Will AI take your job? (Dispatches C4)

[najaB]

That of course is automation designed for the presence of a human who can take over. Automation designed for a pilotless aircraft could not work in that way.

The laws of physics don't care if it's a human or AI at the controls.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The laws of physics don't care if it's a human or AI at the controls.

They don't, but as with automated cars you are left with this "dilemma" - do you accept higher safety overall if that results in fewer accidents of a specific type (those caused by pilot error) but slightly more of another type (those caused by mechanical failure that a pilot could have averted).

Many people would baulk at that but rationally one should accept it as it means fewer deaths/injuries overall.

But equally on my point, at present if anything odd happens the autopilot disconnects rather than operating in a degraded mode on the assumption the human is there to take over. On a completely automatic aircraft that isn't a possible design consideration.

 

[bleeder4]

This current news item seems relevant to this thread.

Amazon confirms massive job losses in corporate division

The company says the opportunities provided by AI means it needs to be "organised more leanly."

www.bbc.co.uk

Amazon has confirmed it plans to cut thousands of jobs, saying it needs to be "organised more leanly" to seize the opportunity provided by artificial intelligence (AI).

The tech giant said on Tuesday it would reduce its global corporate workforce by "approximately 14,000 roles".

 

[87electric]

I come in from the angle of the arts. I can clearly see marvellous human creativity in books, art, music being stifled at first, then gradually becoming a non important part of all cultures. Perhaps disappearing within a 100 years depending on what is deemed to be the norm of the times. It would be interesting to know the statistics of how many people do not pick up and use a pen/pencil a day. I come from the world where calculators were banned in classrooms at school.
Crypto art, NFTs ( Non-Fungible Tokens) and the blockchain technology has been advancing for 8 or 9 years now and it generates a lot of money of that there is no doubt. Artists (or moneymakers depending on your point of view) have embraced the tech but so have auction houses like Christie’s and Sothebys.
Will digital art resign traditional art to the bin? Will it co-exist? Traditional is more impressive to me because of the hand to paper creativity. I don’t want robots.

 

[The exile]

Within lots of fields there will for the time being be niche legacy products / areas which are not outwith the capabilities of AI but where it just wouldn’t be worth the time and effort training it up and ironing out the ast inconsistencies/ mistakes which in a necessarily small sample would potentially set dangerous precedents. At least that’s what I’m hoping will see me out…

 

[PTR 444]

I come in from the angle of the arts. I can clearly see marvellous human creativity in books, art, music being stifled at first, then gradually becoming a non important part of all cultures. Perhaps disappearing within a 100 years depending on what is deemed to be the norm of the times. It would be interesting to know the statistics of how many people do not pick up and use a pen/pencil a day. I come from the world where calculators were banned in classrooms at school.
Crypto art, NFTs ( Non-Fungible Tokens) and the blockchain technology has been advancing for 8 or 9 years now and it generates a lot of money of that there is no doubt. Artists (or moneymakers depending on your point of view) have embraced the tech but so have auction houses like Christie’s and Sothebys.
Will digital art resign traditional art to the bin? Will it co-exist? Traditional is more impressive to me because of the hand to paper creativity. I don’t want robots.

Even with AI capable of generating masterpieces, there will always be humans who want to create original art, compose music and write books using traditional methods. I expect we will see a lot more independent creators partaking in their own crafts to counteract the dominance of AI generated art, music and literature.

 

[Class 317]

The bigger picture for me if is AI takes say 50% of the jobs how does the economy survive with 50% less consumers?

A universal basic income? How do you deal with the inequalities between those who go to work and those how get a free ride?

Another alternative I have seen proposed is much early retirement maybe at 45 or 50 but again how do we support a much bigger none earning contingent?

How do we rebalance the economy for the new reality?

 

[styles]

The bigger picture for me if is AI takes say 50% of the jobs how does the economy survive with 50% less consumers?

A universal basic income? How do you deal with the inequalities between those who go to work and those how get a free ride?

Another alternative I have seen proposed is much early retirement maybe at 45 or 50 but again how do we support a much bigger none earning contingent?

How do we rebalance the economy for the new reality?

Indeed, this is the big concern.

