a lot of jobs are being replaced by AI already... comms/copywriting/customer service/off shored contract technicals roles especially.
Which is not quite the same as replacing them.
Products and services typically require a mix of many kinds of internal parts or tasks to be created or supplied. Most of them are not the majority cost drivers.
You don’t increase the amount of software created by responding to cheaper documentation by increasing the documentation to keep your staff busy, or hiring more document staff, to create even more of the cheaper documentation.
You hire fewer documentation people and shift resources elsewhere.
Making one tasks easier is more likely to reduce internal demand for employees in that area. Very unlikely to somehow increase demand for it.
Unless all tasks get cheaper, or the task is a majority cost driver, and directly spills into obviously lower prices for customers for the product or service.
> Making one tasks easier is more likely to reduce internal demand for employees in that area. Very unlikely to somehow increase demand for it.
And yet we have way more software developers now that you can just use open-source libraries everywhere instead of re-inventing the wheel in a proprietary way every time. This has caused an increased in developer productivity that dwarf any other productivity improvements in other sectors, and yet the number of developers increased.
But I agree, that is likely to increase demand for developers in many organizations and the market at large. Since software is a bottleneck on many internal and external products and services, and often is the product or service.
But many other kinds of work are more likely to see a reduction in labor demand, given higher productivity.
But AI software generation will get better, and at some point, lower level coders will not be in demand and that might be a majority. I imagine developer quality and development tasks as a pyramid. The bottom is most vulnerable.
However, there are some boosts that can be made to augment the performance of other workers if they are used carefully and with attention to detail.
Furthermore, don't you think it's possible for a real human customer service agent to make such a blunder as what happened in that case?
It shows that some are trying, and failing at that.
> Furthermore, don't you think it's possible for a real human customer service agent to make such a blunder as what happened in that case?
One human? Sure, some people are plain dumb. The thing is you don't give your entire customer service under the responsibility of a single dumb human. You have thousands of them and only a few of them could do the same mistake. When using LLMs, you're not gonna use thousands of different LLMs so such mistakes can have an impact that's multiple order of magnitude higher.
Anyone experienced ability to self-correct from an "A.I" ?