I think my current job will be replaced by a robot/software:
Displaying poll results.14122 total votes.
"People should have access to the data which you have about them. There should be a process for them to challenge any inaccuracies." -- Arthur Miller
Never (Score:3, Funny)
Two reasons - I'm write automation software, and I'm retiring before I suffer that fate.
Yes, I lose sleep over it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm in the same boat. I design, build, and program automation systems...software and hardware. The abstract thinking needed to do my job will not be replaceable by AI, robots, and other automation for generations. Everyone always thinks we are on the cusp of complete AI breakthrough. We are no where near what is needed for movie crap.
Re: (Score:3)
Yup. Same, though I'm more on the software side of things.
AI is great for tasks with well-defined input and output, especially if they are tolerant of significant errors. But a huge fraction of engineering simply isn't like that. For the most part, AI will just become another tool in software engineer's toolboxes that will be brought to bear when it makes sense, and other solutions will be used when it doesn't.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Never (Score:4, Insightful)
The abstract thinking needed to do my job will not be replaceable by AI, robots, and other automation for generations.
This is a very risky claim, though.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is, from your comment alone, I can't tell if you're a Democrat or a Republican.
As a Libertarian, rational thought left the building a long time ago (IMHO)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
So you fear-monger about the evils of immigrants and Muslims in past posts and then claim to be a libertarian?
Where's the live and let live? If there's no strong federal government who will protect you from the horrible Muslim immigrants?
You're not one of those misguided libertarians who believe everything just works itself out so there's no need for government. No, you just dont like government that you disagree with.
Re: (Score:2)
So they're just a regular conservative then?
Re: (Score:3)
The difference between fascism and libertarian is that libertarians want "minimal rules to create a safe environment" where fascism wants maximal rules. Fascism wants the government to control things. Libertarians want the government to control nothing. They are on exact opposite sides of the spectrum.
You might think that, but I'm not sure that's actually true. In the short run, they can have many goals in common. Fascists like to dismantle entitlement programs, as do libertarians. Fascists want a strong military, as do many libertarians. In fact, many libertarians seem quite willing to go along with Fascism as long as their rights (specifically) aren't being infringed and the fascists promise to cut taxes and fight the "nasty liberals" who want to insist that people should be nice to one another.
Of
Professional accoutant (Score:2)
So no realistic means to replce me with a robot until AI takes over the world.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you kidding?
I'm already seeing junior-level accountant positions replaced by software. The sophistication isn't quite there yet to take out the next step up in the food-chain, but it's probably only a matter of a year or two at most. Now, accountancy is a broad profession and there are undoubtedly sub-sets which will hold out for considerably longer, but I'd have put accountancy right at the top of the list of white-collar professions at risk from automation.
Lawyers are probably second placed. Forget th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Lawyers beat out accountants. The reason there was such a glut of law-school graduates starting ~10 years ago is so many associate positions have been replaced by software. Now, most of that is memorized/centralized research, rather than AI, but lawyers have been feeling the brunt for a while.
Re: Professional accoutant (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Accounting and taxes are defined by rules. Rules-based, data-based jobs are the easiest to replace.
The hardest jobs to replace are in the physical world where every step has the potential to require on-the-fly adaptation, such as a construction worker.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes but GPs point is you have a human client and they don't communicate clearly based on "Is this receipt business or personal?" so you need an accountant that knows people *and* tax law to divine the legal answers.
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's already been happening for decades already. There was tax-related software long before the Internet. TurboTAX, etc.
Re: Professional accoutant (Score:5, Insightful)
ccounting and taxes are defined by rules. Rules-based, data-based jobs are the easiest to replace.
Tax rules aren't like software rules. You don't even know what they really mean until someone guess wrong and there's case law.
Tax rules won't tell you that if you structure a business in a certain way, you can lower your tax burden. You need an expert in tax law to do that.
Re: (Score:3)
Tax rules aren't like software rules. You don't even know what they really mean until someone guess wrong and there's case law.
Tax rules won't tell you that if you structure a business in a certain way, you can lower your tax burden. You need an expert in tax law to do that.
See this is the problem with very methodical, mathematical sorts of minds. The ugly side of the way the human brain works is that it doesn't make decisions with 100% certainty. It guesses a lot about what to do based on incomplete information and heuristics. And it makes mistakes. I don't think we're ready for that type of algorithm in a non-human form because when we think of software systems, we expected them to be infallible. If you make them more like humans, they become fallible by definition. Yo
Re: (Score:2)
because when we think of software systems, we expected them to be infallible.