In particular, AI and robotics are likely to replace more of the unskilled workforce. Unskilled workers replaced by technology will end up competing for an even smaller pool of unskilled jobs which remain.

In the end I think a universal basic income will become unavoidable. The alternative is we stop measuring our economy the way which we currently do, and instead say that we are content with people not 'working'.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The bigger picture for me if is AI takes say 50% of the jobs how does the economy survive with 50% less consumers?

A universal basic income? How do you deal with the inequalities between those who go to work and those how get a free ride?

The nature of UBI is that it's universal, everyone gets it. It'd be funded from tax on businesses using AI etc.

People could then choose to work or not work to augment it. The whole point is that it's not means tested, you get it if you work and earn 100K or if you don't work, and it's your choice if you do or you don't, though you'd only afford a basic lifestyle on it.

 

[PTR 444]

I think even if AI takes away jobs on a mass scale, there will still be some sort of encouragement from the government for citizens to attend some sort of purposeful or meaningful activity. That could be attending an education or training program, or running a small business.

Funding these would be less of a concern if AI improves productivity over human workers.

In the shorter term though, I can see the majority of workplaces implementing a four-day working week as AI increasingly takes on productive tasks, with pay equivalent to that of five days.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Oct 2025 ==

Indeed, this is the big concern.

In particular, AI and robotics are likely to replace more of the unskilled workforce. Unskilled workers replaced by technology will end up competing for an even smaller pool of unskilled jobs which remain.

In the end I think a universal basic income will become unavoidable. The alternative is we stop measuring our economy the way which we currently do, and instead say that we are content with people not 'working'.

I was under the impression that AI would replace more “white collar” jobs that are largely knowledge based. This would have more of a profound impact on highly skilled citizens who may have to adjust to significantly reduced earnings compared to those on lower salaries, unless UBI can fill the gap.

 

[styles]

In the shorter term though, I can see the majority of workplaces implementing a four-day working week as AI increasingly takes on productive tasks, with pay equivalent to that of five days.

To be honest I'd be happy with a 4 day working week at 80% of my normal weekly rate.

Actually finding clients who are up for this arrangement isn't easy though.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Oct 2025 ==

I was under the impression that AI would replace more “white collar” jobs that are largely knowledge based. This would have more of a profound impact on highly skilled citizens who may have to adjust to significantly reduced earnings compared to those on lower salaries, unless UBI can fill the gap.

I think robotics, potentially employing AI, are likely to replace jobs like mail sorting, deliveries, cleaning, etc. Royal Mail already has a giant automatic mail sorter at their main postal centre, and they're looking to invest in more of them. It'll take out the vast majority of manual sorting, leaving a smaller workforce dealing with edge cases, for example.

 

[Sun Chariot]

Having seen the value-add of Ai in being able to target healthcare issues before the internal symptoms are medically diagnosed, I am very supportive of it. I also see it as a productivity-enabler for people - AI doing the data-gathering / sifting / triage analysis / options and rationale for each - enabling (where it is still needed / valued) the human interaction in final decision and outcome.

Purely as an aside, I and several other forum members have been crafting our creative juices on a thread Show off your realistic AI railway images. We think of picture-compositions and then use AI assistance to bring them to life.
It is not "taking" other people's work. It is not threatening jobs or stealing others' creativity.

Show off your realistic AI railway images!

I have started this thread after becoming rather too addicted (so my wife says...) to the capabilities of AI and Big Data. There are several AI image generators. I use Google Gemini. These images are created using my own descriptions into AI. Add your realistic AI generated railway themed...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[JamesT]

The nature of UBI is that it's universal, everyone gets it. It'd be funded from tax on businesses using AI etc.

People could then choose to work or not work to augment it. The whole point is that it's not means tested, you get it if you work and earn 100K or if you don't work, and it's your choice if you do or you don't, though you'd only afford a basic lifestyle on it.

There would be various things that could pay towards the cost of UBI. Cranking up income tax rates on the money people earned beyond the UBI. You would save on most of the means-testing for benefits as they would be replaced by the UBI.
The perennial issue is cost, set at a high enough level that those relying on it aren't in poverty adds up to quite a large bill. Also, the incentives to do some jobs when you know you'll always get the UBI, whereas the benefits system requires at least some attempt at finding employment.

