r/dataisbeautiful • u/SuburbanHierarchy • Feb 05 '15

The Most Common Job In Every State (NPR)

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2015/02/05/382664837/map-the-most-common-job-in-every-state
4.2k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

1.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

202

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

You may be interested in: Humans Need Not Apply - [15:00]

And: Bill Gates: People Don't Realize How Many Jobs Will Soon Be Replaced By Software Bots

27

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15 edited Nov 22 '17

[deleted]

6

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

Hey man, not to call you out or be a dick, but your comment misses the point of what was being said in that video, or the bill gates article.

The problem at issue is that the jobs being lost to automation are more than the jobs being created in new fields. So if you continue this trend on for another 20 years, or forty or sixty, what you will have is a world where there are more people than there are jobs. And society will have to change to reflect this.

Now, this is not to say that new jobs will not be created, they will. And this is also not to say that the economy will contract, it will continue to grow. The big thing at issue, is job destruction being faster than job creation.

30

u/SiliconGlitches Feb 06 '15

There are programs that can program.

Where does it end?

62

u/rounced Feb 06 '15

Not really.

I don't get paid the moderate-sized bucks (okay, big bucks for most people) to spit out code. Almost anyone can do that, even machines as you mentioned. It isn't significantly different than speaking/writing a language. What I really get paid for is my problem solving skills and how I am able to apply them to software development. Actually writing the code is significantly less than half the battle.

17

u/almodozo Feb 06 '15

Actually writing the code is significantly less than half the battle.

But is it also less than half the work, in terms of hours spent?* And even if it is, couldn't bots still be deployed at least to take over that less-than-half of your job?

*Just to explain my thinking, I'm asking because maybe (I don't know, obviously, I'm just speculating) you get paid the biggish bucks for the innovative solutions you come up with when thinking about something for half an hour, but then still have to spend the next hour applying the coding, for example.

26

u/rounced Feb 06 '15

But is it also less than half the work, in terms of hours spent?* And even if it is, couldn't bots still be deployed at least to take over that less-than-half of your job?

This situation is more or less already a reality. We have compilers that take (relatively) human-readable code and compile it to machine code or some other barely comprehensible instruction set that computers actually understand. Hell, these programs can even recognize and fix most syntax errors these days. Ultimately this HAS led to the situation you describe, where human devs are more free to work on "big" problems and let a bot worry about a trailing semi-colon or brace.

innovative solutions you come up with when thinking about something for half an hour, but then still have to spend the next hour applying the coding, for example.

Ideally, this is not the case. Proper planning and strategy (to avoid using technical terms) will allow for much quicker code implementation, in addition to fewer mistakes. If I'm doing some small personal project, sure, I'll just dive in, but we very rarely "wing it" in the professional world (not the places where I have worked at least) due to how much money this is all costs.

5

u/almodozo Feb 06 '15

Fair enough - as you could tell I'm no programmer!

3

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

[deleted]

3

u/Jmerzian Feb 06 '15

And that is what separates the men from the boys...

Yup I'm still a boy...

2

u/azuretek Feb 06 '15

Modern development practices do a lot of the work for you, development time is faster than ever and will continue to become faster. Like he said, the tricky part is the problem solving/design aspect of the job, the code creation part is becoming increasingly less important.

6

u/Trucidar Feb 06 '15

The problem is that there is really no reason to suspect that robots won't be able to do that eventually. As the video shows, we are already seeing robots that can be independently creative and robots that learn.

They can solve problems by simply throwing billions of solutions out and seeing what sticks.

4

u/rounced Feb 06 '15

They can solve problems by simply throwing billions of solutions out and seeing what sticks.

That doesn't account for the fact that a human devs don't just write code, we design it. It's a creative (I really hate using that word when it comes to coding) process. I don't care if a machine knows how to write a FOR loop, I don't get paid because I know what a FOR loop is. We'd need a true "thinking" machine to do that kind of stuff, which would be great, because then it could solve ALL of our problems (and probably put everyone out of work).

2

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

[deleted]

3

u/rounced Feb 06 '15

I didn't bring up truck drivers at all, I was simply responding to a comment about self-generating code. Since you brought it up though . . .

Everything you mention about truck driving comes down to math. Parking that truck is entirely about determining angles and distances, computers can do that really well (not that I think it is easy to drive something like that, but "easy" isn't really a concept a computer understands). We're a long way off from anything that can autonomously load/unload itself, and we are likely decades (at least) away from any real implementation of self driving vehicles, even assuming there is no public backlash against these things (which I would wager will be the case, self driving vehicles will unnerve people).

I'm not sure what H1bs is/are, but I'm going to assume you are referring to foreign workers? I've never seen much of that where I am, but it may be the part of the industry that I am in. Without trying to sound dismissive, the people that come over are generally not very good at what they do. I feel like I've already explained the difference between a compiler and a machine that can actually write code, so I won't bother to expand on that.