Hee.
Re: (Score:2)
because when we think of software systems, we expected them to be infallible.
Hee.
ikr? I didn't say it was rational. :)
Re: (Score:2)
The hardest jobs to replace are in the physical world where every step has the potential to require on-the-fly adaptation, such as a construction worker.
I'm not so sure those are so hard to replace. I mean they are, based on the way we currently build, but we don't need to build the way we build. In the future (and to some degree, it currently is) construction will just happen in a factory and be assembled on-site.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Never (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm a purchasing agent. Most of my vendors won't negotiate pricing with a robot.
Re:Vendors/Salesmen (Score:2)
someone needs to configure and deploy the robots! (Score:2)
someone needs to what they will do, configure the robots and networks and deploy the software that control then
Re: (Score:2)
Eventually they will be able to do that. See Skynet.
Re: (Score:2)
after that, communism (Carl Max one, not Stalin one!!) will be a good model, robot will do the work, everyone will receive money and do thinks that like and money in the end will be lot less important... think in a Star Trek like world
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
do not know why, but i have a feeling that i'm missing some "?????" (probably with lot of problems and deads) somewhere :)
Welders and more (Score:3, Interesting)
Six of us got laid off after the purchase of a single robot two years ago. One job was 'created'; there's a technician who both programs jobs into it and maintains it as needed, but that's still five jobs in the red. Make that nine, after they bought a second unit a year later. Had been good work, good pay, and now all of that's just gone. Everywhere else is cutting too, I'm now doing nights at Tim Hortons, because all my training and experience no longer has value.
The McDonalds around town have also all been remodeled to two less cashes (dropped about two cashiers from every shift) with the addition of those touchscreen point of sales that you can order from. And even WalMart management's begining to get hit at low levels. ONE pair of techs is apparently enough for the entire city, for those machines. So, two jobs created, and a good 60 gone.
Will or Could be Replaced? (Score:3)
I think my job (cashiering/customer service) COULD be replaced by a robot today, but won't actually be for around 20 years. My job involves many odd jobs and no one robot existing today could do all of them. I imagine this is true for many people in the service industry. However...
Many of the odd jobs assume a certain retail paradigm. Putting up paper signage. Reticketing items. Assessing what price to discount damaged items to. Getting items down for customers. Explaining policies. Helping customers find an item. Putting back misplaced items. etc.
If the store worked under a different paradigm, none of these odd jobs would be necessary. For example, use tablet to order on website while automated car drives you to store. When you arrive, a robot has picked all your chosen items and put them in a bag/box for you already. You inspect the things you're unsure about, pay, and go. VR/AR will allow for item inspection before you arrive, hastening the process. VR shelves/racks don't need multiple facings per item, so item browsing can be much quicker than in person, if you just want to look at what's available. Items can't be misplaced or damaged by stockers/customers.
The Amazon concept store is a nice idea, but some people have bad credit and can't get a credit card, or refuse to own a credit/debit card, or are unable to create a bank account for various reasons. In any case, they currently pay for everything in cash, and couldn't use such a store. If the Amazon concept store accepted cash, broke people could wander in and rob the place blind; some people are only deterred by humans. A technical anti-theft solution like sealing the doors if a cash customer tries to leave without paying wouldn't work, as they'd leave right behind a paying customer; sirens are a crappy deterrent.
I chose 'Never' because... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
English to code isn't much more difficult than thought to interaction and computers are doing better and better at that.
Re: (Score:2)
Me too, though more because 20 years is WAY to short. 50 years would be more likely, and 100 years my personal guess.
I've already been replaced by a robot (Score:2)
No - I'm a school teacher (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Considering the absolute lack that some teachers engage with their classes? Many could already be replaced by robots. I know what you're saying, but many teachers don't do what you say. I had a math teacher in high school ~20 years ago that didn't give two shits how his class succeeded or failed. The last year that they taught 96% of his class failed and everyone was given the option of a null year including students who passed the exams. The kicker is that neither the principal, vice principal, or boa
Re: (Score:2)
So, your profession can already be done better by AI? I mean, the odds that you are one of the best explainers of a concept on the planet is small, and that can be videoed and shared. Software is better at predicting the emotional/social needs of teenagers based on a few
I'm retired. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Your new robot overlords thank you for your service.
