Please see the following RG link.

Article Artificial Intelligence, Jobs and the Future of Work: Racing...

@See in any business, only the best will always survive. In this era of AI, it is natural that machine learning and higher order AI can actually replace the teacher in say conventional subjects. However, the question of developing new courses and programmes, human interventions will be required and i feel that way only the presence of teacher will be recognised. For formal classes over the years, the teachers may not be required but for faciliating and supporting, teacher is a must.

Dear K. Suresh ,

Artificial intelligence (AI) refers to the simulation of human intelligence in machines that are programmed to think like humans and mimic their actions. The term may also be applied to any machine that exhibits traits associated with a human mind such as learning and problem-solving .

https://chatbotslife.com/will-ai-cause-mass-unemployment-f26537e5f25a

Regards,

Shafagat

Please see the following RG link.

Article Artificial Intelligence, Jobs and the Future of Work: Racing...

I think need is increasing. So efficiency is most to be increased

May I refer you the article "The Impact of AI on the Future of Work and Workers" A discussion paper prepared by the Australian Institute of Machine Learning, University of Adelaide

As with the 'automation' debate way-back-when, some current job roles will go while new ones will be created, and the world will come to a new balance of employment.

Interesting answers. i agree with Dr. Philip Adams , Anjay kumar Mishra , Harasit Kumar Paul ,, Arvind Singh , Manal Hadi Kanaan

The results of many studies suggest that in the future, due to the development of applications of constantly improved artificial intelligence and technology, learning machines can significantly decrease the employment of people in some types of professions, professions, in some branches and sectors of the economy. It is likely that significant decreases in employment in some branches and sectors of the knowledge-based economy will appear in a few years, because prognostic research shows that in a few years the scale of applications of artificial intelligence and technologies will increase strongly learning machines in various areas of production processes and services rendered. On the other hand, the development of applications of constantly improved artificial intelligence and technology learning machines will also create new jobs in the fields of analytical and research. However, the scale of employment decline will be much larger than the number of new jobs created.

Regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Dear All,

@Dear Dariusz P.

I do have a somewhat contrary view to what you have expressed in your post.

One aspect of it has been explained earlier by Dr. Philip Adams in his recent post on this thread but there could be a strong possibility in my opinion, of a reverse trend in the post Covid-19 economies of several countries as contrary to what was witnessed under globalization in last couple of decades across the globe.

Obviously, 'the survival of the fittest principle' (as far as the latest technology/adaptation and continuous innovation of the same is concerned) whether it is for the country or for an individual employable youth would apply more or less uniformly under the circumstances.

Regards,

Erik Brynjolfsson, an economist at MIT, argues against focusing on job losses as the central effect of AI, because it is rare to see an entire job automated. “Reinvention and re-engineering of jobs is the key story,” he says. The question is less about whether a job will survive, and more about whether it will still be recognizable. For example, although the job of bank cashier accounts for a smaller share of employment now than it did 50 years ago, cashiers have survived the arrival of automated cash machines much better than most predicted, partly by focusing on customer care.

AI will cause Both unemployment and employment. As AI progresses, it will steadily and inevitably take over large sectors of the workforce and will bring mass-scale unemployment and social unrest. The jobs that most of the people are currently doing, may get obsolete or automated sooner than you think. ... AI will also create new jobs in the field.

https://chatbotslife.com/will-ai-cause-mass-unemployment-f26537e5f25a

Oxford Economics: up to 20 million manufacturing jobs worldwide will be lost to robots by 2030. ... World Economic Forum: automation will displace 75 million jobs but generate 133 million new ones worldwide by 2022. Gartner: AI-related job creation will reach two million net-new jobs in 2025.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/gilpress/2019/07/15/is-ai-going-to-be-a-jobs-killer-new-reports-about-the-future-of-work/

AI will replace "repetitive" jobs--those tasks that can be automated like robots are doing in factories. It will also potentially replace many "white-collar" tasks in the fields of accounting, healthcare, marketing, law, hospitality, and other areas.

https://www.inc.com/carmine-gallo/an-ai-expert-told-60-minutes-that-ai-could-replace-40-percent-of-jobs-heres-part-he-left-out.html

The same was predicted during the introduction of the Computer but what was happened, rather more employment was created.

Hope AI too will create more jobs in future !!!!

AI will definitely affect the lives of people. We will have to adapt accordingly but AI has definitely some limits beyond which if its made autonomous then humanity will be at loss that is why advance research was stopped on it as it may gain the power where it can bypass logic and compassion and all norms. Like if we have made AI based nuclear arsenal or missile systems or any such war machines which have autonomous controls/ decision making algorithms then humanity will move towards devastation and destruction. A mere software bug can bring the world to an end what to talk of jobs and life style. Secondly, definitely, AI is taking over subsequently and sequentially which is to some extent good as well as companies are going to shed off extra expense but again people will be loosing jobs so they will have to be more proficient than mere AI. However when it comes to logic , reasoning , emotions, feeling and decision making, AI does have a dark side which we cant trust.