 

[PTR 444]

To be honest I'd be happy with a 4 day working week at 80% of my normal weekly rate.

Not everybody would be able to live on 80% of their normal weekly rate in this scenario though. For example, someone earning £32,000 per annum would end up taking home £25,600, just ever so slightly above somebody currently working 5 days a week on the National Living Wage.

 

[styles]

Not everybody would be able to live on 80% of their normal weekly rate in this scenario though. For example, someone earning £32,000 per annum would end up taking home £25,600, just ever so slightly above somebody currently working 5 days a week on the National Living Wage.

Yes, agreed, I'm merely observing that personally I'd be happy to take a pay cut for it. If it can be achieved without a pay cut, even better, but I'd be happy to trade 1 day a week in today to spend more time in the mountains.

 

[DerekC]

Having seen the value-add of Ai in being able to target healthcare issues before the internal symptoms are medically diagnosed, I am very supportive of it. I also see it as a productivity-enabler for people - AI doing the data-gathering / sifting / triage analysis / options and rationale for each - enabling (where it is still needed / valued) the human interaction in final decision and outcome.

Purely as an aside, I and several other forum members have been crafting our creative juices on a thread Show off your realistic AI railway images. We think of picture-compositions and then use AI assistance to bring them to life.
It is not "taking" other people's work. It is not threatening jobs or stealing others' creativity.

Show off your realistic AI railway images!

I have started this thread after becoming rather too addicted (so my wife says...) to the capabilities of AI and Big Data. There are several AI image generators. I use Google Gemini. These images are created using my own descriptions into AI. Add your realistic AI generated railway themed...

www.railforums.co.uk

These are two AI applications which have some positive value, in one case healthcare and the other a new angle on the railway hobby. But to extrapolate from these to say that you arre supportive of AI is a bit like saying that you support nuclear fission. It all depends what it's used for. And it's clear that AI is going to have a big, big downside by eliminating huge numbers of jobs. And all the talk of using it to free people to enjoy themselves and receive a UBI is a bit naïve. AI is being developed at top speed by the Techbros because they see it as a way of sucking in trillions of dollars. That money will go to the USA. The majority will stay with the multibillionaires. Some will go to shareholders, some will go into the US treasury in taxes and and some will no doubt "trickle down" into the low level and craft skilled jobs that survive - but will the techbros give away most of the money to pay a UBI to the otherwise unemployed? Let's just say I doubt it.

 

[Sun Chariot]

Interesting angle @DerekC

I have worked in technology-enabled business change and transformation for thirty years, with several different sectors. In all cases the use of technologies was to bring people out from repetitive, non-value-add activity, into decision-making with qualitative value-add.

None of the changes I shaped or oversaw, resulted in loss of job specifically from the new technology. Any reduncdancy or redeployment was directly a result of org restructures or org financial situation.

The healthcare stakeholders I dealt with, at regional and UK national levels, were wholly supportive of AI and Big Data as an aid to jobs, rather than jobs-taker.

Change is a natural part of human evolution. The UK's past 200+ years has seen manually intensive and / or inefficient tasks replaced or enhanced through use of mechanisation and automation. We are now seeing its continued evolution.

And I'm far more concerned of goverrnment censorship, mis-spending and naiive decision-making, than I am of advancing industry and growth through the use of emerging tech.

 

[Bantamzen]

Interesting angle @DerekC

I have worked in technology-enabled business change and transformation for thirty years, with several different sectors. In all cases the use of techmologies was to bring people out from repetitive, non-value-add activity, into decision-making with qualitative value-add.

None of the changes I shaped or oversaw, resulted in loss of job specifically from the new technology. Any reduncdancy or redeployment was directly a result of org restructures or org financial situation.

The healthcare stakeholders I dealt with, at regional and UK national levels, were wholly supportive of AI and Big Data as an aid to jobs, rather than jobs-taker.

Change is a natural part of human evolution. The UK's past 200+ years has seen manually intensive and / or inefficient tasks replaced or enhanced through use of mechanisation and automation. We are now seeing its continued evolution.

