IMF did not say AI will take over 40% of all jobs

[Rruchi man]

What concerns me is the jobs at the entry level, the president of Singapore said that there is already a decline in demand for some of these jobs. No one knows what's going to happen here, but i would rather educate myself on how to use these tools than freak out because of a headline, it is the same fud we see in the crypto world.

I believe this is the right reaction to the prediction of artificial intelligence taking most of the jobs because instead of waiting around debating the figures only for your job to be taken it is best you start trying to make yourself indispensable in your workplace by gaining additional skills and becoming more valuable.

I don't use AI in my workplace, because I'm a manual worker who doesn't need technology, and I believe AI reduces jobs in the technology sector in particular,

So manual workers can still learn to use Artificial intelligence to improve on their job. I will give some very good example and something you can easily notice.

- The automechanic who can now use artificial intelligence to diagnose the problem with a car instead of wild guessing as before, the interior designer now using Artificial intelligence to design home spaces etc

Bottom line is you do not need to say that you are involved in manual labor or a manual worker hence do not need artificial intelligence in any sense, you need to understand what you do and then see where artificial intelligence can come in and make you better at what you do already because that will give you an edge going forward

[Goasvuean]

same energy as misreading bonus terms on vega or any other platform. always check the source and the fine print first.

[Somegory]

What IMF says is just to calm down people who feel worried AI will be taking their job. I personally don't even trust what IMF says after i saw so many companies are looking for the exp people to train AI for them. The point is that AI will still cut down the need for so many people to do the jobs.

AI will take people's job is just to make people to be scared, but that is far from the truth if they did not let people know that AI is also creating jobs.

I also saw this speculation about AI could create more jobs, but it's only a speculation. In fact, companies may be using AI for the automation and cost eficiency.  If such things happen, AI would be decreasing the jobs instead of increasing it. Look at self driving car who replaced taxi driver in some developed countries.

It's so crazy how AI can take over every humans job but yet humans are needed to train those AI, can someone help me make sense out of this? It's like AI has no brain but they need to borrow one to be really active.

AI should start learning things themselves not humans training them, if humans can say no to AI then it means that there will be no one training the AI and they will be useless and the jobs will be safe?

How many people are even asking this question?

[STT]

There is no simple effect but the way people read news and comprehend at least initially can be the simple headline.   Its not the total impression people have but the fastest moving info is this one liner snippet of info which often is so far off base its not even correct.
   Its why politics operates the way it does imo, empowered by ignorance almost seems to be the meta.

  Its clear to me and just historically, any business or product which raises efficiency and productivity is going to be of benefit.  Creating jobs is a harder logical outcome to explain then the negatives, stealing jobs or work is far quicker to understand.

  The biggest thing to establish is humans far outrank AI for capability, right now and even decades forward people are just so much more capable.   What AI will do best is highly repepitive or possibly dangerous work.  The easiest way I understand AI will propagate and is not a falsehood or bubble is that simple tasks and unused capability can be programmed into AI usage to stop wasted time.  
 
 We got to a point now in technology, hardware and software where inventions and capable systems are not used because people dont have the manual, they dont have the time left or the energy to understand all that is waiting to be used.  Creating a layer of AI to interface the tech waiting to be used so a person can switch it on like a light switch is going to empower mankind as a whole.

  In sum total it wont significantly differ from the tractor or the digger that can push more dirt then a guy with a shovel, ultimately the man can learn to command the machine to his advantage and profit from it all.

  Disruption short term I agree is quite possible for sure, like many things in these powerful economies we built.

[devouring-DARKNESS]

What IMF says is just to calm down people who feel worried AI will be taking their job. I personally don't even trust what IMF says after i saw so many companies are looking for the exp people to train AI for them. The point is that AI will still cut down the need for so many people to do the jobs.

This is the part most people will miss, machines make the work easier but that also meant most people had to lose their jobs and then look for alternatives ways to make a living, machines weren't bad but people still lost jobs because of them.
The same thing is happening with AI right, you either adapt to using AI to do your job or the market leaves you behind, just like machs, AI isn't bad but that doesn't magically remove the fact that people's jobs will be lost to it, will it also create jobs? Yes, but most of the older generations who lose their jobs to it will still not be able to do the new jobs it will need up creating.

[angrybirdy]

What IMF says is just to calm down people who feel worried AI will be taking their job. I personally don't even trust what IMF says after i saw so many companies are looking for the exp people to train AI for them. The point is that AI will still cut down the need for so many people to do the jobs.

This is the part most people will miss, machines make the work easier but that also meant most people had to lose their jobs and then look for alternatives ways to make a living, machines weren't bad but people still lost jobs because of them.
The same thing is happening with AI right, you either adapt to using AI to do your job or the market leaves you behind, just like machs, AI isn't bad but that doesn't magically remove the fact that people's jobs will be lost to it, will it also create jobs? Yes, but most of the older generations who lose their jobs to it will still not be able to do the new jobs it will need up creating.

However, the main problem here is that all individuals do not move in unison.
.. While AI might bring about like more employment opportunities and even make work easier for people, it also remains a reality that not all people will find themselves losing their jobs to the AI revolution. Some people don't have time, money or even the opportunity to get any training in the new technology, particularly those who are older and have been working in positions that are now done by AI technology. There's a need to move on, but leaving some people behind doesn't sound like a good plan.

[atookz]

It is nothing more than the typical tactic constantly used by the media.

Yeah, I agree, on the headline part. Most people just read the title and somewhere along the way "exposed" became "will take over".

I wouldn't say it's all manipulation though. Exposed is broad enough to be misinterpreted and a scarier headline will garner more clicks.

Yeah, it's pretty speculative. The IMF figures indicate which occupations could be affected, but do not necessarily reflect the number that will be lost. What I would watch would be entry-level jobs and the gap between rich and poor countries as this's where it may first manifest.