Jobs in the future?

It totally depends on the kind of future you are envisioning.

If general AI arrives, for example, then all human jobs will be obsolete. (And human race will most likely go extinct).

Other than that, it's easier to predict which jobs will disappear, then to invent new ones.

If we are talking about near future, then 99% of drivers are out of job with the advent of self-driving cars.

The same self-driving car and drone revolution might also lead to retail store collapse, if automated delivery becomes much more cheaper and efficient. Amazon.com eats everything, basically.

If solar power plus battery storage revolutions happens, then the energy production segment will change radically, but that doesn't necessarily means there will be less jobs.

Someone still has to tell the AI what to work on... Law continues, AI assisted, so fewer legal assistants or secretaries but human judges remain necessary and human lawyers to argue cases before human juries. Art, crafts, equipment repair, maintenance, troubleshooting and human beings to supervise them because people don't follow machines.
Unlike some, I do not see AI quickly achieving self-awareness or being as capable as humans--anyplace where there is a rapidly changing environment would cause them trouble. They like things predictable. Humans by nature are irrational and unpredictable and so we would be something they would have difficulty with. So law enforcement would use AIs to identify and track suspects but humans would be bringing them in.
News could be written by AI but analysis and in-depth articles would be handled by humans.
Humans would be hackers and crackers--some people will just be better at getting to the information than others. Remember, the information will grow more and more overwhelming as everything is digitized and nothing is ever thrown away. Human beings will be trained in search and paid to suss out information--to find the needle in that haystack. Some of these will be paid vast amounts for the information they are able to pull out of data mining.

efreysson said:

what will the majority of people actually do for a living in a future-tech society? I mean, there will still be a place for jobs involving human interaction, like therapy, entertainment and whatnot, but it seems to me that at some point humanity will advance to the point that there will be very little left for Joe Average to do.

Click to expand...

The majority will not have jobs. All those stories about everyone being on the dole may become true true.
There may still be some jobs for people who will do things that are too dangerous for AI's, and there will be the planners, lawyers, therapists, bartenders, whores, and other service workers, but that will leave about 90% of people unemployed. But this assumes that population will continue to increase, and real AI's will be devised. On the other hand, if the Really Great Pandemic hits, as per schedule, then employment will be quite varied. Will can see what has happened in the industries that were first mechanized and project from there.

efreysson said:

With the advent of automation, online commerce, drones, 3D printers, self-driving vehicles and all that, I'm left wondering: Realistically, what will the majority of people actually do for a living in a future-tech society?

Click to expand...

We'll float in space in giant hi-tech spaceships, looking to meed other civilizations. Like in Star Trek

In a sci-fi novel especially, the future holds whatever you want it to. For example, Back to the Future predicted we'd be flying around on hoverboards by 2015. Last time I checked, hoverboards still aren't a thing, and it's two years past. Point is, people who "predict" the future in movies, books, etc, are usually not correct or are only correct to an extent. The first self driving car was manufactured years ago, but last time I checked there aren't many on the road. In my opinion, there are a lot of things humans aren't going to accept technology wise and it's going to be a fad if anything and then fizzle out. I cringe at the idea of a car driving me on its own and not being in control, for example.

If you don't want all the jobs to be taken, then they don't have to be. If you want all the jobs to be taken and all AI responsible for everything including the production and development of new AI and humans survive on a new type of currency developed by their creations then make it so. There's literally no right or wrong. You can't be "realistic" with sci-fi. The two are oxymorons. As long as you back up and explain the reasoning behind why there are still jobs/what jobs are available/why no one has jobs and how they now make a living, you can do no wrong.

20th century historian.

History professors who specialize in the 20th century.

21st century historians.

Re-enactors who stand around historically accurate recreations of 20th and 21st century shopping malls, "Tweeting" and "Texting".

There's a book on my to-read list about this because it's also a subject I'm interested in. The Wealth of Humans

It's also making an argument for Minimum Basic Income. People who want to work can but industrial and factory jobs as we know them are likely to be mostly replaced by automation.

The trouble I see, from where we are now, is getting both politicians and "average people" to understand this. I'll refrain from going too deep into the politics but it was probably a factor in the US elections. Of all the things blamed for the decline of things like coal mining and factory jobs, automation is a major one that hardly anyone on the national level is talking about.