And I'm far more concerned of goverrnment censorship, mis-spending and naiive decision-making, than I am of advancing industry and growth through the use of emerging tech.

Technology based change has brought about job losses though, in many sectors. For example consider online shopping services like Amazon that has largely automated high street shopping, causing many businesses to fold and for increasing numbers of people in that sector to lose their job. Following on from a spike and fall in unemployment rates during and following covid, unemployment rates have been steadily rising since mid-2022 (from 3.7% to 4.7%). There's a link to an ONS page which shows the long term trend below:

Unemployment rate (aged 16 and over, seasonally adjusted): % - Office for National Statistics

The difference with an Amazon-style automation, and AI through Machine Learning is that next generation models won't just automate tedious, time consuming tasks, but will allow systems to develop higher level decision making, removing even more jobs from the market over time. So unless new jobs are created, we will start to see AI replacing roles like software engineers, sales persons, legal & financial services, and many middle management decision makers etc etc. It won't be an overnight change, more a slow creep as we've seen over the last three years.

 

[gabrielhj07]

This is already looked at in a way by the Airbus flight laws which won't let the pilot stall the aircraft in normal operations

Airbus' flight control philosophy is a very long way from 'Artificial Intelligence', whatever that may be.

But equally on my point, at present if anything odd happens the autopilot disconnects rather than operating in a degraded mode on the assumption the human is there to take over.

Not necessarily. The A320, for example, will quite happily land itself with a failed autopilot. More modern Airbuses can accommodate a range of failures without even entering a reconfiguration law.

 

[najaB]

Even so, I'm fairly convinced that stories of pilots having caused a crash (or a near crash which they then averted) are likely to be far more common than stories of pilots heroically saving an aircraft.

Of course such stories are much more common. Pilots taking over when the automation kicks off is just them doing their jobs. 99.9% of the time there isn't any heroism involved.

 

[styles]

Technology based change has brought about job losses though, in many sectors. For example consider online shopping services like Amazon that has largely automated high street shopping, causing many businesses to fold and for increasing numbers of people in that sector to lose their job. Following on from a spike and fall in unemployment rates during and following covid, unemployment rates have been steadily rising since mid-2022 (from 3.7% to 4.7%). There's a link to an ONS page which shows the long term trend below:

Unemployment rate (aged 16 and over, seasonally adjusted): % - Office for National Statistics

Amazon's effect on the high street is about much more than automation and AI though. They've been taking shoppers online since well before adopting what we would today call AI.

Online shopping is just way more convenient than going to a high street shop. And Amazon have for a long time focussed on developing a world class logistics operation so that they can offer next day delivery. This is a mathematical problem and no doubt it has been aided by machine learning, but also significant human input to drive the whole operation towards building a distribution network.

 

[najaB]

And Amazon have for a long time focussed on developing a world class logistics operation so that they can offer next day delivery.

Indeed. Amazon is the world's biggest computing services company and one of, if the, biggest logistics companies.

They also happen to sell consumer products.

 

[Rab Smith]

I am not an Amazon driver (nor would I want to be) but I've noticed something strange. I live in a Cul-de-sac and familiar with the local Amazon delivery guy. When he delivers to someone in my Cul-de-sac he then returns later to deliver in the street that runs along to the North. My road runs East to West and then turns into a different named street. I've read pieces on how Amazon drivers route are set out by AI to maximise their drop offs but it seems to not realise that if he just walked a few yards he could do multiple further drops. This would probably muck up the AI routing and is maybe where a human can outdo the AI with good old fashioned logical thought. As a former multidrop driver from many years ago, I planned my route around where I could park the van and deliver as much as possible on foot. This sped up my round.
It's almost like AI is so perfect, it's not.

 

[Railwaycat]

I am not an Amazon driver (nor would I want to be) but I've noticed something strange. I live in a Cul-de-sac and familiar with the local Amazon delivery guy. When he delivers to someone in my Cul-de-sac he then returns later to deliver in the street that runs along to the North. My road runs East to West and then turns into a different named street. I've read pieces on how Amazon drivers route are set out by AI to maximise their drop offs but it seems to not realise that if he just walked a few yards he could do multiple further drops. This would probably muck up the AI routing and is maybe where a human can outdo the AI with good old fashioned logical thought. As a former multidrop driver from many years ago, I planned my route around where I could park the van and deliver as much as possible on foot. This sped up my round.
It's almost like AI is so perfect, it's not.

