I wish there were studies on when this situation will normalize. Will the lost jobs ever come back? Or not?

augment_me 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You have market theory saying that at some point, you will not have enough seniors because no juniors were trained. So seniors will become more and more expensive due to lack of supply. At some point, it will be cheaper to take the risk and train the junior entry person again, and things will stabilize out. The sad part is that there will be a generation of 10 years or so of lost juniors while seniors are abundant.

▲

RivieraKid an hour ago | parent | next [-]

At that point AI will be significantly more advanced than today.

	▲	augment_me an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Sure but we can't work on hypotheticals. Otherwise we can also say that information work is 90% automated, society has 50% unemployment of white-collar workers and capitalism is over because there is no purchasing power. There is enough incentives from people in power to keep status quo(bread and circuses) that if we are trying to answer the question using another framework than the current one we are just speculating

▲

FpUser an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

>"At some point, it will be cheaper to take the risk and train the junior entry person again"

I think they will have big problem finding people who will actually train those juniors by then.

▲

pianopatrick an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I would plan based on the lost jobs not coming back. I would also plan that the trend of AI getting better and taking more jobs will continue. Plan for the worst, hope for the best.

A lot of people may have to transition to careers that people do not want to have AI do, like nursing. The earlier you start such a transition the easier it is because you still have resources to make moves.

	▲	FpUser an hour ago \| parent [-]
		>"A lot of people may have to transition to careers that people do not want to have AI do, like nursing." Becoming bum or going off the grid would be way more attractive to me than working my ass of in stressful conditions for meager pay so some motherfuckers can buy yet another yacht

▲

nemomarx 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

What kind of study could predict the future like this? Every technological change is different each time, I think.

For example - at first ATMs created more jobs in banking because employees could move to more complex services. But banks are back to downsizing after further advancements streamlined those services too, aiui.

▲

vineyardmike 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Those jobs aren’t coming back as-is, because AI isn’t going anywhere. Job markets change over time.

I’ve just started transitioning my career closer to management, so I develop/manage roughly 50/50. At this point, if I had to manage a tight budget, I’d rather have an entry level salary as tokens for a senior engineer.

We’ll need a way, as a society, to help new adults transitions from education to productive employee. But individual companies don’t have aligned incentives.

	▲	Marsymars an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> I’ve just started transitioning my career closer to management, so I develop/manage roughly 50/50. At this point, if I had to manage a tight budget, I’d rather have an entry level salary as tokens for a senior engineer. A high-potential junior you can at least justify as an investment in the future. The other people who are going to get squeezed are the later-career developers who are below-average in ability. (I'm not using "below average" here pejoratively - just noting that by definition, half of developers are below-average.) Outside of big tech, there are piles of organizations with devs who don't make big-tech salary and who are only marginally productive for what they're getting paid. If you're an organization that only has the budget to pay non-junior devs $80k... you can see the implications of having the option to spend your dev budget on seniors + tokens instead.
	▲	whatshisface 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Masters degrees are a way for people to spend longer in the education-costs-more-than-the-value-to-the-educator phase of their career.
	▲	bcjdjsndon 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		> But individual companies don’t have aligned incentives. Be realistic. Would you start a business and risk it's viability giving away free training to the public? No, and neither would anyone else.
	▲	dominotw 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		are you incharge of making those decisions at work? maybe govt can tax ai companies and use that money to prearm juniors with tokens that only they can use.

▲

bcjdjsndon 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Did horse and cart operators ever get their jobs back?

	▲	da_chicken an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I mean... yes. Blacksmiths, wheelwrights, and wainwrights transitioned to auto mechanic or carpentry work. Not all of them, but for most the skills were portable. Several of the carriage-making businesses transitioned to automobiles. Studebaker and Oakland (which became Pontiac), for example. I'm sure the most experienced people lost big, of course, and we shouldn't minimize the damage done to people's livlihoods. Unless you mean taxicab drivers, which was the term for them before the automobile. Taxicab = taximeter cabriolet, and a cabriolet is a style of horse-drawn carriage. It really was the horse people that lost out the most. That's why the idiomatic reference is for buggy whips, not so much for buggies themselves.
	▲	boshalfoshal 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		This is unironically the best comparison. maybe they became taxi drivers. But that too will be gone soon. Can't beat capitalism + technological innovation.

▲

drop_star 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Ask the people that worked on printing presses