Which occupations are at highest risk of being automated

[hurlerontheditch]

Quote

Around 1.5 million jobs in England are at high risk of some of their duties and tasks being automated in the future, Office for National Statistics (ONS) analysis shows.

The ONS has analysed the jobs of 20 million people¹ in England in 2017, and has found that 7.4% are at high risk of automation.

Automation involves replacing tasks currently done by workers with technology, which could include computer programs, algorithms, or even robots.

Women, young people, and those who work part-time are most likely to work in roles that are at high risk of automation.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/articles/whichoccupationsareathighestriskofbeingautomated/2019-03-25?hootPostID=d1a7ef7e7e41c524c8100923a05f0769

[winkie]

A vacuum cleaner costs plus £250......a dustpan and brush a fraction of the cost.....if Tec will be replacing jobs, who will be paying over half a weeks wages on a cleaner.....when will have the time to DIY.....extra quality time to do many things for less.

[Monkey]

Technology has been replacing jobs since the beginning of time. But new jobs emerge to replace these jobs that were lost. 

[hayder]

General Practitioners. 

And good riddance!

[Errol]

Within 20 years  - GPs will be totally obsolete. Lawyers will also be obsolete. 

[Riedquat]

58 minutes ago, Monkey said:

Technology has been replacing jobs since the beginning of time. But new jobs emerge to replace these jobs that were lost. 

Since the beginning of time we struggled to produce enough for more than a very small number to live in any sort of comfort. That doesn't really apply now, the paradigm has changed.

Also throughout most of that time the rate of change was very small. I don't think I'm stretching things to say that life just before the Industrial Revolution was more similar to life in the Iron Age to life today.

[winkie]

15 minutes ago, Errol said:

Within 20 years  - GPs will be totally obsolete. Lawyers will also be obsolete. 

What the agents/middle men and women?......I hope it will be because their services will not be required.....all healthy and no disputes.

[“Nasty Piece of work”]

High Street Estate Agents eventually.

[msi]

Internet trolls?

[happyguy]

2 hours ago, Monkey said:

Technology has been replacing jobs since the beginning of time. But new jobs emerge to replace these jobs that were lost. 

In the past old jobs were lost and new low skilled jobs

This change will eliminate the low skilled jobs 

Anyone who thinks this will be the same is dreaming 

[simvastatin]

3 hours ago, msi said:

Internet trolls?

So you want your job to be automated 

[spyguy]

5 hours ago, hayder said:

General Practitioners. 

And good riddance!

Who'll type my symptoms into google then? 

Oh, I see ....

[spyguy]

Ah, yes.

A combination of public sector statisticians and economist getting together. And not being able to see he woods from the trees.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47691078

The three occupations with the highest probability of automation are waiters and waitresses, shelf fillers and elementary sales occupations, all of which are low-skilled or routine.

Those at the lowest risk are medical practitioners, higher education teaching professionals, and senior professionals in education.

What the gormess retards dont grasps is that the top 3 jobs at risk are very unlikely to be replaced as they are physical and the wages saved are too low.

The *most* likely to be replaced are the educational ones. Most of that is reptetive work. They could be replaced by a VCR.

As far as GP. There was an trial where they fed a hand written diagnostics summary into a computer and it had to try and determine what was wrong wit hthe patient.

I think it was ~30% right compared to human who was ~80% right.

Thats close.

It also is very dumb. Computers excel at sifting huge amount of data.

The correct test would be to connect a person to a number of sensors and let the computer crunch away.

For any middle classy, brain occupation, they have to consider the fallout in accountancy. The las t~30 years have seen a reduction of 90% of people employed.

Teaching esp. 11-> 16 is crying out for automating along line of Khan academy. I spent those years listening to various teachers winging it before I gave up and read the course books.

The value add of a lot of public sector jobs is very low.

 

 

 

[24gray24]

Get the predictions from 1970 and 1990 to check how accurate these sorts of things turn out to be.

My guess is the people who make predictions have no idea what waitresses are really there for. 

They probably can't even name one famous waitress. Let alone account for what happened next. 

[Mikhail Liebenstein]

2 hours ago, 24gray24 said:

Get the predictions from 1970 and 1990 to check how accurate these sorts of things turn out to be.

My guess is the people who make predictions have no idea what waitresses are really there for. 

They probably can't even name one famous waitress. Let alone account for what happened next. 

I predict that pundits and other soothsayers will be automated.

We can already make excellent outcome predictions using data science and machine learning.

[Riedquat]

4 hours ago, spyguy said:

Ah, yes.

A combination of public sector statisticians and economist getting together. And not being able to see he woods from the trees.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47691078

The three occupations with the highest probability of automation are waiters and waitresses, shelf fillers and elementary sales occupations, all of which are low-skilled or routine.

Those at the lowest risk are medical practitioners, higher education teaching professionals, and senior professionals in education.

What the gormess retards dont grasps is that the top 3 jobs at risk are very unlikely to be replaced as they are physical and the wages saved are too low.

The *most* likely to be replaced are the educational ones. Most of that is reptetive work. They could be replaced by a VCR.