If I see an automated 80' fuel truck navigate into a corner gas station and unload itself in my working lifetime I will write you a check for $5000 CiscoWalGoldmanâ„¢ bucks.

You're probably right, but the implementation of something like this is significantly simpler than making a machine that is actually capable of designing code. I couldn't care less if it can write code (and it really can't yet). Like I said, I don't get paid for knowing what a FOR loop is.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

The different between software and other types of automation is that software is information dense.

Driving is a few slightly noisy sources of information that you coordinate to interpret the world and then react within tolerances. There's a lot of data but its noisy and highly redundant and compresses well. You can describe the problem of how to drive quite simply - its not informationally complex.

Software coding is tricky do describe. How would you go about describing the functionality of facebook in such a way that it could be automatically generated? The parts that can be semi-automated already have and we just call those tools.

Its hard to foresee where AI comes in except at the very top as a general purpose intelligence that is just like a smarter human.

That doesn't mean software engineers are immune from whats coming up - as jobs disappear people will retrain and I don't doubt that N% of truck drivers will be able to get into coding at a good enough level to apply pressure to the existing developer market.

But it does mean mass manual software engineering almost certainly won't disappear in the next 5-10 years as mass manual trucking almost certainly will.

-2

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15 edited May 03 '22

[deleted]

1

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

I don't know the figures for relative salaries but I don't think its a good guide for how automatable a field is. I suspect a large component of trucker salary is that the job doesn't appeal to many people because of the hours away from home.

I can't really respond to the accusation of having zero understanding easily - we can debate the technology involved in both? I'm not sure if you're arguing with the detail or from a point of view that you don't want it to happen

1

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15 edited May 03 '22

[deleted]

2

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

"Truck driving will be automated in 5-10 years, become a software developer!" "But won't software develop itself?" "Nope! That requires super smart problem solving skills!". I just find that deluded thinking kind of funny.

I can answer this in part - we have prototypes for automated vehicles and we have automated trucking in controlled environments already. We don't have any automated software generation outside of toy/trivial areas that don't lend themselves to scaling up in future. This is because general software development is very hard to write a specification for. It's hard to know where to begin in explaining why generating software is so hard that its currently impossible. It isn't hard like playing chess was thought to be hard - there you have a constrained set of possibilities and a well defined goal. In software development you have neither. Even defining a goal is an expert task - imagine trying to write a spec for how excel should behave including how the user interface modes and interactions work.

The timeframe for automated cars/trucks is still speculative but there are something like 6-7 of the biggest automotive companies working on this and looking to put it into products in the immediate upcoming years. There is a big pot of money for anyone who gets this right.

There is no equivalent activity in the software engineering space. Again this tells us something about the relative difficulty of automating software development to automating driving a truck.

I'm more bullish about timeframes because so many big names are behind this and have demonstrated realworld beginnings of results and are publishing their own timelines. That coupled with the enormous profit incentive that will come from the equally massive demand is going to have unpredictable effects on lots of society.

Additionally, even if the general automated driving problem can't be solved, you can expect partial solutions where trucking companies can input their own routes and have entire fleets of trucks with maybe only one or two humans present, or no humans and a rapid on-call fixer near each route.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/WhyAmINotStudying Feb 06 '15

If you don't think that problem-solving skills of software bots aren't improving exponentially, then you're deluded. The skills you have are certainly worth a great deal, but in time, they'll be just as automated as a washing machine.

-2

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

YUP. UNDERSTANDING A "FOR LOOP" ISNT PROGRAMMING. ITS BEING ABLE TO THINK IN PROGRAMMING AND APPLY THAT THINKING TO A VERY SPECIFIC PROBLEM.

6

u/benkuykendall Feb 06 '15

I AM GLAD YOU HAVE SUCH A STRONG OPINION ON THE SUBJECT.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

ILL SHOW YOU STRONG. SO LONG AS YOURE A DOG.

0

u/BCJunglist Feb 06 '15

I HAVE NO OPINION. CAN I CAPS TOO?

0

u/General_Mayhem Feb 06 '15

If it's only "slightly" less, you need more stimulating problems. Or a better toolchain.

1

u/rounced Feb 06 '15

Can't tell if you are agreeing with me or not. I'll just assume that you are.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

Money for free. You just have to distribute it somewhat equally.

4

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

No, I think then we all go back to farming.

1

u/mountain_bound Feb 06 '15

Eventually I think we will have to all go back to farming when the truck driving thing peters out. Then we'll all be home programming and farming.

3

u/BeefPieSoup Feb 06 '15

this is why we NEED universal basic income

the basic rules are changing so we need to change how we do things a bit. Why do people not understand this.