If you have the technology but not the social systems to support the fact that it takes those jobs out of the equation, you have a problem, one that could push your future much more sharply in the dystopic direction.

If the future imagined happens after WWIII, the main jobs will be farming, hunting, gathering, spear manufacture and guarding the tribe.

caw

In my future world, slave labor still exists with some jobs, especially where it is dangerous and replacing machines is expensive. I also went with today's examples like the fact no one has come up with a mechanical means of peeling and deveining shrimp. Women are still trafficked.

There are lots of jobs for police and security, computer tech doesn't build itself. There are still government and medical jobs. The jobs to run all the automated systems, some aspects of building them, and certainly innovation are still human labor jobs.

Do some research on where labor is cheaper than automation now, where automation has been slow to develop, and extrapolate.

KaseetaKen said:

Someone still has to tell the AI what to work on... Law continues, AI assisted, so fewer legal assistants or secretaries but human judges remain necessary and human lawyers to argue cases before human juries.

Click to expand...

Perhaps, though one could argue that a computer program might be able to do a more impartial job of analyzing all the precedents and all the reasonable interpretations of laws. Though they'd have to be more sophisticated than they are now. It's already the case that some news stories are written by computer programs, robots can create art, and there's a computer-written symphony.

Even creative pursuits won't necessarily be monopolized by humans in the future, though there might be an interest in art that is human created, because it's more expensive and quirky or something.

But the point is, a SF writer can create their own "what ifs" and extrapolate them in ways that are interesting and create the backdrop for the story they want to tell.

I remember reading a story where most people were unemployed and spent most of their time immersed in virtual reality that served as a creative outlet and simulated a world where they felt they were doing something meaningful.

That's the issue that makes me wonder the most. Say we end up with an extremely wealthy world where nearly all goods, services and management are provided inexpensively by robots and computer programs, so very few humans need do anything but goof off all day. Is the need to feel like one is engaged in meaningful work that makes a difference to others a socially conditioned phenomenon that would fade after a couple of generations after collective idleness is normalized, or does it reflect a deeper human need? If the latter is true, is there another way people can satisfy their need for purpose without working to support themselves or contributing materially to society? I'm not sure we know the answer to this yet, and a novel set in the future could reasonably take a variety of positions on this.

I do roll my eyes a bit at SF scenarios (like Star Wars) where robots actually have personalities and seem to be able to do everything humans can do (and better), from translation, to soldiering, to helping pilot X-wing fighters (why do they even need human pilots--just stick the droid in), to medicine, yet there still seem to be busy humans running around doing things in the background too. What, exactly, are their jobs and why not just have one of the many robots do it?

But that gets to another issue with SF. It needs to present a future that is different and interesting to readers, and it needs to feel plausible to one's target audience. Yet it also has to present a world that is relatable enough that readers want to immerse themselves in it and identify with its characters. If modern readers can't relate to a character who spends most of their life "goofing off," or if trying to do so touches too much on fears, prejudices or anxieties held by the reader, that person may not enjoy the book.

Roxxsmom said:

... I do roll my eyes a bit at SF scenarios (like Star Wars) where robots actually have personalities and seem to be able to do everything humans can do (and better), from translation, to soldiering, to helping pilot X-wing fighters (why do they even need human pilots--just stick the droid in), to medicine, yet there still seem to be busy humans running around doing things in the background too. What, exactly, are their jobs and why not just have one of the many robots do it?...

Click to expand...

I don't think one would be wrong to say in their future world that people have still not conquered AI, incredible memory function and algorithms, yes, but that has limits when it comes to independent thinking.

New technologies have always put people out of jobs, but new jobs have usually appeared to replace them.

Maybe there will be a whole lot more art for art's sake, science for science's sake, and leisure/entertainment jobs, and no more soul-sucking McJobs.

Alternately, maybe people will all have guaranteed incomes (as themindstream noted; Finland just started a trial of this for people on government assistance) so that working itself becomes optional. We don't need an economy, per se, if we have another way to make sure everyone gets what they need to live.

themindstream said:

There's a book on my to-read list about this because it's also a subject I'm interested in. The Wealth of Humans

It's also making an argument for Minimum Basic Income. People who want to work can but industrial and factory jobs as we know them are likely to be mostly replaced by automation.