There are many causes of unemployment that are not limited to artificial intelligence

We use artificial intelligence to replace manpower to reduce labour costs

You cannot take that probability out. However, innovative ways would still pop up to absorb mass unemployment. I have always advocated for more smart dealings in agriculture and host of other sectors that can employ a larger number of people outside the service and commerce industry.

AI is a very interesting area to explore because it has a lot of fascinating questions that are left unanswered. One of them is, it is still a challenging question to answer as to whether bots can develop sub- or sub-sub-conscious memory and knowledge just like humans. There are certain ideas and facts that doesn't pop out of the mind simply by logical reasoning or training. These are things that can be solved if common sense knowledge is present.

The bot should know where to look for certain things. For example, if I ask the bot to go and buy vegetables, it should automatically know not to look for them in a shop that sells fruits, or flowers. If it is such that the bot will be AI-complete only if it knows almost everything by a lot of intensive training, then that is too much of a time to train the model along with the size of the data.These two parameters grow either linearly or exponentially or whatever depending on the nature of the application. And also, how do the bots know if a cheese packet in a grocery store is already spoiled? That is the mistake we make. Is is possible to teach the bot to not make that mistake? What kind of knowledge does that require to learn such things? Is it through smell? This brings us to the next question. Can it smell?

Just a follow up on my previous comments. We humans have a sequence of thoughts that sometimes follow a sense of intuition. We don't really think based on our conceptual understanding. But, we usually have some kind of an innate sense of what could be the right way or what is right, or how it can go wrong and nobody really trained us to know what is right or wrong in certain aspects. We do hypothesize a lot of things right? Some go right while others go wrong at other times. All these things may not really involve reasoning through logistics. So, can the recent trend in AI answer that question, or if not, can it still answer (meaning 'yes') those questions in the future?

Oxford Economics: up to 20 million manufacturing jobs worldwide will be lost to robots by 2030. ... World Economic Forum: automation will displace 75 million jobs but generate 133 million new ones worldwide by 2022. Gartner: AI-related job creation will reach two million net-new jobs in 2025.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/gilpress/2019/07/15/is-ai-going-to-be-a-jobs-killer-new-reports-about-the-future-of-work/

Here are 13 jobs that are unlikely to exist in 2030 due to AI:

Travel Agents. ...

Cashiers. ...

Librarians. ...

Postal Couriers. ...

Bank Tellers. ...

Textile Workers. ...

The Print Industry. ...

Sports Referees and Umpires.

https://www.careeraddict.com/disappearing-jobs

Dariusz Prokopowicz , Well, it means that companies such as Uber or Lyft who rely on external taxi drivers will soon have cars which are autonomous. This example is interesting. Should the car be fully or semi-autonomous? I feel that semi-automated cars will be of a better choice due to rapidly changing environments thus leading to an intensive training of the AI model. Such people will lose their jobs to the advent and operation of fully autonomous cars. Although I agree that AI will be a dominating factor, how far it can be allowed to dominate is entirely in the control of humans. There are two parts: the human involvement and the AI involvement. These two should harmonize which will then create a sustainable world. They may not harmonize in most of the cases but only in one situation. Hence, this requires rethinking of the situation from both the sides. This problem is equally applicable in other relevant industries where the unemployment leads to serious problems.

I agree on that point Faraz Saleem . Thank you for contributing to this discussion.

Surely AI is going to minimize the requirements of unskilled and semiskilled workers in coming years.

The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Unemployment

https://www.technology.org/2019/12/17/the-impact-of-artificial-intelligence-on-unemployment/

Read some interesting research articles through the below links.

Article Artificial Intelligence, Jobs and the Future of Work: Racing...

https://www.pnas.org/content/116/14/6531

Intelligent algorithms and production robots lead to mass unemployment

I do think AI will actually create employment in so many ways and areas. The lost employment will be less as compared to created ones and benefits.

It depends on human behaviour. There are sectors where robots will replace many people but there are some jobs, as a cashier for example, where a client can decide whether to go to self-service or to a cash machine with a person. If we choose self-service, the owners will not have a problem with making cashiers redundant. That is only one example but it shows that our choices matter.

