At Davos, IBM Chief Predicts Artificial Intelligence Won’t Be a Job Killer
1–10 of 195 posts
Re: At Davos, IBM Chief Predicts Artificial Intelligence Won’t Be a Job Killer
#2Is IBM CEO Ginni Rometty someone who can actually provide insight on the impact of AI on society? I'm sure some of her subordinates could, but the only thing I've ever heard about her personally is that she's driving IBM into the ground by chasing some unrealistic financial metric, and I'm not super inclined to bypass a paywall just to hear an executive say executive things.
Re: At Davos, IBM Chief Predicts Artificial Intelligence Won’t Be a Job Killer
#3This is all you need to read from the article:
> Advances in artificial intelligence will lead to job losses, but new forms of employment will take their place...History, though, has demonstrated that technological breakthroughs lead to new employment opportunities
-- IBM CEO Ginni Rometty
But, I think we are approaching (if we haven't already crossed this point) the time where new jobs created by technology advancements will be fewer than old jobs displaced.
My example here is Instagram, a company of a dozen staff or so when acquired, is the digital replacement of photo labs in every city. New technologies are not the job creator that they once were and I haven't read anything to contradict that statement or posit that new tech is going to drive jobs growth.
Re: At Davos, IBM Chief Predicts Artificial Intelligence Won’t Be a Job Killer
#4We've seen this before with the transition from a labour force that was 50%+ involved in farming to one that became a manufacturing based society and then again in the move from manufacturing to services.
One of the bigger differences with AI is that it now may take away many of the lower tier "white collar" jobs along with blue collar jobs that were previously displaced by technology shits.
I'm not terribly familiar with my economics history but is it possible that a huge tide of AI backed apps could be the first time that a significant portion of white collar jobs are lost along with the typical blue collar jobs that are more traditionally lost with tech shifts?
Then again, in 2000, alot of first world programmers were worried about offshoring of programming jobs, I haven't seen any real impact of the loss of these jobs on programmers in North America so perhaps IBM is correct that AI will produce as many new jobs as it replaces.
Re: At Davos, IBM Chief Predicts Artificial Intelligence Won’t Be a Job Killer
#5In discussions of the issue, AI and automation are often used interchangeably and this entirely clouds the issue.
The AI that is so far real is a particular kind of software that has helped large-scale decisions and processes in large enterprises, large websites and etc - places with a lot of data to agregate.
Automation is an ongoing process of replacing people with machines and it is what has eliminated jobs. Advances in software has helped some automation and some of those advances are connected to AI but a lot of the advances involve materials, processes, a willingness-or-not of consumers to use automated processes rather than interacting with a human (whether buying online or from automatic kiosk or whatever).
Indeed, the AI-in-particular and job losses in general narrative is just about a sales-pitch for IBM's Watson etc rather than a serious threat.
Re: At Davos, IBM Chief Predicts Artificial Intelligence Won’t Be a Job Killer
#6This is all you need to read from the article: > Advances in artificial intelligence will lead to job losses, but new forms of employment will take their place...History, though, has demonstrated that technological breakthroughs lead to new employment opportunities -- IBM CEO Ginni Rometty But, I think we are approaching (if we haven't already crossed this point) the time where new jobs created by technology advancem…
Instagram is not replacement for photo labs, digital cameras are.
Re: At Davos, IBM Chief Predicts Artificial Intelligence Won’t Be a Job Killer
#7This is all you need to read from the article: > Advances in artificial intelligence will lead to job losses, but new forms of employment will take their place...History, though, has demonstrated that technological breakthroughs lead to new employment opportunities -- IBM CEO Ginni Rometty But, I think we are approaching (if we haven't already crossed this point) the time where new jobs created by technology advancem…
I agree.
It all seems so obvious to me that I feel like I must be the fool in the room, but that can't be. Technology and progress in science changes the kinds of work we do. The processes are accelerating, and we're reaching a point where work is better done by machines. I can see no viable future for humans other than Universal Basic Income, with options for additional creativity and work unbounded by time spent doing menial tasks to earn wages for shelter and food and clothing. Yes that all sounds utopian, but what other futures are there? The masses won't have jobs - the machines will. What will people do when there are no jobs? We'll have UBI and we'll have the strongest entrepreneurship and artistic discovery we've ever had. It doesn't matter what side of the politics you're on - UBI is going to be the future simply because it has to be.
"Job creator" is the most intense insult I can think of to call a politician but everyone else seems to love it. Aren't we supposed to be destroying jobs as fast as possible so that automation can make our lives easier and provide higher quality of life to all?
Creating jobs sounds like the worst possible path for people to take - and for CEOs like Rometty to encourage the idea that jobs are here to stay seems dangerous. Jobs are not here to stay, even as the work changes and some new jobs are created along the way, the numbers of jobs will decline to 0.
Re: At Davos, IBM Chief Predicts Artificial Intelligence Won’t Be a Job Killer
#8Rometty doesn't even know that Watson is a vaporware boondoggle, so how would she know what's going to happen when AI impacts society. She is probably the least qualified person at IBM to talk about AI, and IBM itself is one of the least qualified companies practicing "AI". She too far removed from the trenches. But IBM has excellent PR, and this is the line I would take if I were betting my company on AI services.
Re: At Davos, IBM Chief Predicts Artificial Intelligence Won’t Be a Job Killer
#9The sad thing is she has to say this to appease her public sector clientele that still holds to the believe that life benefits tied to 'jobs' are the only way to keep the unruly masses under control.
Re: At Davos, IBM Chief Predicts Artificial Intelligence Won’t Be a Job Killer
#10This is all you need to read from the article: > Advances in artificial intelligence will lead to job losses, but new forms of employment will take their place...History, though, has demonstrated that technological breakthroughs lead to new employment opportunities -- IBM CEO Ginni Rometty But, I think we are approaching (if we haven't already crossed this point) the time where new jobs created by technology advancem…
> My example here is Instagram, a company of a dozen staff or so when acquired, is the digital replacement of photo labs in every city.
While not trying to dispute your main point, I hardly think Instagram replaces all of what photo labs do, such as large size prints, professional correction, and specialty products such as cards and books. There are other companies online that do compete in these spaces though. I think most labs are probably getting by with their services targeted towards professionals, who want a bit more accountability than they are likely to get using a large service. That may just mean a semi-large to large lab though, so small labs likely have a hard time of it.