Re: (Score:2)
Your new robot overlords thank you for your service.
That manages to sound exactly like, and at the same time completely different, from how I intended it...
lol (Score:2)
My job is to replace people with software (Score:2)
Even though I have a great deal of opportunity ahead and my job wont actually be replaced, I'll run out of people to replace in the next 10-20 years, so I chose (c) as robots will eventually make my current job redundant.
Outsourced? Definitely! Robot, probably not. (Score:3)
Missing Option (Score:2)
I _am_ a robot, you insensitive clod!
(however, I expect to be replaced by a more advanced robot in the 6-10 month timeframe)
10 Years -- Because I'm Planning for It (Score:2)
My work is 40% statistical analysis, 25% interpersonal relations, 35% using creativity to make our product better. Analysis can be automated and I'm trying to make it so. The interpersonal relations almost always boils down to analysis, instruction, and maybe some testimonial. So, that's (again) automated math, referring to existing guides, and likely some interface to connect happy custome
Better not be automated (Score:2)
I work in education. You can certainly try to automate my job away, but until so many jobs have been automated that people no longer need to work I will be employed. I guess once people don't need skills other than "keep the robots serving us" education may become less popular, but even then some people like to learn for the sake of learning. Am I too optimistic in hoping that some people will continue to learn from other humans?
Retired (Score:2)
I'm already retired. That's probably not a very cost-effective role for a robot.
Never (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you here to protect us? Because grandma needs protection at the bottom of the stairs.
Re: (Score:2)
Do not trust the pushing robot. He is malfunctioning. Shoving is the way.
No... (Score:2)
I deal with the station cable, the jack, the faceplate, the horizontal cable, the patch panel in the IDF, the rack, the copper patch cord, the L2 switch and its configuration, the fiber patch cord, the LIU, the backbone cable, the interconnects through various IDFs to the LIU in the MDF and patching into the L3 distribution switch, the L3 switch as a router itself, the fiber plant to the MPOP, the connection to the service provider's MPLS cloud and our rou
I'm a lawyer (Score:4, Interesting)
It will take a lot to replace lawyering that involves client contact. Low-level document discovery has already been replaced by robots, and much of the day-to-day work is already automated. But the task of listening to a client's story, picking out the legal issues, and giving applicable advice will take a lot of technology that we don't have yet. The most important reason for hiring a lawyer is their malpractice insurance policy; if they mess up, the insurance company will bail you out. When we get a robot lawyer that can get its own insurance policy, then we can replace human lawyers, but I don't think that will happen in my lifetime. This also applies to other professions such as doctors and accountants.
Re: (Score:2)
Not A Robot (Score:2)
never. (Score:3)
electronic repair tech. I ain't skeered of no robot wanting no part of some of the hairballs I deal with...
Re: (Score:2)
Not quite. Automation and technology brings downt he cost of electronics. It makes more sense today to throw out a PC and buy a new one than in 1998 when your PC cost $3000 not $699 (for non geek computer needs). Glued in batteries will only accelerate this trend.
Proof is A+ computer techs make $10/hr now. In 1998 that was $15/hr starting out and the cost of living was half. Even if you are specialized in let's say xray machines the problem is the cost is lower and lower each year which does bring down dema
Re: (Score:2)
Electronics aren't just PCs and cell phones.
I work on lab equipment that runs hundreds of thousands to replace and goes up every year.
Manufacturers don't have any incentive to maintain proper support for longer than their one to five year support contracts. They actively force obsolescence on many components that can be brought back into working order with a soldering iron and a little knowledge but can't be purchased any more.
Gone past that (Score:2)
Not for a long time (Score:2)
As a web developer, you'd think my job could be automated away pretty easily - and, in fact, I could see the powers-that-be trying to do just that. But the thing is, I think the effort would fall flat on its face. Most of the time when I'm asked to develop some new system, the client doesn't actually understand what he/she really wants. The biggest and most complicated part of the process is working with them, talking through the details (of both the specific task and the broader area) until we can define,
Probably Never (Score:2)
Until manufacturing systems become self-replicating and AI gets good enough at design, I'll be happily employed until retirement. I'm a controls engineer who specialize in industrial automation. I'm the bad guy who gets paid to put other people out of work.
What "being replaced" actually means (Score:3)
But for most professions the change will be that individual workers will become more and more productive. In those cases it doesn't matter if the individual is a checkout assistant, airline pilot, hooker, journalist, road-digger, marketing person or doctor. Technology, AI, new processes, more disintermediation, will mean that a piece of work that requires a given number of person*days now, will require many fewer as time goes on.
