„Sie können nicht verhindern, dass dies geschieht:“ Die harte Realität von KI und dem Arbeitsmarkt – „Ich bin wirklich davon überzeugt, dass jeder, dessen Arbeit den ganzen Tag auf einem Computer erledigt ist
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/ai-job-layoffs-tech-unemployment-b2769796.html
20 Kommentare
From the article
The often-talked [threat of artificial intelligence on jobs](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/college-graduates-2025-job-outlook-ai-b2758693.html) suddenly became very real and shocking to Jane, who asked to use a pseudonym for privacy reasons, when her human resources role [became automated](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/klarna-ceo-sebastian-siemiatkowski-ai-job-cuts-hiring-b2755580.html) and she was laid off in January.
She’d spent two years at her company managing benefits and was on track for a promotion. She’d noticed her boss [building out AI infrastructure,](https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/meta-ai-artificial-intelligence-privacy-facebook-b2769787.html) but didn’t think her position, which paid roughly $70,000 a year, would be affected.
“I thought that because I had put in so much time and been so good on the higher-level stuff, he would invest in me,” the 45-year-old Bay Area resident told *The Independent* about her former employer. “Then, as soon as he had a way to automate it away, he did that. He just let go of me.”
I worry most about young people.
They get degrees with the expectation of getting an office job. Companies are already freezing new hiring.
Young people not working will affect everyone, young AND old.
They created covid and abandoned people with long covid to prevent people from revolting. Disabled chronically ill people don’t revolt. Brain damaged people don’t understand what’s going on
Automation can be resisted with job-creation policies if we choose. But is that the outcome we want?
We should be talking seriously about UBI. The purpose of the economy was never just to keep people busy; the economy is supposed to help us prosper.
There’s plenty of living for us to do in the absence of jobs.
Reality is not that simple. LLM do not work reliably alone. They hallucinate, make mistakes and fail.
Automation destroyed a large number of jobs, and new jobs were created. Same will happen here with LLM.
Jobs that effectively did nothing meaningful and were the result of population explosion, were never going to last. It was a temporary „fix“ to delay the problems.
Stop this bullshit with trades. Trades suck. Most of them still don’t pay enough. I know your uncles friends son is making 1 mil a year in the trades but guess what? that’s not everyone. not even close. There’s also people in white collar work making multi millions and billions of dollars but that doesn’t mean everyone in white collar is making bank. Not to mention of you send an entire generation into the trades the pay is gonna plummet along with it.
AI is gonna bite businesses in the ass when they wake up one day and realize there are no experienced people to cover what AI cannot because they stopped letting people gain experience years ago.
I love how many people don’t believe this. They think is fear mongering or as I’ve been told „you need to adopt to the change“. I work in tech, we all clearly see how our jobs are being replaced.
It’s a business decision, Completely personal.
This still isn’t a great take. Yes, AI can code. Yes, it can automate some simple and repetitive tasks. And yes, some job loss will occur. But the scale of disruption being pushed in so many of these articles is significantly overblown.
Take Microsoft, for instance: they’ve stated that up to 40% of new code committed by developers using GitHub Copilot is AI-suggested. But that doesn’t mean Copilot is autonomously writing Windows or mission-critical code. These are suggestions accepted by human developers, and a lot of it still requires cleanup due to redundancy, inefficiency, or even incorrect logic. It’s helpful, but far from reliable.
There’s also growing evidence that AI tools frequently „hallucinate“—they generate incorrect or nonsensical output with full confidence. This has serious implications: in mental health tests, for example, some AI-powered systems have given harmful advice to users, like suggesting they stop their medication—something no responsible clinician would say.
Executives will absolutely use AI as a justification to cut headcount—we’ve already seen it. But many roles will change more than disappear. Research from MIT and Stanford consistently shows task automation, not full job replacement. In most industries, AI is better at augmenting work than replacing the worker entirely.
Bottom line: These models still require close human oversight, especially from domain experts. Trusting them blindly, whether in software development or high-stakes environments like healthcare, is not just naive—it’s dangerous.
The real problem is that we are culturally unprepared to pay people for doing less or nothing. We have to take the enormous profit of automation and be willing to share. And then have people seek value in their lives beyond work.
Back in the day, a „computer“ was a person that was paid to sit at a desk and do calculations. Companies would hire rooms full of these people to do maths for them. When digital devices were invented, these jobs were no longer needed and the world moved on.
People be freaking out about AI, but this happens like every decade at this point. We’re going to be fine y’all
No shit. On a long enough timeline its a certainty. Now…what that timeline looks like is what were all discussing and disagreeing on.
There are engineers who solve engineering problems of the kind for which a single human is sufficient. The kind who stereotypically have poor social skills and do their jobs in isolation from others.
And there are engineers who solve problems too complex to ask of a single human, and part of whose job is to work with groups of people.
Guess which kind this one is.
(It’s horseshit. AI sucks at dealing with complexity or comprehending the implications of its decisions in a multitude of engineering fields where training data on real consequences of decisions simply can’t be gathered. It is categorically unfit to make decisions where safety stakes are high, from aerospace to medicine to education. AI has applications in numerous tool chains including in these fields, but applying it will continue requiring humans, many, **many** decisions will not be handed over to AI, and this kind of drivel is nothing more than sensationalist knee-jerking).
In short if your job is a series of if then statements which follow a very precise process and only require escalations for fixed criteria yea.. you might want to look into something else
Creativity and ingenuity will reign supreme until a new set of roles are created.
They confuse the communication/interface with the work and effort. A wise man can point to the moon and a foolish one will stare at the finger.
All these engineers think they’ve cracked it… and it’s their jobs that’ll be the first to go. 😆
My phone can still not reliably transcribe when I talk into it. Someday maybe. Not anytime soon.
My 30-year marketing career in design, interactive, animation, and 3D flushed down the toilet in a matter of months. This was *already* 2 years ago.
If that’s true, who’s going to check their work? AI is inconsistent at best, wrong at worst.
Why does it feel like this is the only genre of article posted here now?
I was a lot more impressed with AI a few years ago, when ChatGPT was new. It hasn’t advanced nearly as quickly as I thought it would then, and anyone who actually replaces employees with it is in for a rude awakening. I think it’s a lot more likely that AI ends up being used as a tool to make employees more efficient and productive, which actually ends up creating a demand for more employees, as we saw when computers entered the office space.