[miksumiksu]

It will be interesting to see how this company is doing 5 years. It seems that thanks to the AI system novice employees are able to cash out on skilled employees knowledge. But this system might also hinder the novices changes on gaining knowledge and becoming skilled employees. And those skilled emploees are essentialto maintain this system to respond to evolving needs. So the effect on job market might be the opposite than researcher wish: recruits need to be smarter than before and the gap between low-skilled and high-skilled employees will keep widening.

So in that case introducing AI to this process would have the exactly same outcome as automation has had in manufacturing.

[euroderf]

If your on-the-job experience and your personal efforts for career advancement have been your capital investment in yourself, now these can be replicated for lesser-paid workers, with the surplus going to the business owner. Take a pay cut or advance your career on the front line at McD's. Fun times!

[spaceman_2020]

Seems like the first jobs to be impacted will be the ones with narrow, domain specific knowledge. Like a customer support rep for a specific product line or a QA tester.

The safer jobs will be the ones where you have to collate knowledge from multiple fields. Like a product creator who needs to know a bit of marketing, code, and design to come up with a new idea.

The orchestra conductors, it seems, are safer than the pianists and cellists - for now.

[euroderf]

Revenge of the Generalists..

[cosmodisk]

I do agree with you. My feeling is that there will be a rise of so called super experienced users- those,who didn't just get all the answers from the prompt but learned instead and hordes of people who won't even know how to do basic stuff without the AI helper. The former group will be small, but extremely well rewarded,while the rest... Well, not so much..

[somenameforme]

It feels somewhat analogous to the calculator, except a million times more impactful because of the breadth of fields it can apply to. The times I go to a minimart type place and cashier laboriously, and slowly, whips out a calculator to determine how much change to give when paid 100 for a 32 cost item. Now imagine that analog generalized to basic knowledge and competence itself.

It's kind of ironic because each one of these steps forward towards making knowledge egalitarian tends to do the exact opposite. Same thing with the internet which was going to democratize knowledge, information, education and more. And indeed it absolutely has, but 99% of people don't take advantage of it - so the 1% just pull that many orders of magnitude further ahead.

[shswkna]

This perspective or line of argumentation does strike an intuitive chord with me.

There is a difference between being able to leverage AI to accomplish more than without it, and merely outsourcing intelligence and knowledge to the AI and effectively becoming complacent (which as you say, the 99% will end up doing).

My bet is on AI causing equality to worsen, unless there is a major political will to counter this with policy.

IMO such policies will need to provide both carrot (equalizing measures) and stick (lessening the options for the 99% to become complacent).

EDIT: There is a third route that could play out. Leveraging AI or “teaming up” could be equivalent to a faustian pact, because of the nonzero possibility of AI to develop their own goals and agency.

[rlupi]

We are the start of a new S-curve. The current skilled employees will use their expertise to bridge the adoption of AI, bring the current use cases. The next wave of AI-native employees will build on their expertise, which we don't have widely yet, to develop new ways of doing things that we haven't envisioned yet and later to ease the next big paradigm shift.

[kriro]

This is a U.S. Fortune 500 company but the workers in the sample are mostly (83%) outsourced customer support chat employees working in the Phillipines. My guess would be that there's not a real career path for these employees and the goal is to eventually automate them away.

[miksumiksu]

Automating the workers away is always to goal. But the irony is that automation makes the few humans that are left in the loop more important than before. So it is possible to end up in a situation where 1000s of easily replaceable employees were replaced by 10s of very difficult to replace employees and very complex system. So all in all it can be that even 10x productivity increase per employee might not be enough to justify the costs overall.

So I guess we have to see this case by case as in manufacturing and industries.

[tough]

I'd bet they're just using them as the RLHF phase of the AI Chatbot Customer Service training and will be gone in less than a few months after that's successful enough