That leads to two possibilities: either professions (and manual, low-skilled work) will need only a fraction of the number of employees that each sector has today. Or that more opportunities will arise for the same number of people to be gainfully employed - but do we really need more holes dug in the road, or more blogs/newspapers/magazines in our lives?
Clearly, this won't happen all at once. But as people retire or leave their traditional jobs, they won't necessarily be replaced. Maybe new types of job will appear (we didn't need programmers until the computer was developed) or maybe we will see an underclass of unemployable people emerge, supported by a UBI system that is paid for by an ever-shrinking number of salaried staff.
Replaced - no, made unnecessary - yes (Score:3)
Software development of the kind I do is too unpredictable and custom to be replaced by robots as-is. On the other hand, perhaps in the age of robots the actual objectives of my work will become unnecessary, if business and IT are conducted in a more organized, planned and logical fashion.
So my job could not be *replaced* but it could surely be made redundant.
What, me worry? No...because I'm retired... (Score:2)
first, you tire, then you re-tire...
Kicked back early the first time at 55 to live off my ill-gotten gains, but got bored, un-retired, then re-retired at 62, bored, un-, then re- again at 66 for the last time (so far...)
I just automated the retire, un-retire, re-retire, re-un-retire process recursively, so now I can just sit back and ride the rollercoaster.
Try it, you'll like it!
(but if you don't, just un-re-un-cycle)
Ob. Missing Option (Score:2)
I'm already a Robot you insensitive clod! :)
Technical Planner: Software Architect (Score:2)
You'll always need to select technologies to accompany a business direction. Unless there becomes a monopoly, there will be a variety of vendors and someone needing to select one. In the technical space, the choice can be very complex. Today, that's a "minor detail" of programming leads, but it's already a unique job for me (Software Architect) and will only become more so.
I have been replaced (Score:2)
by a very small shell script.
Re: (Score:2)
And every program can be reduced by at least one line and has at least one bug so what you're left with is something that is very small doesn't work.
Yeah, testing automations. (Score:2)
Dang bots. :P
Never (Score:3)
But I work for the government, so I think my job is safe until sometime after the heat-death of the universe.
Never (Score:2)
My current job will never be eliminated because I have the best job of all -- I am retired. I have been at this job now for over 13 years.
Engineering is pretty safe (Score:2)
I am a design engineer, and anyone who thinks that engineers will be replaced by automation/AI is dreaming. Maybe when we have androids like Data from Star Trek TNG, but we are literally centuries away from that, if it is possible at all. I have designed automation kiosks, and basically, if your job is simple and repetitive, that is where automation is coming. Even driving, when you boil it down, is repetitive. That is why automation will work well there. The kind of AI/automation required to truly cre
Missing option (Score:2)
cant relace me. ever. (Score:2)
Low-mid-end redundancy (Score:3)
2016: Census was done online; no scanning, no interpreting cursive Greek; straight into the database. I don't know how many people they employed, but I suspect it was less than nine hundred. Good for them! They saved the Commonwealth some money.
A robot cannot replace retirement (Score:2)
Or joblessness. whatever you want to call it.
I highly recommend retiring early. I'm not going to live forever and I may as well enjoy life while I can.
Never (Score:2)
Because I'm the guy who programs the robot to take other people's jobs. Sorry.
Research and research politics (Score:2)
My past job was doing research in computer science, especially code generation and software observation, analysis, adaptation and evolution, which both require model transformations. In a sense I build systems which can help themselves and know their limits. Now I moved on in the department of writing for research grants together with smaller and larger groups of researchers (even from other fields). This requires politics (I give you my Lego when I can have your Lego) and the ability to form compromises.
Realtor (Score:2)
Now a real AI, that could do the job of a r
Re:Already writing code that writes code... (Score:4, Informative)
Then the specification is the code.
But there's more to it than just that - automated code generation is only as good as the persons writing the code generation package and it can never improve or adapt. Automated generation runs the risk of creating a stagnant situation where only a few people really understands how things work.
And to some extent we already have code generators - we have coders in India coding according to spec, but the result that we get back is frequently bad and it takes sometimes several weeks to get it right. You may say that it's a bad specification, but what we in the west see as obvious is like something out of a fairy tale for developers in India. Just something as simple as snow and ice on roads - that's impossible in a large part of India while in most of Europe it's something that happens every year.