Nothing to do with AI (I assume...) but Amazon delivered a CD I'd ordered on Monday, all recorded on my account including posted through letterbox. On Tuesday, they delivered the same CD - no record of it whatsoever (I'd only ordered and paid for one). Strange.

 

[Class 317]

AI and automation is going to drastically reduce business costs which is fantastic for the supply side of the economy.

How will the demand side be managed if 30-50% of jobs go? Who's going to buy the products and services?

With less people working in the economy even jobs not directly at risk from AI or Automation will be at risk. Put simply if large numbers can't afford to get say new bath rooms fitters or kitchens etc less bathroom Kitchen fitters will be able to be supported.

If the transition is not managed well we run the risk of falling into a very long and very deep depression much worse than 1929.

 

[The exile]

People could then choose to work or not work to augment it. The whole point is that it's not means tested, you get it if you work and earn 100K or if you don't work, and it's your choice if you do or you don't, though you'd only afford a basic lifestyle on it.

Receipt is by definition not means tested - how much of it you get to keep effectively can be. Country Xyz decides on a universal basic income of 10,000 sqwats p.a.. in addition to the income tax which already exists, all earning above 20,000 sqwats p.a. Pay an additional supertax on their UBI which rises to 100% once your earnings reach 50,000 sqwats p.a.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Receipt is by definition not means tested - how much of it you get to keep effectively can be. Country Xyz decides on a universal basic income of 10,000 sqwats p.a.. in addition to the income tax which already exists, all earning above 20,000 sqwats p.a. Pay an additional supertax on their UBI which rises to 100% once your earnings reach 50,000 sqwats p.a.

De facto that is not Universal Basic Income. It is a means tested benefit. For it to be UBI it needs not to be clawed back - it's taxation on the additional earnings (and other things like on earnings from AI use) that would need to fund it.

 

[Yew]

I sit in a bit of a funny position on this.

My main bag is software engineering. However much software engineering I get up to isn't particularly difficult. Yes there's some algorithmic work to do, but there's also a lot of writing simple queries. The latter can be undertaken by AI solutions today. In fact in my development environment I have AI tools which write this code for me and I simply review it. I rarely find the need to change it, so to an extent, AI is already doing part of my job.

I do feel that these tools are getting to a point where they are plateauing. Similarly, (I imagine you know, but for others), there is a lot of difference between writing a quick script, and building a coherent and maintainable software system.

I do feel that to this extent, I should upskill to ML and AI software engineering. I have enough other strings to my bow (architecture, consultancy, disaster recovery, etc) that I'm not at immediate threat of being replaced by AI, but I'd be surprised if the work I'm doing today isn't majority automated in 5 years' time.

As the cost of software development goes down, due to AI, the number of problems that become cost-effective to solve with software goes up. We've already seen this phenomenon as we moved from Assembly code, to Java to Python.

 

[najaB]

I do feel that these tools are getting to a point where they are plateauing. Similarly, (I imagine you know, but for others), there is a lot of difference between writing a quick script, and building a coherent and maintainable software system..

100%. Especially when that system needs to interface with legacy systems, with all the complexities that brings.

 

[The exile]

De facto that is not Universal Basic Income. It is a means tested benefit. For it to be UBI it needs not to be clawed back - it's taxation on the additional earnings (and other things like on earnings from AI use) that would need to fund it.

OK - then it is structured differently - but as income tax will presumably continue to exist and have higher rates for higher earners any UBI will eventually be de facto clawed back from higher earners- just as (AIUI - not being personally affected !) the personal tax allowance starts to be clawed back under current arrangements once you hit a certain income.
The three biggest difficulties will be 1) convincing everyone that it should be universal (ie paid to high earners as well, whether obviously clawed back or not) 2) convincing the powers that be that it’s affordable and 3) the problem that the workhouses faced with the level of relief - ie the level you need to set it at needs to be enough to survive (for all) but not so much that no one can be bothered to do those jobs which humans still need to do.