So what jobs are not automatable?

creative jobs

if there will be no need for jobs we will all just starve to death while the elites get all the profit of automation. such is life under capitalism.

All of these are easily automatable the hardest being programming and even then.

you think the elite will just give things away?

There will be no elite if there's a benevolent AGI providing everything a human can reasonably want. No kind of social status would make one person get more stuff there.

and how do you think this AGI will be funded and created? by whom?

Anyone who seriously thinks that programming and software development is automatable clearly doesn't know any computer science.

Doesn't matter. If it's a friendly AGI, it won't let such stupid stuff happen. If it's not, then humanity has basically summoned Satan and is fucked either way.

>magical genie will fix the world

Fixing and maintaining the automation, quality control and anything that requires abstract thought.

Creative things

Or break it. If it doesn't do either, it probably can't automate my job either, so whatever.

>programmer
>driver
>teacher
already being automated

>janitor
nigger have you ever heard of a roomba

>soldier
fear holds us back from giving the robots guns, not technology

Glory hole engineers

The vast majority of office jobs because they are totally useless and only exist so management can brag about how many people they have below them.

Programming
Most mathematics

>automating programming
If you think automation is hiring 1000 pajeets and waiting until they generate a correct solution, sure.

can you give one argument supporting your claim that programming is not automatable?

This. Most middle managers are completely useless. They just exist because the state needs curb unemployment

When I see these threads, I know op has never seen "automation" at work. I work in a automobile parts manufacturer the first place this automation starts. The company bought two new automated lines two years ago and they still don't work right, they were millions each. They both still require a whole time of people, but instead of normal factory workers they have to have "engineers" and "technicians" that's are really just kids out of college that they have pay more and do anymore that desk jobs and standing around saying " well it's not supposed to do that ".

Rice's theorem.

>Anyone who seriously thinks that programming and software development is automatable clearly doesn't know any computer science.

They also don't know any logic.

In essence programming is telling computers what to do.
Let's pretend that could be automated, then how would the computer know WHAT to program?
Someone will have to tell computers what to do....

At the current moment it is incredibly hard since you need an ai to be able to think like a human.

Well, no. I do think that programming is not automatable but that argument doesn't sound right. Programming is the act of making a program fulfilling a given specification. Automating programming would mean that you give a specification to a program and receive the code. So yes, you would still need to create the specification but that's not programming itself.

but we're not talking about automating ALL programming, just programming jobs. low level code monkey positions don't require great ability or creativity and could be automated in the near future. obviously, you will still need someone to supervise the AI.

Programming is creating automations. If you're doing programming that can be automated, you're not a real programmer, you're a data entry clerk

>programming can't be automated because if it can be automated then it's not programming

Attached: 57414096_10219423894573690_6839560364602949632_n.jpg (960x754, 28K)

I'm actually not sure what low level code monkeys do but
>Rice's theorem states that all non-trivial, semantic properties of programs are undecidable
>A semantic property is one about the program's behavior (for instance, does the program terminate for all inputs)
>A property is non-trivial if it is neither true for every computable function, nor false for every computable function
So yes, you could have some heuristics in place to generate simple code but even then it wouldn't always work (it simply can't work at all times) and you'd need an actual programmer anyway. And you'd also have to write down the formal specification first which for simple programs is almost the implementation itself. Doesn't really sound practical to me. What can happen is that we might get better, more expressive languages so that actual programmers can easily write the trivial code in no time.

>you would still need to create the specification but that's not programming itself.

It's not necessarily "coding", but it is programming.
Entering a cutting design into a CNC machine is also "programming".

And coming up with the specifications is the interesting part of a "programmers" job, not the typing.
It's like saying a surgeon's job is "automated" when you replace his manual scalpel with an automated laser cutter. - he's still in charge of what organs to cut, that's the interesting part of his job not the butchering.

Programming will not be fully automated but it can and it is already be extremely automated.
Take wordpress, python, or a compiler
these reduces the amount of work a person has to do to get an equivalent result. Off course there are tradeoffs, but nothing we can't optimise enough.

Fair enough I guess. It does exclude some code monkey jobs though.

Is using a hammer instead of a rock called automation? These tools actually don't guess anything (well actually compiler optimizations are heaps of heuristics but they don't change or verify the semantics), they do only what you tell them to do.

>I'm actually not sure what low level code monkeys do but

I'm not sure they even exist.

I think there are people who take a class/function specification and a bunch of unit tests and write something that fills those specifications and passes all tests.
That's probably what people imagine could be automated.
And it probably could be automated IF you wrote very good specifications or an exhaustive set of tests......which is more work than the "code monkeying" itself.

Programming is the creation of automations. Saying that "programming will all be automated" is a failure to understand what programming actually is. If you write a for loop or a function you've created an automation, a task that would need to be written out several times now only needs to be written out once. If all you're doing is writing boilerplate code then you aren't programming, you're doing data entry

Automation was never about guessing or creativity, it means reducing the amount of human work in a process. I stress on reducing, which is not the same as deleting.

we're arguing semantics here honestly. what you mean by automation is full automation, and i agree that programming will never be fully automated. what i mean by automation is partial automation – some parts of the programming process can already be done automatically (for example, IDEs generating setters/getters. as simple as it is, it's automation of a process) and as technology advances, more and more code will be generated automatically. this will be enough to put some people out of a job.

I am actually fucking tired of seeing this fucking stupid ass frog.

you mean this specific picture, or all pepe pictures in general?

Dumb froghater

Very true.

If you look at how programming was done in the 1960's compared to today we have come a huge way.

