- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Will robots take your job? Post your results
Posted on 5/30/17 at 10:21 pm to GreatLakesTiger24
Posted on 5/30/17 at 10:21 pm to GreatLakesTiger24
10%
Radio Announcers/Talk Show Host
Radio Announcers/Talk Show Host
0
Posted on 5/30/17 at 10:22 pm to OMLandshark
even screen obsessed millennials will want to talk to a person about their retirement, wills, trusts, etc.
Posted on 5/30/17 at 10:27 pm to LSUTANGERINE
4.2%
AUTOMATION RISK LEVEL
Totally Safe
PROJECTED GROWTH
19% by 2024
MEDIAN ANNUAL WAGE
$100,080
PEOPLE EMPLOYED
794,000 as of 2016
AUTOMATION RISK LEVEL
Totally Safe
PROJECTED GROWTH
19% by 2024
MEDIAN ANNUAL WAGE
$100,080
PEOPLE EMPLOYED
794,000 as of 2016
Posted on 5/30/17 at 10:27 pm to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
Accountants and Auditors
quote:
This job has Automation Risk Level: You are doomed. (or 94% proability of automation)
Posted on 5/30/17 at 10:32 pm to StrongBackWeakMind
quote:
quote:
My job is not even on there, but I would guess it's close to 0%.
Unemployed?
I wish. I could use a vacation.
Same here.Posted on 5/30/17 at 10:35 pm to LSUTANGERINE
Less than .9%.
Posted on 5/30/17 at 10:36 pm to LSUTANGERINE
3.7%.
Totally safe baw
Totally safe baw
Posted on 5/30/17 at 10:43 pm to LSUTANGERINE
0.41
Posted on 5/30/17 at 10:49 pm to LSUTANGERINE
The algorithm in that site is based on one of the dumbest, shittiest studies I've ever seen. The clowns who put it together basically just made it all up based on their own opinion. But every journalist cites it because like Oxford and shite.
This post was edited on 5/30/17 at 10:50 pm
Posted on 5/30/17 at 10:54 pm to Lou Pai
quote:
The algorithm in that site is based on one of the dumbest, shittiest studies I've ever seen. The clowns who put it together basically just made it all up based on their own opinion. But every journalist cites it because like Oxford and shite.
Could you link the study?
I am curious from a professional standpoint.
Apropos of my prior comment, part of my work entails identifying strategic opportunities for automation (via AI, machine learning, and implementation) and derivative M&A and figuring out the path forward for companies thereafter.
Posted on 5/30/17 at 10:55 pm to Brummy
quote:
Accountants and Auditors
quote:
This job has Automation Risk Level: You are doomed. (or 94% proability of automation)
Take that for example. Anyone who knows anything about the public accounting industry realizes how difficult it would be to automate something like that, especially given the regulatory and compliance issues and relationship oriented aspect of the work.
The study is the height of arrogance really.
Posted on 5/30/17 at 10:57 pm to LSUTANGERINE
11%
Posted on 5/30/17 at 10:58 pm to AbuTheMonkey
Posted on 5/30/17 at 11:00 pm to Lou Pai
quote:
Take that for example. Anyone who knows anything about the public accounting industry realizes how difficult it would be to automate something like that, especially given the regulatory and compliance issues and relationship oriented aspect of the work.
The study is the height of arrogance really.
I wonder if it's more automation/outsourcing.
Public accounting is relying more and more on overseas JITs, but you're right - relationships, reputation, and knowledge of compliance matter a lot in that industry.
Posted on 5/30/17 at 11:17 pm to Lou Pai
quote:
LINK
Interesting. Thank you.
I read the abstract, intro, and conclusion, so I didn't get into the meat, but a couple of observations:
- They are dead on about the professional polarization. Had they extrapolated that out to political economics, they would've predicted the rise of Trump and the European equivalents well before it actually happened
- They clearly failed to account for the amount of regulatory capture that is going to keep a lot of labor around for at least a generation (think healthcare and, to the prior point, public accounting to a degree)
- They didn't incorporate behavioral economics at all, and I think that's, by far, the biggest flaw; human beings have a natural bent towards human service in a lot of industries for a variety of reasons (think servers at a decent restaurant or anything in which a premium is placed on quality human interaction), and you can thank behavioral economics for that; I think automation of those tasks is a long way off; customer service has served as an early warning of how dangerous it can be if you automate everything in these arenas
- They're definitely infused with a more European view of labor protection, job growth, innovation, and the like
This post was edited on 5/30/17 at 11:18 pm
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News