Overall it will benefit mankind. We cannot see it as direct replacement of human by machines but can envision how machines can help us in our work. Something which is of mass benefit is going to help all, say for example Google , whats app etc has helped many in different ways. Well if we want to see in automobile sector specifically, I would like to start from the car price in India in 1995 and what it is now. It is not even double the price it was 25 years back. The technology has brought better featured car with very less cost compared with year on year inflation. People who are affected in the short run will also benefit in the long run.

This is the wrong question. We live in a world of plenty which must be experienced as scarcity for our debt-money economy to function. But for the enormous interest costs imposed by debt-money, we would all be working no more than 15 hours a week. I wrote a book about this. Moreover, plenty is relative. Sahlins studied aborigines in Australia who never worked more than ten to fifteen hours a week and had plenty. His work has been confirmed by further studies in a book delightfully labeled " Limited Wants, Unlimited Means. I would argue that our present monetary system is obsolete if only because it increases costs. By the way, socialism is not the answer. Socialism seeks to justly distribute the value produced by workers in an economy of scarcity. Productive capitalism has achieved plenty. The evidence is clear. The length of the average work-week is shrinking. We have hundreds of millions of retirees and hundreds of millions of university students because we simply do not need their work. Hopefully, jobs, a miserable invention of industrial capitalism, will disappear as the form of human work organization.

https://www.iotforall.com/impact-of-artificial-intelligence-job-losses/

Although, jobs are a miserable invention (if humans can think of a way to improve their financial status without working), it does look like that is the way to survive, given the conditions such as financial jeopardy that might occur otherwise. Money created more jobs. Money is the center of gravity in this context. Will this be a sensible problem to work on is the next question. If there is no money involved in any business, then there is a tremendous liberation across all societies. There will be no gap between urban and rural areas as anyone will now have access to everything, can do almost everything, and so on. This is not practical at the moment.

I think if AI becomes as intelligent as highly skilled workers, maybe they will replace them too Mahesh Kumar after some point in time. Whether it takes 100 years or 500 years before they can replace such workers, it's a bit uncertainty. It's rather a question of time.

Money has been invented in countless forms over the last several thousand years. human evolution has been going on for two to three million years, civilization for 7000 years, capitalism for 400 years, and the current debt-money dominance of financial capitalism for but one century. Why should anyone believe that our current system is the end game? People have always worked but the forms of work organization have changed. Technology is driving us to more complex systems which will require much more professional work. Consider a nuclear power plant as such a complex system. We cannot experiment with them. It is too dangerous. Probability risk analysis suggests several hundred million potential paths to failure. The uncertainties are enormous. The experience of operators will become crucial to safe operation. Given the risks, human back up for any system will always be necessary.

Yes, even if the probability of success will be 98-99%, it is still a bit difficult to put all the eggs in one basket, given our human nature and tendency to disbelieve or lay a small fraction of a doubt on what if something goes wrong. AI can be computationally smarter than us in terms of speed, accuracy, and other alike parameters. Examples such as nuclear power plant control are beautiful examples to explain the situation as they have a high degree of impact on human lives. It is just a single button in some place in this world that determines the fate of all humans across the world. In these situations, it is easy to depend on fellow colleagues as there are three elements; Sensational experience, emotional impact, and common sense. We humans can imagine a situation and understand the seriousness of the problem. Can robots do the same? If yes, how do we figure out if they really imagined a situation, and if it is the right situation or not for the given context? Intelligence is not just the ability to perform arithmetic better than us, or perform a task within 1/2 an hour while it takes 7+ hours for 5 people to do the same job. This factor is just a limited sphere of what intelligence can tell us.

Just a follow-up on the previous discussion. In the light of that, how can we be so sure that an AI machine can do a particular task better, with a high reliability, and much more safer than us? If we have the right to be sure, what are the parameters to consider before we can decide?

While we consider a nuclear-like example, I would also recommend everyone to consider the present situation, covid-19. I feel that this situation will be a strong motivator to get into the autonomous world of technology. I agree that humans have a lot of tendency to get affected by various diseases. What about robots? Will they get affected too? However, any AI approach can be of immense value if it can assist human beings and leads to a much higher productivity than before, much better profit than before, and so on. We can depend on AI to an extent which depends on how much intelligence we give it to them. Giving them the required intelligence is entirely in human's control.

Kasyap, I have written a paper for the American Nuclear Society about the design of a high-reliability work organization for nuclear power plants. The core issue is how we use human effort to push back the walls of uncertainty. The fundamental problem of AI and all of our models and theories is that they act as lenses. They give us focus. They are a way of seeing and, of necessity, a way of not seeing. That is the cost of focus. We must see less in order to see selected foci more clearly. I have proposed dialectical AI systems where one system converges on a well-developed diagnosis of complex problems while a second actively maintains analyses of competing diagnoses. That way the assumptions of competing models are continually tested and available to human actors.