Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AI adoption linked to 13% decline in jobs for young U.S. workers: study

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 662 posts

Re: AI adoption linked to 13% decline in jobs for young U.S. workers: study

#61

Post by the_real_cher »

fibers wrote: post #8

The accounting note is not true in the traditional sense. The field in the US is just getting offshored to India/PH/Eastern Europe for better or for worse. There is even a big push to lower the educational requirements to attain licensure in the US (Big 4 partners want more bodies and are destroying the pipeline for US students). Audit quality will continue to suffer and public filers will issue bunk financials if th…

This is exactly right.

The H1B pipeline has not decreased at all whereas millions of American workers have been laid off.

Re: AI adoption linked to 13% decline in jobs for young U.S. workers: study

#62

Post by stonemetal12 »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #4
techpineapple wrote: post #2

I’m suss about this paper when it makes this claim: “where AI is more likely to automate, rather than augment , human labor.” Where is AI currently automating human labor? Not Software Engineering. Or - what’s the difference between AI that augments me so I can do the job of three people and AI that “automates human labor”

What is the effective difference between augment and automate? Either way, fewer man hours are needed to produce the same output.

If your job is to swing a hammer, then hammer swinging robot automates your job.

If your job is to swing a hammer, then drill robot augments your job (your job is now swing hammer and drill hole).

How that is different from drill bot automating human driller's job is an exercise left to the reader.

Re: AI adoption linked to 13% decline in jobs for young U.S. workers: study

#63

Post by Ekaros »

Spivak wrote: post #39
ArtTimeInvestor wrote: post #38

Every day when I am out in the city, I am amazed by how many jobs we have NOT managed to replace with AI yet. For example, cashiers. There are still many people spending their lives dragging items over a scanner, reading a number from a screen, holding out their hand for the customer to put money in, and then sorting the coins into boxes. How hard can it be to automate that?

You mean ordering kiosks and self-checkout machines? We have automated it, it's just not everywhere has implemented it. The one I'm desperately waiting for is serverless restaurants—food halls already do it but I want it everywhere. Just let me sit down, put an order into the kitchen, pick it up myself. I promise I can walk 20 feet and fill my own drink cup.

Seems like perfect option for robots (not humanoid). Bring me my food. You can still keep people in kitchen for a bit, but well servers in many restaurants are not really needed.

Re: AI adoption linked to 13% decline in jobs for young U.S. workers: study

#64

Post by Ekaros »

ArtTimeInvestor wrote: post #46
lotsofpulp wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hard part is preventing theft, not adding numbers.

Is the theft really happening at the checkout? And if so, why can't we detect it via camera + AI?

Checkouts are often only egress points. So having pair of eyes over them does have some effect compared to having none at all.

Re: AI adoption linked to 13% decline in jobs for young U.S. workers: study

#65

Post by loco5niner »

tux3 wrote: post #49
lotsofpulp wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hard part is preventing theft, not adding numbers.

Cashiers should not, and will not prevent theft. They're not paid nearly enough to get in danger, and it is not their job. I'm sure you can find videos of thefts in San Francisco if you need a visual demonstration. No cashier is going to jump in front of someone to stop a theft.

That's not the type of theft they were talking about. Rather, self scanners purposely not scanning items to get them for free, etc

Re: AI adoption linked to 13% decline in jobs for young U.S. workers: study

#66

Post by techpineapple »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #30
techpineapple wrote: post #2

I’m suss about this paper when it makes this claim: “where AI is more likely to automate, rather than augment , human labor.” Where is AI currently automating human labor? Not Software Engineering. Or - what’s the difference between AI that augments me so I can do the job of three people and AI that “automates human labor”

When the Stanford paper looked at augment vs automate, they used the data from Anthropic's AI Economic Index. That paper defined the terms like this: We also analyze how AI is being used for tasks, finding 57% of usage suggests augmentation of human capabilities (e.g., learning or iterating on an output) while 43% suggests automation (e.g., fulfilling a request with minimal human involvement). From the data, software…

Sounds like a snake eating it's own tail.

Re: AI adoption linked to 13% decline in jobs for young U.S. workers: study

#67

Post by HPsquared »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #4
techpineapple wrote: post #2

I’m suss about this paper when it makes this claim: “where AI is more likely to automate, rather than augment , human labor.” Where is AI currently automating human labor? Not Software Engineering. Or - what’s the difference between AI that augments me so I can do the job of three people and AI that “automates human labor”

What is the effective difference between augment and automate? Either way, fewer man hours are needed to produce the same output.

The total output isn't going to stay the same, though.

Re: AI adoption linked to 13% decline in jobs for young U.S. workers: study

#68

Post by HankStallone »

tux3 wrote: post #49
lotsofpulp wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hard part is preventing theft, not adding numbers.

Cashiers should not, and will not prevent theft. They're not paid nearly enough to get in danger, and it is not their job. I'm sure you can find videos of thefts in San Francisco if you need a visual demonstration. No cashier is going to jump in front of someone to stop a theft.

True, but having a cashier standing there waiting to scan your items will prevent most normal people from stealing. Sure, some will brazenly walk right past with a TV on their shoulder, but most people won't.

If there's no cashier and you're doing it yourself, a whole lot more people will "forget" to scan a couple items, and that adds up.

Re: AI adoption linked to 13% decline in jobs for young U.S. workers: study

#69

Post by jszymborski »

MangoCoffee wrote: post #35
jszymborski wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell that to dock workers, who have successfully delayed the automation of ports to the extent we see them automated in e.g. the PRC [0]. Hell, they're even (successfully) pushing back against automated gates! [1] [0] https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/02/business/dock-workers-strike-... [1] https://www.npr.org/2024/10/03/nx-s1-5135597/striking-dockwo...

Isn't that just delaying the inevitable? Yangshan Deep-Water Port in Shanghai is one of the most automated ports. Considering there are more people in China than in the US, China still automated their port.

I'm not making a value judgment on the specific case of dock workers, I'm rather saying that unions can and do prevent automation. If Software Devs had unionized earlier, a lot of positions would probably still be around.

Re: AI adoption linked to 13% decline in jobs for young U.S. workers: study

#70

Post by lotsofpulp »

ArtTimeInvestor wrote: post #46
lotsofpulp wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hard part is preventing theft, not adding numbers.

Is the theft really happening at the checkout? And if so, why can't we detect it via camera + AI?

Detecting theft does not mean theft is prevented. You then need the government to prosecute, and impose sufficient punishment to deter theft. This is not cheap, nor a given that it will happen.
Post reply on HN