The trouble I see, from where we are now, is getting both politicians and "average people" to understand this. I'll refrain from going too deep into the politics but it was probably a factor in the US elections. Of all the things blamed for the decline of things like coal mining and factory jobs, automation is a major one that hardly anyone on the national level is talking about.

If you have the technology but not the social systems to support the fact that it takes those jobs out of the equation, you have a problem, one that could push your future much more sharply in the dystopic direction.

Click to expand...

The problem with this point of view is that jobs give people a mission and a purpose. Without that, they become self-destructive and counter-productive to society. You have to give people purpose and not just a check.

KaseetaKen said:

The problem with this point of view is that jobs give people a mission and a purpose. Without that, they become self-destructive and counter-productive to society. You have to give people purpose and not just a check.

Click to expand...

Actually, I was reading an article last year that noted there's currently a subset of young men who are underemployed, often living with family, and spending most of their time engaged in video games. Surprisingly, these young men seem to be reasonably happy with their lives.

So it seems possible that you could create a society where people are happy without having a job. Retirees often manage it, after all.

And it's not like there aren't many people who have a job and still feel purposeless, because it's something they must do, not something they felt called to do. The idea that humans need to work may be a justification to get us to buy into that idea, rather than a biological fact.

MaeZe said:

I don't think one would be wrong to say in their future world that people have still not conquered AI, incredible memory function and algorithms, yes, but that has limits when it comes to independent thinking.

Click to expand...

I guess, though the different robots have personalities with emotions and a strong instinct for self preservation that appears to war with their sense of duty, loyalty and self sacrifice. I think the series's sense of what the 'droids actually think and feel varies a bit with the current needs of the story.

It seems, at least, that barring a few people who need the Force to accomplish a particular goal, they could pilot those extra X-wings with 'droids and save some human lives at least (since those space battles tend to end in carnage and were often about creating a diversion so Luke or whoever could do their special job anyway).

Another question is why are 'droids always regarded as male (where the ones that don't just whistle and beep always speak in masculine voices). I get that we 21st century humans tend to assign genders to things, and most people are uncomfortable with beings that have no gender (which makes it hard for people who really aren't on the gender binary), but in an environment where there are so many other intelligent species that must have rather varied biology, surely people would be less uncomfortable with beings that don't fall into our concept of male and female. Or at least, why would all 'droids be thought of as male?

Again, I think that says more about our own current societal biases and comfort zone, where anyone that isn't clearly "marked" as female (with boobs, long hair, or a bow) is assumed to be male, whether it's an animal character in a kid's cartoon, the "minions" in the Despicable Me franchise, or a metallic, sexless 'droid in a SF setting.

Roxxsmom said:

I guess, though the different robots have personalities with emotions and a strong instinct for self preservation that appears to war with their sense of duty, loyalty and self sacrifice. I think the series's sense of what the 'droids actually think and feel varies a bit with the current needs of the story.

It seems, at least, that barring a few people who need the Force to accomplish a particular goal, they could pilot those extra X-wings with 'droids and save some human lives at least (since those space battles tend to end in carnage and were often about creating a diversion so Luke or whoever could do their special job anyway).

Another question is why are 'droids always regarded as male (where the ones that don't just whistle and beep always speak in masculine voices). I get that we 21st century humans tend to assign genders to things, and most people are uncomfortable with beings that have no gender (which makes it hard for people who really aren't on the gender binary), but in an environment where there are so many other intelligent species that must have rather varied biology, surely people would be less uncomfortable with beings that don't fall into our concept of male and female. Or at least, why would all 'droids be thought of as male?

Again, I think that says more about our own current societal biases and comfort zone, where anyone that isn't clearly "marked" as female (with boobs, long hair, or a bow) is assumed to be male, whether it's an animal character in a kid's cartoon, the "minions" in the Despicable Me franchise, or a metallic, sexless 'droid in a SF setting.

Click to expand...

Not saying there is anything wrong with building your world with AI. It's a big theme in sci-fi.

Just saying you can write the future with an explanation how we got all the memory, retrieval, algorithms and and even robot learning without getting AI consciousness.

People don't often consider, where are we in the physiological understanding of consciousness? It's not just memory, retrieval, algorithms and learning. There's another element to consciousness we haven't yet cracked in brain research.