Definitely agree there. Such physical work is very difficult for computers; it really makes the writers look rather clueless, unless they think people will happily get their food from a vending machine in a restaurant. Stacking shelves in conventional supermarkets looks rather unlikely too, although there could be a bit of a threat there from automated stock fetching in warehouses for internet ordered shopping (which certainly won't affect all). What's low skilled for a human is sometimes bloody difficult for a computer.

A good teacher is capable of far more than any computer could do too, but there'll be an awful lot of teachers that don't reach that standard.

Anything fairly routine which involves being sat at a desk is the most likely candidate for going, easily. There'll still be a few people working on the fiddlier parts but far fewer than now.

Edited March 25, 2019 by Riedquat

[Upabove]

The real risk is displacement not replacement, but it's harder to spot.  Yes we will always have waiters, however their numbers are already far lower than they once would have been due to the rise of fast food, and things such as automated ordering (McDonald's) will see itself move up the value chain (next the coffee shops, then your pizza expresses etc.) 

Same with retail jobs. Shelf stacker aren't directly replaced by robots.  They get displaced by automated warehouses feeding the boom in Internet shopping. 

[spyguy]

4 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

Definitely agree there. Such physical work is very difficult for computers; it really makes the writers look rather clueless, unless they think people will happily get their food from a vending machine in a restaurant. Stacking shelves in conventional supermarkets looks rather unlikely too, although there could be a bit of a threat there from automated stock fetching in warehouses for internet ordered shopping (which certainly won't affect all). What's low skilled for a human is sometimes bloody difficult for a computer.

A good teacher is capable of far more than any computer could do too, but there'll be an awful lot of teachers that don't reach that standard.

Anything fairly routine which involves being sat at a desk is the most likely candidate for going, easily. There'll still be a few people working on the fiddlier parts but far fewer than now.

Digitsing any task allows it to operated much more efficiently.

Then, when its digitsed, its how easy the data is to analyse.

Thats why accountancy was the first big hit.

Most people cant do maths all day long. Accountants and book keepers can. As soon as the ledgers and transatinso were digitised - poof! - large number of low end jobs go. Then,as comptuers got better - think Quicken books, the middle jobs went.

The financial sector, despite the claims otherwise, is getting hammered - the only job that software cannot do is lots of misselling ...

So, you are seeing any job that involves digitised numbers go.

No open outcry exhanges - all matched bargains on electronic ehchanges. Essex barrow boys have gone back to barrows; no need for them.

The layoffs inthe FinSec  are and are going to be huge. Lots of jobs have already gone.

Its the reason why I think London/regional South housing and local economies are going to get trashed.

 

[spyguy]

9 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

Definitely agree there. Such physical work is very difficult for computers; it really makes the writers look rather clueless, unless they think people will happily get their food from a vending machine in a restaurant. Stacking shelves in conventional supermarkets looks rather unlikely too, although there could be a bit of a threat there from automated stock fetching in warehouses for internet ordered shopping (which certainly won't affect all). What's low skilled for a human is sometimes bloody difficult for a computer.

A good teacher is capable of far more than any computer could do too, but there'll be an awful lot of teachers that don't reach that standard.

Anything fairly routine which involves being sat at a desk is the most likely candidate for going, easily. There'll still be a few people working on the fiddlier parts but far fewer than now.

Ive only had a couple of competent teachers. Most were winging it day to day.

The bets example I can give in Linear algebra, a complex, dense subject.

There's only one book yuou need - gilbert strang's. Buy the books, download the lectures. Most other teachers will not be able to add much value to the written and video courses.

 

[Hullabaloo82]

9 hours ago, spyguy said:

Digitsing any task allows it to operated much more efficiently.

Then, when its digitsed, its how easy the data is to analyse.

Thats why accountancy was the first big hit.

Most people cant do maths all day long. Accountants and book keepers can. As soon as the ledgers and transatinso were digitised - poof! - large number of low end jobs go. Then,as comptuers got better - think Quicken books, the middle jobs went.

The financial sector, despite the claims otherwise, is getting hammered - the only job that software cannot do is lots of misselling ...

So, you are seeing any job that involves digitised numbers go.

No open outcry exhanges - all matched bargains on electronic ehchanges. Essex barrow boys have gone back to barrows; no need for them.

The layoffs inthe FinSec  are and are going to be huge. Lots of jobs have already gone.

Its the reason why I think London/regional South housing and local economies are going to get trashed.

 

Lol at "Quicken" books. The belief that QB and the like will be able to fully replace accountants in the near future is in the same ballpark as believing Khan Academy can replace teachers; totally ignorant of what either of those professions actually do. 

What automated ledgers etc have done is replaced large quantities of data entry and checking jobs. There are probably 99% less Purchase Ledger clerks out there now but all computer systems suffer from the "rubbish in, rubbish out" problem; most people, despite believing they're business experts have zero clue how to actually use these tools, hence why even people who use QB etc still pay an accountant to make sense of it. 

Not only that but actual accounting (as opposed to just bookkeeping) requires large amounts of judgement. Most business owners wouldn't actually want to entrust a machine with that (way too honest, far too much papertrail). 

