas and would be hiring, which would make them the jobs of today. Anything less would be equivalent to the whole world having an understanding that Apple stock will rise by 100% in the next two years but nobody buying it. Basically, the future is unknowable. But as Marc Andressen likes to say, human needs and wants are unlimited. As long as people can provide for the wants and needs of others via jobs, there will be jobs. I'd take it one step further, in fact. If we imagine the robot dominated future that so many people fear, it stands to reason (given human nature) that robot-produced goods and services will be viewed as inferior, cheaper, or less personal than human-produced goods. Robots and AI are by nature easily copyable, thus fungible. Sure, AI can be trained and tailored to specific needs, but competitors can simply copy the successful training methods once they are apparent. A widespread perception of AI/robot produced goods/services as inferior or less personal will happen irrespective of the actual merits of of the products and services in question. There will probably be a few field-specific exceptions to this, but primarily in areas where exact precision, scalability, or replicability are the primary competitive advantages (precision machinery, automobiles, aircraft, etc). In industries that are very cost or precision-sensitive, robotic automation will do well. In industries sensitive to quality of service, humans will still be useful. Ordinary products such as food & clothing, and especially services, can be marketed based on a "human touch and taste" differentiating advantage that robot-based corporations will be unable to compete with. You can go into RoboDonalds and order your hamburger with all the ingredients you want, and that will be fine. Or you can go into a traditional steakhouse, talk with the chef about the cuts of meat available, select one, tell him/her how you'd like it prepared, and enjoy conversing with the waitstaff. Until AI can hold human-like conversations and understand all the nuances of human communication, any product or service that differentiates itself based on a non-trivial communication with the customer will be robust to AI/robotic disruption.
- pinkyand 12y ago
  Yes, it's an historical observation. But it would be very interesting imagine/inquire how it could manifest in the future.And BTW - science fiction authors did predict something generally similar to the iPhone. OK ,it's possible that robot produced goods will be perceived as inferior, but judging the popularity of today's hand made goods vs machines made goods it might not be a big factor - but who knows. It's also possible that people would be interested in being serviced by a human and not a robot. It's interesting to think such a world, where more than 50% of your wages are purely going towards buying relationships - and most of the work time of people is purely selling relationships. It seems pretty lousy - but it's possible.
gexla 12y ago
We can't say what kind of jobs there will because we are horrible at predicting the future. The most certain guide we have for the future is the past, and the past isn't as mysterious / scary as the future. One thing is for damn sure though, we can be quite certain of the jobs a robot can do right now and that we are just waiting for price is right.
- pinkyand 12y ago
  Accuracy shouldn't prevent us from telling stories about the future, stories that could inspire, and give us some direction about the possible future, even if some of them are wrong ,because some could be right. And heck, i'm pretty sure there would be decent readership for such stories. But there aren't none as far as i can tell.

gipp 12y ago

Do you think people in Turing's time could have possibly envisioned the existence or proliferation of the role of "developer"? Not saying you're right or wrong, but our inability to envision future jobs, or lack thereof, doesn't mean much one way or the other.

JeremyReimer 12y ago
It's hard to see developer jobs (as awesome as they are) replacing displaced jobs on a massive scale. I was listening to an NPR podcast where they estimated that only one percent of workers in the United States are employed as software developers.
marcosdumay 12y ago
> Do you think people in Turing's time could have possibly envisioned the existence or proliferation of the role of "developer"? Yes, I do. Before that there were already people that spent most of their time creating algorithms, and programming machines.

thinkingkong 12y ago

Perhaps there is net job creation but not for the people who are immediately displaced. The jobs figures are treated like some pool, and it ignores the fact that many people can't adapt their existing skill set to the jobs that were created. For example, 100,000 truckers are put out of work by a truck that drives itself. There might be 100,000 other jobs created - we might all get to work less one day - but for those 100,000 truckers, the number of them becoming automation developers is probably pretty low.

seanflyon 12y ago
It seems to me that the new jobs will require more and more education, which could be a problem for the uneducated. I am optimistic though, because when I look at the past people have always been able to adapt to the new jobs and benefited significantly. Just think of all the poor hunters and gatherers who were put out of work by the advent of farming.

