Goldman Sachs Predicts 300M Jobs Will Be Lost or Degraded by AI

I follow Goldman Sachs multiple years and their predictions are always changing. I remember in 2020 after March crash they had this prediction (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;fortune.com&#x2F;2020&#x2F;03&#x2F;20&#x2F;coronavirus-economic-predictions-goldman-sachs-recession-gdp-2q-2020&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;fortune.com&#x2F;2020&#x2F;03&#x2F;20&#x2F;coronavirus-economic-predicti...</a>) which in reality completely opposite happened. There were multiple other similar cases that their prediction was wrong and after sometime they just changed their prediction.

I have worked with deps around the world of JPM, GS and others and others and there are not many places I have seen where there are so many replaceable and basically not really employable people. They could’ve been replaced with some code 10 years ago; now it’s only easier. Not necessarily AI but AI won’t make it better for them. These are very large numbers who are only there to pump the number of employees under their managers or some other lame metric.<p>Of course it does not mean they will do anything about it.

Goldman Sachs prediction reporting will likely be among them.

It highlights our preposterous assumption that in order to live everyone must have a &quot;job&quot;. Why? If people become destitute then some others will gain even more wealth than they need. Is that a great way for humanity to behave?

If there is a job that requires generating bullsh*t, then definitely it is at risk. Otherwise, no.

I expect jobs to be lost, but new jobs to be created. For example, prompt engineers. There is already a job board for prompt engineers (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=35436168" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=35436168</a>). I&#x27;ve been told they can make around $300k. I wouldn&#x27;t be surprised to see the quant developers among the hardest hit by AI automation, maybe 10 quants replaced by one high-skill quant who can write the necessary prompts.

The actual report doesn&#x27;t say lost or degraded, but rather &#x27;exposed to automation&#x27;, and right after that statement, they also mention the historical trend of automation has been moving people around:<p>&gt;The good news is that worker displacement from automation has historically been offset by creation of new jobs, and the emergence of new occupations following technological innovations accounts for the vast majority of long-run employment growth.<p>This article is a misrepresentation of Goldman&#x27;s analysis.

The one good thing I see out of the coming AI cambrian explosion is that it&#x27;ll hit the bracket of top 10% to 1% earners the hardest, while those above and bellow are safer.<p>This bracket has been in recent decades the enforcers of the status quo, helping widen the wealth gap all over the developed world. Maybe once they get a taste of what everyone is going through they might change sides and actually align with the general population on these issues.

Doesn&#x27;t sound that much in global terms compared to the global population. And does it account for all the new jobs that will be created along the way? When I started out there was nothing like a DevOps engineer, social media influencer or Deliveroo driver...<p>The point being that this happens all the time and is a natural consequence of progress and evolution.

Unproductive fear mongering.

And how many will be created?