Re: (Score:2)
We have snow and ice on the roads every day in Canada. Well, except for maybe two or three days of spring and the summer week.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah! A fellow Winnipegger I see! Or more accurately, I don't see. The snow blindness has set in.
Re: (Score:2)
This year we are back to having a real winter. You could go snow blind here today.
Re: (Score:2)
There are studded tires for motorcycles - it's actually really funny to see the other people in the traffic when you pass them in 4" of snow.
Re: (Score:2)
There's a difference between writing code generators requiring human input and providing fuzzy requirements to a software program that then goes forth in search of information of what said software program is supposed to do and then accumulates it, sorts it, indexes it and then can somehow intuitively guess when it has enough information to distill it down into a formal set of instructions where discrete steps can then be determined to generate the appropriate algorithms.
Furthermore, can we feed information
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just for entertainment, write a piece of code that outputs itself. You can do it, for simple values of programs.
The only thing you could trivially do is write the equivalent of a "cut and paste" algorithm. Just like any human that "programs" in this manner, the program that does it wouldn't understand the nature of what it cut and paste either. It also wouldn't understand where to apply it. The algorithm for that is FAR more sophisticated
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, my biggest job as a software developer isn't usually translating the specification into code, it is talking to systems to get a full specification. And no, it isn't just an implementation detail. I learned years ago that if I code the way I think best for the gaps in the specification called implementation details, someone will complain the code isn't working like they want it.
Re: (Score:2)
My job involves testing the automation...
I feel fairly safe till I'm retirement age.
Re: (Score:2)
Except that unit testing is only a small portion of QA in any automation software (I write it for a living). System testing still takes quite a large presence to do simply because it is difficult to write a testing script that knows exactly how something should go from input to final highly technical format and user display especially when that changes on a very regular basis due to improvements in the code or new technologies and rewrites. There is currently a shortage of qualified QA people to handle th
Re: (Score:2)
Which is fine, except large companies are following the fad of "no, no, unit tests are fine, all of QA is fired". Sure the product isn't as good afterwards, but this quarter looks great.
Re: (Score:2)
Then the market corrects itself especially in automation software. If those companies put out consistently shit code that is unstable and hard to keep anything running they stop getting contracts and the company that is putting out high quality code gets them. I know this because it has been unfolding in one of the major industries my company is in. We keep getting contract after contract to fix the other's constant fuck ups (literally we just got a job to replace a system before that company has finishe
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As a programmer I had to take the joke option because it's not "Never" and it's probably not within 20 years...but at some point robots will be able to program, and fix, other robots. At some point after the singularity, 100% of jobs could be taken by robots.
Re: (Score:3)
I actually continuously replace myself with scripts or systems. I architect effort out of systems and make sure there's as little work for me as possible. That somehow keeps me employed.
Year after year, the amount of work required to do my job goes down; and I find I can accomplish more with my time, so I do. Sometimes I sit around doing nothing and getting paid, and people peck at me for stuff now and then; this happens because I'm a lot better at making things happen than they are, and I turn 3-day
Re: (Score:2)
Bad news:
https://www.wired.com/2009/04/... [wired.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Pharmacy Technicians can be replaced by robots.
As for consultations, medical doctors still consult with pharmacists because pharmacists have in depth knowledge that doctors don't. Much like some doctors are specialists is various subfields of medicine. And much like general doctors send their patients to specialist doctors, pharmacists can continue to provide valuable services directly to patients.
And with robots to do the technician work, the pharmacists will be able to focus far more on supporting doctors
Re: (Score:2)
You have a limited view on what pharmacists do. In case you refer to those only pushing boxes over the counter, they are expendable, but those who support you with your medication, check it for side effects (doctors are not that well verse in that department) discuss problems you have with your medication. These people have social skills which are hard to automate. Presently, we are not able to do so. However, the work pharmacists do today will rapidly change in the future.
Re: (Score:2)
Pharmacists also help in another area - suggesting cheaper options. I had a medication which was not covered by insurance. The pharmacist suggested asking the doctor to prescribe a specific higher dosage, and the resulting pills could be divided into fourths. Same quantity of medicine for less than half the price. Sometimes the reverse is true, for example five 1mg pills is cheaper than one 5mg because there is a generic for the 1mg.
Another benefit: for elderly people, finding pills that are easier to s
Re: (Score:2)