by According to a recent study, the majority of jobs will only be “partially exposed to automation,” meaning that artificial intelligence (AI) won’t be replacing people in the workforce.OpenAI released ChatGPT in November 2022, sparking something of an AI revolution. As time went on, more and more businesses developed their own AI tools, and while some thought these tools would aid humans in their work, others were worried about its potential drawbacks. Many people thought AI would take their jobs, and Elon Musk and other tech experts warned of the potential dangers of the new technology.
According to a report released on Monday by the International Labour Organisation (ILO), the United Nations agency that creates standards for the world of work, generative AI will likely not replace the majority of current workers, with its impact instead being limited to automating some tasks for a minority.The report, “Generative AI and Jobs: A Global Analysis of Potential Effects on Job Quantity and Quality,” notes that the introduction of OpenAI’s ChatGPT has raised concerns about job losses because machines are now able to perform tasks that many humans are paid to do, such as creating text and images or analysing data.However, the report suggests that these worries may be exaggerated because most workers are not at a high risk of being replaced by AI.
Instead, the report’s [PDF] key conclusion is that “most jobs and industries are only partially exposed to automation and are thus more likely to be complemented rather than substituted by AI.”The same conclusion has probably been reached by everyone who has used generative AI and observed its, shall we say, imaginative output.The study concludes that while tools like GPT-4 can perform some of the work that humans do in areas like administration, customer service, data management, and information provision, AI models are unable to complete the work necessary in the majority of roles.Therefore, rather than completely automating occupations, the most significant impact of technology is likely to be augmenting work, which involves automating some tasks within an occupation to free up time for other responsibilities.
However, office workers will be more affected.”We find that only the broad occupation of clerical work is highly exposed to the technology, with 24 percent of clerical tasks considered highly exposed and an additional 58 percent with medium-level exposure,” the report reads. The percentage of highly exposed tasks in the other occupational groups varies between one and four percent, and the percentage of tasks that are mediumly exposed does not go above 25 percent.The analysis is bad news for women because it reveals that they are overrepresented in administrative positions, particularly in high- and middle-income nations.As economies develop, clerical work has historically been a significant source of employment for women. As a result of generative AI, certain clerical positions might never materialise in low-income nations.
When generative AI is used, workers in developed countries are more likely to experience the effects of the technology. According to the report, compared to just 0.4 percent in low-income countries, 5.5 percent of all employment in high-income countries may be partially at risk of automation.Without making predictions about how many new jobs might be created in the future, we concentrated on the potential of task automation as it exists today. This method might have been anticipated to produce worrisome projections of net job loss, but it did not. Instead, they said, “our global estimates point to a future in which work is transformed but very much still exists.However, they cautioned, governments must establish policies to guarantee that workers’ rights are still upheld as industries adapt to generative AI.”Without proper policies in place, there is a risk that only some of the well-positioned countries and market participants will be able to harness the benefits of the transition, while the costs to affected workers could be brutal,” the ILO report concluded. As one might anticipate from an organisation that exists to develop and promote policies that make work fair and dignified, the ILO report’s conclusion was not surprising.
AI replacing human jobs?
A recent study by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) of the United Nations, however, asserts that while AI will alter the way we work, it won’t replace people in their positions.According to a report by AFP, the majority of jobs and industries will only “partially be exposed to automation.”According to the ILO, the majority of businesses are “more likely to be complemented rather than substituted by the latest wave of generative AI, such as ChatGPT.”The study concludes that rather than creating more jobs, technology may actually improve the quality of existing ones by increasing work intensity and autonomy.The study also emphasises that different regions and professions will experience the effects of emerging technology in different ways. It also states that women are more likely than men to experience an impact on their employment.
Sam Altman on AI replacing jobs
In a recent interview with The Atlantic, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman stated that not all effects of AI on humanity will be favourable. According to him, many AI researchers “pretend” that their work will only benefit people, serve as a support system for them, and not replace anyone in the workforce. That is not the case, though.Without a doubt, jobs will vanish, according to Altman.In addition, he disclosed that OpenAI was capable of developing a tool even more potent than ChatGPT, but the public would not have been ready for such a development.
He added that the public would not have been ready for the’shock’ that followed and the outcome is quite ‘unpleasant’ to imagine. ‘We could have gone off and just built this in our building here for five more years and we would have had something jaw-dropping’, he said.According to Altman, people need time to adjust to the idea that a potent new intelligence might coexist with humans in the future, and ChatGPT was a “way of serving notice,” according to the Atlantic report.