ModernMech 12y ago

I believe as the robotics industry grows, an appropriate support network will need to grow with it to handle the inevitable growing pains. For instance, I believe a "robotics mechanic" will be a job of the future, analogous to an automotive mechanic. Today there are experts/specialists in different automotive systems like transmissions, electrical, etc. Likewise, robots will need specialists in perception, locomotion, cognition, etc. But robots of the future will not be designed to do one thing, as cars are (press throttle, move forward). They will be complex, autonomous decision-making machines, something the world really has never dealt with. I imagine the support infrastructure needed to deal with such machines would more closely resemble the healthcare industry than the automotive industry. For example, you would have your highly trained specialists as I mentioned, but also generalists skilled at diagnosing and repairing common issues, and of course support staff needed to assist them in their jobs. Thus you have tiers of skill so that if a robot displaces a housekeeper(for instance) he doesn't have to get a PhD in order to find a new job in the robotics industry that made him obsolete.

JoeAltmaier 12y ago
Its unlikely that disruptive changes in the robotics situation will magically leave room for everyone, or even for most people, to still have meaningful work. We'll have to decide what to do about that. And it will take more than hopeful trickle-down theories. Probably a basic income or work program solution of some kind.
_random_ 12y ago
"robotics mechanic" - sounds like a job for fully automated robotic robot service centers.

recalibrator 12y ago

This question intrigued me, so did some research and started designing "future-proof" business plans and brands that people can use right away. It's still a work in progress, but it's here if anyone wants a look: http://startjumper.com http://startjumper.com.

john_b 12y ago

It's simply a historical observation. If it was obvious what kind of jobs there would be in the future, companies would have already sprang up around those ideas and would be hiring, which would make them the jobs of today. Anything less would be equivalent to the whole world having an understanding that Apple stock will rise by 100% in the next two years but nobody buying it. Basically, the future is unknowable. But as Marc Andressen likes to say, human needs and wants are unlimited. As long as people can provide for the wants and needs of others via jobs, there will be jobs. I'd take it one step further, in fact. If we imagine the robot dominated future that so many people fear, it stands to reason (given human nature) that robot-produced goods and services will be viewed as inferior, cheaper, or less personal than human-produced goods. Robots and AI are by nature easily copyable, thus fungible. Sure, AI can be trained and tailored to specific needs, but competitors can simply copy the successful training methods once they are apparent. A widespread perception of AI/robot produced goods/services as inferior or less personal will happen irrespective of the actual merits of of the products and services in question. There will probably be a few field-specific exceptions to this, but primarily in areas where exact precision, scalability, or replicability are the primary competitive advantages (precision machinery, automobiles, aircraft, etc). In industries that are very cost or precision-sensitive, robotic automation will do well. In industries sensitive to quality of service, humans will still be useful. Ordinary products such as food & clothing, and especially services, can be marketed based on a "human touch and taste" differentiating advantage that robot-based corporations will be unable to compete with. You can go into RoboDonalds and order your hamburger with all the ingredients you want, and that will be fine. Or you can go into a traditional steakhouse, talk with the chef about the cuts of meat available, select one, tell him/her how you'd like it prepared, and enjoy conversing with the waitstaff. Until AI can hold human-like conversations and understand all the nuances of human communication, any product or service that differentiates itself based on a non-trivial communication with the customer will be robust to AI/robotic disruption.

pinkyand 12y ago
Yes, it's an historical observation. But it would be very interesting imagine/inquire how it could manifest in the future.And BTW - science fiction authors did predict something generally similar to the iPhone. OK ,it's possible that robot produced goods will be perceived as inferior, but judging the popularity of today's hand made goods vs machines made goods it might not be a big factor - but who knows. It's also possible that people would be interested in being serviced by a human and not a robot. It's interesting to think such a world, where more than 50% of your wages are purely going towards buying relationships - and most of the work time of people is purely selling relationships. It seems pretty lousy - but it's possible.

gexla 12y ago

We can't say what kind of jobs there will because we are horrible at predicting the future. The most certain guide we have for the future is the past, and the past isn't as mysterious / scary as the future. One thing is for damn sure though, we can be quite certain of the jobs a robot can do right now and that we are just waiting for price is right.

pinkyand 12y ago
Accuracy shouldn't prevent us from telling stories about the future, stories that could inspire, and give us some direction about the possible future, even if some of them are wrong ,because some could be right. And heck, i'm pretty sure there would be decent readership for such stories. But there aren't none as far as i can tell.