Computer programmers used to manually punch holes into cards.
If they made any mistake they had to throw away the card.
If they wanted to change some memory locations (and they often did) they basically had to start all over again.

Yeah so programming COULD be automated. If writing the specifications didn't take more time than writing the code. But how can we even differentiate between specifications and programming? Programming is already abstract, we don't type 0s and 1s. We are writing specifications already and it is programming. . .

What could happen over time is that programming languages could become more simple, such that dumber and dumber people are able to program. That has happened over the last half century, but not quickly. We still need programmers and will need them. Just as we still need carpenters and other tradesman - electric tools made things easier but didn't eliminate the trades.

All.
Dumb frogfucker.

Attached: 311.gif (511x512, 105K)

I don't believe there could be a algorithm that could generate even a simple sorting algorithm according to the specification in a finite time (as in: that always terminates). That's almost what Rice's theorem says, verifying any non-trivial semantics property is undecidable (which sounds easier than generating a program). And I don't believe you could make a heuristic that would work for more than just one case for which you made it.

What about Japanese fuck dolls ?

Attached: 5b317db3adfa7fbf9cea3bcc46e88c80.jpg (176x220, 13K)

Variants are okay.

Feminists will ban those

you seem to have forgotten that modern AI is mostly machine learning. you don't have to sit there thinking of heuristics to use in every situation, you just feed it as much data as you can and help it learn on its own.

Isn't that also the very definition of trivial vs. non-trivial?

When people say "code monkeys" they imply they only do trivial work.
The real work is of course non-trivial.

This. It will outlive the fags who want it banned

>you just feed it as much data as you can and help it learn on its own.

That's NOT how machine learning works in practice.
In practice you spend countless hours tweaking it to get it to do more or less what you wanted.

i mean, obviously, but you still ain't gonna get shit from a small data set. the point is that you don't need to come up with heuristics and algorithms on your own. i imagine automated programming will work similarly to automated translation or natural language generation. so probabilistically, rather than algorithmically.

The strong have always trampled on the weak. Even if everything was free, someone would start forming coalitions somewhere to start hoarding all the free stuff. It's just human nature. It's like how billionaires continue to hoard more and more gold even though its all quite pointless and "free" to them after a point.

"automated translation" works by looking up existing translations.
If the database doesn't already contain a translation the result will be utter shit 90% of the time.

No, trivial and non-trivial was above:
>A property is non-trivial if it is neither true for every computable function, nor false for every computable function
(computable function ~=~ program)
Any trivial property is absolutely useless for programming.

How would they hoard stuff when there's a sufficient amount of stuff anyone can get? How would they even have any more power than anyone else under a friendly AGI?

>~=~
Is that a flying duck coming towards me?

Yes

Barely any office jobs will get automated, because they don't actually produce anything of value.

Ever heard of neural networks?

We don't know, if AIs can attain sentiency and become creative there's nothing stopping them from replacing us everywhere. But there's a lot of manual labor that probably won't be disappearing any time soon, people like to brag about technology and how far advanced it is, but we are still using horses for transportation in rugged terrains. If an activity is complex enough animals are generally best suited for it, we are general purpose machines.

none. the first to go will be the bullshit management positions. CEOs even will get replaced, because AI will run companies better than they can.

Truck Driver

>he thinks CEOs will let themselves be replaced

big brain jobs

Attached: images(5).jpg (572x536, 30K)

This

Terrorist, Inventor, Politician, Swindler, oh you are talking about bitchboi professions, my bad idk

Attached: peguevara.jpg (702x1334, 49K)

priest, rabbi

You know that meta-programming is a thing, right? Stop talking out of your ass, moron.

strippers, prostitutes, professional "cuddlers"
nannies, teachers, esp. kindergarten teachers, mentors, tutors
academics, mathematicians, engineers
journalists, writers
entertainers of all kind, street performers, magicians, jugglers, comedians, musicians, youtubers, sport players

Making GOd's Temple

hi redd*t

ones that require intuition

ye, meta-programming gives you more power to write automations
what's your point

I'm retarded user, I read that post as something else, thought it was disagreeing with the guy kek

if it requires intuition it can't be automated yet

CEOs and board members.

I know this is bait, but I still gotta ask: how did you come to this conclusion?

>Computer scientist here
as if it meant anything on an anonymous image board

That was obviously an answer to OP's question, not an attempt to brag or whatever. If I cared about that, I wouldn't bother posting anonymously.

Till the AI be able to improve on it's own. If we manage to create evolving AI, then there's nothing not automatable

>computer scientist here

Attached: 1533612105225.jpg (640x845, 108K)

Engineers and Mechanics

Art gallery curator

But I guess any task which involves logic can be taught to a computer..

shitposter

Attached: 1556019054995.jpg (713x713, 89K)

>So what jobs are not automatable?
Being a nigger on wellfare

If capitalism remains the same then most things will remain scarce and prices won't go down. Most likely, prices of things that matter (houses) will go up. The rift between rich and poor will become deeper. Most people who are currently elite, upper class, and middle class do not want to mingle with the lower class. There will be an ugly civil war before the class divide disappears.

Why the hell would capitalism remain in existence when everything people need to live and more is in abundance? Why would money still exist?

>So what jobs are not automatable?
automator

Why would it change? The people in power have a huge interest in keeping things the same. If capitalism truly goes away, there won't be rich neighborhoods and poor neighborhoods. There will be a massive war before that order of things goes away.

Attached: 1540054502066.png (589x487, 345K)

Teaching is probably safe for a while