Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

45% of U.S. Jobs Vulnerable to Automation

Anonymous Coward writes | about a year ago

2

An anonymous reader writes "A new report out of Oxford has found that the next 20 years will see 45% of America's workforce replaced by computerized automation. 'The authors believe this takeover will happen in two stages. First, computers will start replacing people in especially vulnerable fields like transportation/logistics, production labor, and administrative support. Jobs in services, sales, and construction may also be lost in this first stage. Then, the rate of replacement will slow down due to bottlenecks in harder-to-automate fields such engineering. This "technological plateau" will be followed by a second wave of computerization, dependent upon the development of good artificial intelligence. This could next put jobs in management, science and engineering, and the arts at risk.' 45% is a big number. Politicians have been yelling themselves hoarse over the jobs issue in this country for the past few years, and the current situation isn't anywhere near as bad. At what point will we start seeing legislation forbidding the automation of certain industries?"
Link to Original Source

cancel ×

2 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Population control (1)

Merls the Sneaky (1031058) | about a year ago | (#44847989)

Time to reduce your population by the same 45%.

Won't happen (1)

Truekaiser (724672) | about a year ago | (#44848297)

I used to think like this, but that was before I had a job at a major mail order prescription company.
Middle management tried to impress upper management by purchasing a one million dollar automated packing system, in theory it could do thousands of orders a day.
Far outclassing a single human packer at a packing station.
It only did that occasionally, why?
It was a dumb automated machine, ONE little deviation and it stopped working.
This was on top of other stuff on it not working like printing the wrong order's paper work, it throwing a fit if the rx's did not come down the line in the exact order it expected.
It also did not care if for instance the printers messed up, or the paper came out non flat causing the grabber arm to get it stuck on it.
This is the general problem with automation fantasies, physicly it may be possible to replace the human doing the job with a machine.
But the machine is no where near as fault tolerant as a human.
If one of these machines encounters a minor error such as product being out of order, or objects not being 'exactly' where it expects it to be, they stop at best and at worst ignoring it causing more problems.
For a human worker it's just a fraction of a second routine correction.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>