This analysis also ignores "mission creep"; it's true that some menial tasks might be automated out of existence but you're ignoring the fact that this is an industry which turned the greatest scandal in its history into one of its biggest money makers (Enron; compliance, controls reports etc). Acvounting will likely just find a more value add way to sell you services; my bet? Forensic accounting boom to coincide with the death of cash. 

[spyguy]

6 minutes ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

Lol at "Quicken" books. The belief that QB and the like will be able to fully replace accountants in the near future is in the same ballpark as believing Khan Academy can replace teachers; totally ignorant of what either of those professions actually do. 

What automated ledgers etc have done is replaced large quantities of data entry and checking jobs. There are probably 99% less Purchase Ledger clerks out there now but all computer systems suffer from the "rubbish in, rubbish out" problem; most people, despite believing they're business experts have zero clue how to actually use these tools, hence why even people who use QB etc still pay an accountant to make sense of it. 

Not only that but actual accounting (as opposed to just bookkeeping) requires large amounts of judgement. Most business owners wouldn't actually want to entrust a machine with that (way too honest, far too much papertrail). 

This analysis also ignores "mission creep"; it's true that some menial tasks might be automated out of existence but you're ignoring the fact that this is an industry which turned the greatest scandal in its history into one of its biggest money makers (Enron; compliance, controls reports etc). Acvounting will likely just find a more value add way to sell you services; my bet? Forensic accounting boom to coincide with the death of cash. 

Quicken book *has* replaced 10,000s of book keepers.

 are looking at accounting large company then Id be much happier with software crunching all transactions than a human using judgement on a small sample.

Accountancy - as a thing -is just poor - look at Enron, Carillion, Interserve, Automony.

Actually Enron is a very good example. The entire company was stuffed full of MBAs and accountants. Yet the it was brought down by a low paid book keeper. Not a single high paid professional spotted the compnay was nothing but a sham. That fact alone points to a something that is basically useless.

My bet - most of the current forms of accounting with be deprecated and a complex  but automated means of accounting be brought in.

 

 

 

[BorrowToLeech]

22 hours ago, Monkey said:

Technology has been replacing jobs since the beginning of time. But new jobs emerge to replace these jobs that were lost. 

I’m not convinced that this is really what has happened. 

I think that machines have removed jobs that were once necessary or useful, and we have replaced those jobs with largely ceremonial jobs that serve no real function, beyond maintaining our employment focused economic system.

In other words, we’ve invented make-work and busy-work becuse we really haven’t found sufficient useful work to replace the jobs already lost to machines. 

Edited March 26, 2019 by BorrowToLeech

[BorrowToLeech]

1 hour ago, spyguy said:

Actually Enron is a very good example. The entire company was stuffed full of MBAs and accountants. Yet the it was brought down by a low paid book keeper. Not a single high paid professional spotted the compnay was nothing but a sham. That fact alone points to a something that is basically useless.

 

Yes, so I’d argue that those MBA jobs are examples of ceremonial jobs.

In a rational economy those jobs wouldn’t be automated, they wouldn’t exist at all.

In fact, it’s precisely the jobs that are not already ceremonial - in your example the low paid book keepers - that are at most risk of being automated.  

Edited March 26, 2019 by BorrowToLeech

[zugzwang]

ONS: 1.5 million people at risk of losing their jobs to automation.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/mar/25/automation-threatens-15-million-workers-britain-says-ons

Quote

About 1.5 million workers in Britain are at high risk of losing their jobs to automation, according to government estimates, with women and those in part-time work most affected.

Supermarket checkout assistants have already borne the brunt of the phenomenon, the Office for National Statistics found, with 25.3% of jobs disappearing between 2011 and 2017.

Some technology groups are already experimenting with retail outlets that will not require human-run checkouts or cashiers. Last year Amazon, which is expanding into grocery selling, opened a supermarket in Seattle with no checkout assistants, relying instead on sensors to track what shoppers removed from shelves, using “just walk out” technology to bill customers and end queues. Meanwhile McDonald’s is rapidly shifting to self-ordering kiosks in its restaurants, removing the need for customers to speak to workers at the counter.

Other jobs where automation has taken its toll include laundry workers, farm workers and tyre fitters, among which numbers have dropped by 15% or more, said the ONS, as machines have replaced labour.

Women are most likely to lose out, said the ONS. “The analysis showed a higher proportion of roles currently filled by women are at risk of automation; in 2017, 70.2% of high-risk jobs were held by women.”

 

[scottbeard]

16 hours ago, spyguy said:

Teaching esp. 11-> 16 is crying out for automating along line of Khan academy. I spent those years listening to various teachers winging it before I gave up and read the course books.

Automating teaching maths is easy; automating everything that a maths teacher does isn't.

You can replace a teacher with a textbook as long as the student actually wants to learn.  A textbook watch over you and make sure you stop mucking around and get on with your work.

Also, a school goes way beyond filling children's heads with facts and skills.  School is a place to learn social skills, learn discipline, meet friends, try out different sports and (if the school is good) a place for fragile teenagers to gain confidence in themselves.  And that's before the basic pastoral points i.e. that school acts as childcare and that teachers can watch children for signs of learning difficulties, abuse at home etc.