Automating the Professions

In her latest Washington Post column Megan McArdle muses on what will happen when automation begins to supplant professionals’ jobs. After noting that she continues to believe that free trade and increased automation are the correct prescriptions she goes on:

But as artificial intelligence starts coming for our jobs, I wonder how well the professional class will take its own medicine. Will we gracefully transition to lower-skilled service work, as we urged manufacturing workers to do? Or will we fight like hell to retain what we have, for our children as well as ourselves?

My prediction is that professionals will go through the Five Stages of Grief. It may be that has already begun and they’re in the denial stage.

My prescription on the other hand is that professional education needs to change with the times, both in how prospective professionals are selected and what they’re expected to do.

A number of other observations occur to me. I wonder how Megan squares this:

As we entered the electorate, it became a major force in our politics, as the Clintons tried to steer the economy toward a global, postindustrial future.

with the fact that there was a sharp upswing in immigration, almost entirely of low-skill workers whose jobs could easily be performed via automation, during the Clinton years? Different Clinton policies were working at cross-purposes? Or that much of Washington Consensus policy was either wrong or inconsistently applied?

My second observation is that I suspect that generative artificial intelligence will replace the lowest cost entry level “professional” jobs first which is almost entirely backwards. As I have pointed out any number of times junior engineers become senior engineers. When you cut off the paths to becoming a junior engineer whether by offshoring or automation, it will inevitably lead to no senior engineers eventually.

The sad reality is that some of the things that can actually be done better by algorithms, e.g. a lot of what lawyers do and some of the things that physicians do, e.g. diagnosis based on clinical findings but that lawyers and doctors have the political clout to prevent their jobs being taken over by machines. The comparison I would make is to occupational licensing. It’s one way of preventing your job from being offshored.

7 comments… add one
  • CuriousOnlooker Link

    Maybe AI will do it someday; but it isn’t likely to be soon. I think its still missing some critical pieces of how human intelligence works.

    Much more pressing is offshoring. Zoom has made a lot of work able to be done anywhere; combined with better English proficiency around the world and an a very high US dollar and wages; the incentive to offshore is really tempting right now.

  • Tell me about it. I have meetings on a daily basis with team members in five timezones.

  • bob sykes Link

    AI might not be ready to take over the professions now, but someday it will be. Law and Engineering look like the most vulnerable. But the US is not the likely developer of such AI. David (Spengler) Goldman points out that China has a one to two generation lead in manufacturing over the US, and the lead is growing. China has two-thirds of all the factory robots in the world, and they are linked and optimized by AI programs running on high speed 5G networks. Up to a couple years ago, China also had 80% of all the 5G base stations in the world.

    Add to that that China has 8 to 10 times as many engineers and scientists as we do, and graduates 10 times as many each year. Some 30% of all the graduate students in American STEM programs are Chinese nationals.

    Extrapolating from China’s enormous leads in both technology and STEM manpower, it seems most probable that China will be the country that pushes AI to its limits. American lawyers and engineers will act as front men and interfaces for Chinese AI programs, and the profits will go back to China.

    Russia is also deep in mathematical and computer expertise and talent. They might be the competitor to China.

  • steve Link

    Long visit with old friends yesterday. They are already incorporating AI into a fair bit of what they do but it’s clearly not ready to run on its own. It can give (mostly) good answers if good data is entered properly but if you need someone else to do that it loses a lot of its advantages. They cant do a PE yet either. So I think there will be a long period where they can just increase productivity. We still need to judge pt acceptance and the liability things needs to be settled.

    Steve

  • CuriousOnlooker Link

    I was talking to a colleague last week on where the gap was with this analogy.

    Large lanaguage models currently exhibit the behavior of a 3 year old, if I have to correct a 3 year old when they are doing a task wrong, they often will throw a temper tendrum, insist they are right (similar to “hallucinations”) and take a bunch of examples before they get it right. I talk to a 7 year old, I can explain it once before they understand my point and adjust their thinking process.

    I don’t know what goes on that changes the mental process of 3 year to be a 7 year old; but AI needs to cross that gap before it is a real threat to the professions.

  • Drew Link

    Judgement and intuitiveness born of performing your craft for years will be the last to be automated.

    As a former practicing engineer I can see low level engineering functions performed by AI. Especially design. But as Dave points out, who becomes the experienced hand when things get more touchy feely?

    I saw a reference by Steve to PE. I don’t know if he was referencing what I did/do. But any reasonably trained fool can do basic MBA stuff. Market analysis, manufacturing footprint, finance etc etc. Knock yourself out on the real art: evaluating and motivating management. Reacting to the unexpected. Etc. Goid luck with AI.

    I don’t know how many hockey fans we have here. But you can go read books on hockey theory. Basic offense and defense sets and maneuvers. Flow. Dump and chase. “Where you should go on the ice”. Heh. If you think hockey is just chaos and chance you don’t understand. After the theory, hockey is a game of well intentioned action, but then (lightning quick) reaction to unanticipated actions. Try your AI on that…

  • Grey Shambler Link

    A I could replace the speech writer for our current V.P. without anyone noticing.

Leave a Comment