If you want AI in your future world, go for it. The reading public expects that is going to happen in the future. But if you want advanced robots, but not go with the usual extension into conscious robots, that's actually where we are at in understanding the human brain. We have not yet cracked that elusive step, how are we conscious?

I love biological brain research. It's absolutely fascinating. Do you know that a good proportion of our brains are busy with all sorts of things that are not going through our consciousness center? Ever wonder why you type one word while you were thinking of a different word? It's more than a typo, think about it the next time you do it. Your finger didn't just hit the wrong key, your fingers typed a different word than you were thinking.

Just now I typed thing instead of think, and that instead of than. Why was that? How did my brain create such typos? Ever think about how your fingers typed a programed word when you were thinking a different one?

Our brains are incredible things we don't yet fully understand. That last step to a conscious AI is not going to happen until we understand how we ourselves are conscious.

But that's the beauty of writing, as long as the reader buys it, the world is infinite.

There was a BBC article a while back on the future of telecommuting and jobs in general, as remote working - via computer or robot - becomes a technological possibility in a global economy: link. It touches on the social changes that will be required for nations to succeed in a new reality, where jobs may not exist for everyone.

Article in the business section of today's Telegraph reckons there will loads of jobs in cyber security

KaseetaKen said:

The problem with this point of view is that jobs give people a mission and a purpose. Without that, they become self-destructive and counter-productive to society. You have to give people purpose and not just a check.

Click to expand...

I don't doubt that and to my knowledge I don't believe proponents of minimum basic income do either. It's more that having a job would become optional and taking a health and-or soul killing job just to make ends meet isn't needed. If you are doing a job that could easily be replaced by a machine with tech we mostly already have, it probably involves a lot of repetition and not much advanced thought and is not the kind of thing that's conducive to quality of life or "purpose". It would also open the way for people to find purpose in things other than employment.

waylander said:

Article in the business section of today's Telegraph reckons there will loads of jobs in cyber security

Click to expand...

The AI in my story got its start building websites and then went into cyber security. One of the subplots is the growth and development of the AI. I think that AI would be quite good at cyber security.

themindstream said:

I don't doubt that and to my knowledge I don't believe proponents of minimum basic income do either. It's more that having a job would become optional and taking a health and-or soul killing job just to make ends meet isn't needed. If you are doing a job that could easily be replaced by a machine with tech we mostly already have, it probably involves a lot of repetition and not much advanced thought and is not the kind of thing that's conducive to quality of life or "purpose". It would also open the way for people to find purpose in things other than employment.

Click to expand...

Well, and also, a lot of jobs people might genuinely want to do may not have much earning potential. A lot of people like the idea of writing for a living, for example. I like the idea of being a lawyer and working for a non-profit or doing pro bono work for people who really need it, but can't justify spending many thousands on law school to do that. Important jobs like social worker and teacher often wind up on lists of careers with the lowest earning potential.

Scientific research is another field that will be hard to automate.

DancingMaenid said:

Well, and also, a lot of jobs people might genuinely want to do may not have much earning potential. A lot of people like the idea of writing for a living, for example. I like the idea of being a lawyer and working for a non-profit or doing pro bono work for people who really need it, but can't justify spending many thousands on law school to do that. Important jobs like social worker and teacher often wind up on lists of careers with the lowest earning potential.

Click to expand...

As long as school teachers are paid like babysitters instead of paid for what they produce, it will remain so. I've proposed funding bonuses for results that could double a teacher's salary depending on the results. Nobody has taken me seriously yet but I think even people who vote against every tax increase would have no problem paying for results.

efreysson said:

With the advent of automation, online commerce, drones, 3D printers, self-driving vehicles and all that, I'm left wondering: Realistically, what will the majority of people actually do for a living in a future-tech society? I mean, there will still be a place for jobs involving human interaction, like therapy, entertainment and whatnot, but it seems to me that at some point humanity will advance to the point that there will be very little left for Joe Average to do.

Are there any notable theories on this? I'm having some trouble coming up with jobs for my setting.

Click to expand...

I read an article today where Mark Cuban believes creative thinkers will be the next rock stars: the more data, the more necessary to design creative solutions. I tend to think people who can find what you are specifically looking for will be valuable--digital intelligence analysts? Hucksters and con-men. Corporate espionage--re-enactors for the Society for Creative Anachronism. Okay... that just made my next book.