AI could widen the American wealth gap, erase entry -level jobs: NPR

Artificial intelligence continues to grow, forcing companies to find a way to fill the gap between innovation and preparation.

Companies have started to integrate AI into their daily operations. Some employers fear that this leads to a complete elimination of their roles within companies.

In a precedent Morning edition Video interview, The former transport secretary Pete Buttigieg has raised concerns that America is not prepared for the economic disadvantages of artificial intelligence.

“Economic implications are those which, I think, could be the most disruptive, the fastest. We are talking about entire categories of jobs, where – not in 30 or 40 years, but in three or four – half of the entry -level jobs may not be there.” Says Buttigieg.

Erik Brynjolfsson, principal researcher at the Stanford’s Institute for Human Centered Artificial Intelligence and director of the Stanford Digital Economy Lab, said Morning edition This coding, software engineering and call centers are jobs that are likely to undergo the most change.

Most industries look at the automation management, explains Brynjolfsson.

But there are things that artificial intelligence cannot do. Consequently, future jobs can rely on more human skills such as communication and creativity – areas where AI can help but not replace.

“I think that interaction with humans face to face is something that many people prefer – it is something that, by definition, can only be done by other humans,” said Brynjolfsson.

He also warns that if AI can generate wealth, he worries that he will only like the gap between those who form the technology and those he will move.

Brynjolfsson spoke to Steve Inskeep of NPR in urgent areas that must be discussed during the integration of new technologies in the workforce such as moving employment, the need for more skills centered on humans and the widening of economic inequality.

This interview has been modified for duration and clarity

Strengths of the interview

Steve Inskeep: First, is Pete Buttigieg right to raise this concern about the very close future?

Erik Brynjolfsson: Yeah, he’s on site. We see huge advances in basic technology and very little attention is paid to the way we can adapt our economy and be ready for these changes.

Inskeep: What are the jobs that disappear in part or entirely?

Brynjolfsson: There is a transition in both directions. There are jobs that disappear and new jobs are created. Some of the jobs that change the most are coding, software engineering and call centers – that I have studied. And in these areas, we are already starting to see certain effects, especially on entry level work.

Inskeep: I also think of a Auto Factory that I visited earlier this year in China. They had human employees, but robots were doing a lot of work, and I imagine that robots could do more and more.

Brynjolfsson: I visited one of these factories in Shenzhen and I saw the same thing. They are all going to be trendy in the sense of more automation – it is simply more profitable. And factories told me that it leads to better quality and consistency.

Inskeep: Well, it can be. But of course, there is also dislocation. So let’s focus on this for a second. Pete Buttigieg made this comparison with the industrial midwest where there were entire communities which were devastated. Could we see this kind of effect?

Brynjolfsson: I think it is a very appropriate analogy. The ideal is that you find ways to compensate for people and manage a transition. Sad to say that with trade, we did not do a very good job. Many people have been left behind. It would be a disaster if we made a similar error with technology, [which] It will also create huge amounts of wealth, but it will not affect everyone uniformly. And we have to make sure that people manage this transition.

Inskeep: How would we shape our future in a more positive way?

Brynjolfsson: The first thing that many economists, of which me, would go, is the recycling of workers and understanding the types of skills and tasks that will become more important in the future: many interpersonal skills, many management skills. I think that when we create these agents, we will all become CEO of our own small fleet of agents. Learning management skills that apply not only to humans, but more and more to agents, is something that can be taught. If we each have our own fleet of agents, we can each be more productive.

Inskeep: You better explain what an agent is for people who are not familiar.

Brynjolfsson: AI – We all use more and more LLMS (large language models) and use them to make us pieces of text and give us some advice. The agents push a little further when the large language model does not simply make us text, but actually takes an action. It goes forward and makes an air reservation or buy something for us or performs other tasks.

Inskeep: I want to add a skepticism note on recycling. I widely understand why it would be a good idea. But I think of the industrial midwest of the way people talk about recycling work as old industrial jobs disappear. Some of the effects of this included job recycling programs – which sounds good but has not really helped people – an accent on education – which sounds good – but perhaps it just increased the price and demand for education and not everyone ended up with very fruitful work on the other. It’s difficult.

Brynjolfsson: It’s hard. There is always a salary bonus for people more educated against less educated. And that does not necessarily mean recycling to do more of the same thing. He often moves in to make new industries – new types of tasks. I think the interaction with humans face to face is something that many people prefer. It is something which, by definition, can only be done by other humans.

Inskeep: I wonder if we have the bad emphasis on education. We tried so much of raising stem fields. Some of these jobs can be replaced. Perhaps we should have further emphasized the liberal arts which deal with humanity.

Brynjolfsson: I think it’s “both / and”. I absolutely think that there could be a revenge of many tasks of humanity, and there can be opportunities there for a more creative, artistic and interpersonal work. At the same time, there are huge bonuses for certain types of engineering, mathematics, science and coding. You may have seen some of the disproportionate wages offered to them to people who are really good at creating AI.

Inskeep: Yeah, absolutely true. Do you worry that creative jobs can also disappear? I am thinking of the film industry, where there has already been a lot of tension and conflicts on the idea that maybe you don’t even need the actor to be there – AI can catch it.

Brynjolfsson: This is incredible what is happening in this industry. It is a place where jobs will change a lot. I think there will be opportunities. To make people like you and I make our own fun little films, I used the GPT cat to write poems to my wife and my songs that I could not have done before. Maybe next year, I will make films.

Inskeep: Someone will listen and say: “Wait a minute. Did you ask Chatgpt to write a poem to your wife?”

Brynjolfsson: Complete disclosure, I told her where she came from, but she always appreciated her.

Inskeep :: You seem fundamentally optimistic. Is there something that keeps you awake at night?

Brynjolfsson: Oh, definitely. I am optimistic about the potential to create much more wealth and productivity. I think we are going to have much higher productivity growth. At the same time, there is no guarantee that all wealth and productivity will be shared evenly. We invest so much in the management of capacities for hundreds of billions of dollars and we invest very little in the reflection on the way in which we ensure that this leads to a largely shared prosperity. This should be the agenda for the coming years.

This story was published by Suzanne Nuyen.