Comment Re:Before you rail on this... (Score 1) 124
Macroeconomic trends toward employment are not the same as microeconomic trends of job replacement, particularly in specific sectors or roles. Like everything anti-AI, the goal posts will be moved as AI improves... but it has proven consistently able to broaden its reach and capacity over time. Workers who are displaced to be underemployed (but still employed), or ones who list themselves as no longer actively looking for work, would result in exactly what we are seeing.
Translation and transcription are nearly gone as a job. Legal document review. Vibe coding. A World Economic Forum survey said 41% of employers are currently intent on reduce staffing over five years due to AI automation. Indeed reports a 36% drop in tech job postings since early 2020. Sure, you can blame that on macroeconomics... but they didn't see the same drop in other sectors. A 2023 UChicago/Manning/Eloundou study found ~80% of U.S. workers have at least 10% of tasks potentially affected by LLMs, and ~19% may see 50% or more of tasks disrupted. About 47–56% of tasks are automatable with *current* LLM tools. There is no logical reason for a business to hire more people when work productivity can be doubled in some cases with AI use.
That's mostly current case. If you include projections, the concensus is more dire. If you track this consensus into the past, it likewise paints a clear picture of trajectory.