Anthropic's Index Shows Job Evolution Over Replacement
- Reference: 0180585072
- News link: https://slashdot.org/story/26/01/15/1436248/anthropics-index-shows-job-evolution-over-replacement
- Source link:
The share of jobs using AI for at least a quarter of their tasks has risen from 36% in January to 49% across pooled data from multiple reports. Anthropic's researchers also found that AI delivers its largest productivity gains on complex work requiring college-level education, speeding up those tasks by a factor of 12 compared to 9 for high-school-level work.
Claude completes college-degree tasks successfully 66% of the time versus 70% for simpler work. Computer and mathematical tasks continue to dominate usage, accounting for roughly a third of Claude.ai conversations and nearly half of API traffic.
[1] https://www.anthropic.com/research/anthropic-economic-index-january-2026-report
Good E. Nuff. (Score:3)
When the threat of AI/AGI first came on, most arrogant meatsacks assumed it would take Perfect AI to replace them at their job.
Most fallible humans don’t realize it will only take Good E. Nuff AI to replace them. Because that is exactly how they landed their human job in the first place. You were good enough to hire. Nowhere near perfect.
The need for UBI will happen far sooner than Greed N. Corruption realizes. That doesn’t put Greed in charge. That puts Greed on the fucking menu. With Mass Chaos in charge.
Re: (Score:3)
It did not hurt to have a new circus in charge of destabilizing the economy to the point most companies would cut back at the same time, to greater lengths than before.
Good E Nuff was also Real E Cheap too.
Re: Good E. Nuff. (Score:2)
You'll have to forgive him: He's been afraid of robots ever since he first saw Chuck E Cheese.
We investigated ourselves and found.. (Score:2)
Everything's great and we're so wonderful!
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think that's quite accurate...but it's sure in the right ballpark. IIUC Anthropic tries to be "the good guys" and tries to be honest. But they *do* have a highly biased viewpoint.
i don't understand (Score:1)
i don't get the point here. how are there so many layoffs happening everywhere if we're just being better employees and not being replaced? i'm calling bullshit.
Re: (Score:3)
Over-hiring at big tech along with a cooling economy. The layoff were coming no matter what. AI is just an excuse.
Re: (Score:2)
Note that their study was based on those using their chatbot. They've got a highly biased data sample.
that's what I expected and what I observe (Score:1)
I see people, who are not programmers at all, creating automation solutions for their businesses:
[1]https://slashdot.org/comments.... [slashdot.org]
People are using AI to help them create content that otherwise wouldn't have been created ever [2]https://youtube.com/shorts/un8... [youtube.com] just because this is in someone's fantasy does not mean they have resources to make it real until AI stepped in.
We generate and put edit videos for advertising that otherwise wouldn't even be possible, because it would have required a movie crew and I
[1] https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=23890756&cid=65919938
[2] https://youtube.com/shorts/un8kMmoPdi8?si=b6_hm_AsvHDIlc_g
It's not generosity (Score:2)
If people get more efficient using AI, then people will be fired.
Re: (Score:2)
> If people get more efficient using AI, then people will be fired.
Greed is blinded by greed. Doesn’t matter how smart they are or were when that shit takes over.
The pathetic Catch-22 being presented to graduates today, is you better be able to prove you can augment your job with AI. Otherwise, you’re not “future-proof” enough for Greed to pretend it will hire AI augmentees just long enough for AGI to come along.
Then, every motherfucker who ain’t a cyborg is getting fired. Because of annoying meatsack needs like sleep, food, and medical ins
Re: (Score:2)
> The pathetic Catch-22 being presented to graduates today, is you better be able to prove you can augment your job with AI. Otherwise, you’re not “future-proof” enough for Greed to pretend it will hire AI augmentees just long enough for AGI to come along.
> Then, every motherfucker who ain’t a cyborg is getting fired. ...
This assumes that AGI will come along, and soon. IMO, it's more likely that LLM's continue to augment the way work is being done, rather than replacing real jobs (which seems to be what the article is saying as well).
Case in point - TFS: "Claude completes college-degree tasks successfully 66% of the time versus 70% for simpler work."
Barring true AGI, in a future where LLM's are much better at predicting the right completion, they'll still need hand holding. This is certainly a significant change, but so was
Re: (Score:2)
Say you don't get "true AGI" (which by my definition humans don't have), but only twice the efficiency and scope of current AIs. (I'm NOT limiting this to LLMs, which are a subset of AIs.)
Then they will probably be able to to 75% more of the work, so, after job restructuring, you'll need 75% fewer people. This *will* make you more efficient (see Jevon's paradox) so more jobs will become available, but I really doubt that 3 times as many jobs as currently exist will be created. (Yeah, that's a lousy way to
Re: (Score:2)
> If people get more efficient using AI, then people will be fired.
If people get more efficient at doing work, then people will be expected to do more work. For the same pay. This has always been the way of work.
If management doesn't have a backlog of projects for you to work on, they are incompetent. That is a sign that the company is going under. Time to flee the sinking ship!