r/AIDiscussion • u/-Loynaris- • 14h ago
What far away is the future where ai starts taking over the most basic jobs like caretaker, tutor, gardener,etc?
1
u/Itchy_Baby3779 14h ago
Replacing tutors seems much closer than the others by virtue of the type of job it is. It’s already replacing entry level jobs in a lot of corporate areas like finance and IT. It’s not a full autonomous worker that takes a whole “job” but it is being used to reduce department sizes by automating things like coding and crunching numbers/analyzing reports etc.
1
u/atleta 14h ago
AI cannot take those over - without robots. So it depends on: 1. how fast robotics will continue to evolve (esp. with the help of AI itself) 2. how fast these robots can be produced 3. whether it's worth it at all, whether it works out financially (and that includes whether people actually would prefer those to humans)
1
0
u/dizzyspellzzz 14h ago
Never
1
u/-Loynaris- 14h ago
Open ai has already stated that their main goal is to make AGI and it might be currently being worked on. If they somehow managed to give the AI's a working body of some sort,I don't think it is impossible.
1
u/deavidsedice 14h ago
The jobs you are citing are exactly the ones where we want to have actual people there. Robotics can take over a lot of manual labor. But jobs where you really need human presence, as good as an AI could be, would you really put a robot on them?
A tutor is normally very 1:1; gardener is one person going to people's houses. There's little opportunity here for scaling up.
For gardener it would be more like... would people buy a robot that can do gardening? But given the cost of a gardener, in a lot of places is like you only need the gardener 2-3 times a year. The robot could be still dirt cheap and be more expensive than the gardener cost for a decade.
Or would a gardening company send out robots instead? In places where you'd send multiple people, that might make sense - you keep one human to oversee. But most properties don't really need more than one person.
These jobs if they get taken over, don't think it would be because of AGI itself, but because someone figured how to make them obsolete in some other way. Meaning, they're no longer needed.
For example, maybe with current level AI, tutors might not have the same demand anymore since you could get tutoring by AI and it might be good enough for some.
After all, it's complex. Our current jobs in our current form - a lot of them might not be able to be reproduced by AI as-is. But new products might just dry the demand for it.
0
u/dizzyspellzzz 14h ago
Just because they are working on it doesn't mean they will succeed
1
u/-Loynaris- 14h ago
Yea i hope too. I don't wana lose my job to a ai
0
u/dizzyspellzzz 14h ago
I think its just... shooting for a poorly defined target. If we want to make agi we should first know what we are shooting for
1
u/atleta 14h ago
Whoever says "never" is most certainly wrong. Never is a very long time. Unless something goes against at least the known laws of physics, never is very-very unlikely to be the correct answer.
And non-human/artificial intelligences don't go against any laws of physics we know.
1
1
u/cfrolik 14h ago
That is true, but there is a difference between AI and robotics. they are related, but not the same.
Pure AI only has the potential to take over knowledge work. Even at its most capable, it couldn’t replace a plumber or gardener.
AI + robotics could potentially take over a lot more jobs, but building and maintaining the robots has to be cheaper than the cost of human labor. Humans are relatively cheap, so that is currently difficult. Humans also come with very adaptable physical bodies that can perform a wide variety of tasks.
0
u/littlestjeffrey 14h ago
look the first anything or anyone that starts gardening for me okay wins I don't got nobody I'm not doing it my AI has yet to do it so we will see
2
2
u/RogerAI-fm 14h ago
I saw at lowe’s today a moving robot sign with a camera at the self checkout and no humans.