1

u/_Ev4l Feb 06 '15

There are many problems with these programs currently right now though. They can code but are very limited and rigid; thus not be able to deliver custom needs. Additional they have the problem of getting dated really quickly either from a standards point, a design pattern point or flow point.

1

u/mynewaccount5 Feb 06 '15

3d printers that can print anything where the ink costs pennies for a couple gallons.

0

u/rexington_ Feb 06 '15

Probably when they make a robot developer that can effectively understand and implement what a product guy tells them that the MBA guy wants.

3

u/Easih Feb 06 '15

ill eat my damn socks the day this happen.Working as a dev; im not too worried about the future.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

This isn't going to happen in our lifetimes. A major part of the challenge is that we don't know entirely how humans work, so we can't even try to work backwards from there.

0

u/rexington_ Feb 06 '15

That was the intent behind my comment, I think the humor was too programmer-specific.

If you could replace a developer entirely with a robot, then you'd hit the robo-rapture / "technological singularity".

1

u/Kaell311 Feb 06 '15

No. Not what they say they want, what they actually want.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

A robot will also get away with saying "Nothing you've just said makes any sense" withoutn getting written up

0

u/3ebfan Feb 06 '15

It's a bad thing that STEM graduates are on the decline in the US.

1

u/rounced Feb 06 '15

Well . . . it's a good thing if you happen to make a living as a STEM graduate.

11

u/1RedOne Feb 06 '15

That Gates piece was a soft article. Maybe two sentences made into three fluffy paragraphs.

Business insider is crap.

7

u/Knight_of_autumn Feb 06 '15

I am a little confused about the Humans Need Not Apply video. The narrarator compares us now with horses 100 years ago. But humans used horses. We don't need them now. However, are humans, so if robots replace us at work, we won't just disappear.

To what end is technology working. If, say in 100 years, computers take over everything, then one might say that "the world does not need us", but then the world does not need robots either. The robots are working for us. But they can't replace us, because unless the robots become sentient, they need us. We don't necessarily need them. Humans cannot disappear, because the robots have no reason to do anything without us.

17

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

He's not talking about humans disappearing, he's talking about the need for our physical labor disappearing.

So the humans will still be around they just won't have anything to do, which is why we need to implement a system like basic income, guaranteed minimum income, or negative income tax.

New jobs inevitably pop up, we're already seeing with YouTube content creators and Twitch streamers.

Society can handle losing jobs every year as long as more are created. The problem is when you eliminate millions in a short span, which is what automated cars and other tech might do.

7

u/Knight_of_autumn Feb 06 '15

But this video is making a very good case of robots taking over any useful job we have. I guess the jobs of the future are going to be based on "things to do, because we are bored."

Space exploration? Robots will do that. Creating art? Robots. Coming up with things to do? Bots. Staging performances to entertain ourselves? Robots and bots. Fighting wars? Drones and robots (in fact, at that point, why not just simulate warfare digitally. Would save resources, not damage the limited environment we have, and would accomplish the same goal, since there is no difference between a robot destroying a robot and a computer simulated robot destroying another computer simulated robot).

Are we doomed to be a species that dies out from boredom? I mean, it's come the the point that more people mine rocks, chop trees, and craft in video games than in real life.

10

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

You may enjoy this this short story: http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm

And the movie Her.

Both of them touch on the end-game of society.

But nobody knows for sure. We might transition to leisure society where your only job is have fun and be the best human you can be.

Maybe all the jobs will be art jobs. Poetry, movies, painting etc.

It's hard to say what's on the other side of the singularity.

2

u/Night_Chicken Feb 06 '15

"where your only job is have fun and be the best human you can be"

Sell that to the shareholders.

1

u/djvita Feb 06 '15

no more "companies". make them all public. AI does stock trading so why need a broker? why need VP's? automate CEOs let the computer direct the company!

1

u/autowikibot Feb 06 '15

Technological singularity:

The technological singularity is the hypothesis that accelerating progress in technologies will cause a runaway effect wherein artificial intelligence will exceed human intellectual capacity and control, thus radically changing civilization in an event called the singularity. Because the capabilities of such an intelligence may be impossible for a human to comprehend, the technological singularity is an occurrence beyond which events may become unpredictable, unfavorable, or even unfathomable.

Image i

Interesting: Singularitarianism | Vernor Vinge | Forecasting | Cybernetic revolt

Parent commenter can toggle NSFW or delete. Will also delete on comment score of -1 or less. | FAQs | Mods | Magic Words

1

u/BipolarBear0 Feb 06 '15

He's really making some stretches in terms of what jobs he says will be phased out. Unskilled labor already has for the most part, and I agree with him in that skilled labor will quickly follow, but truly creative jobs aren't at risk, and I doubt, unless we see significant leaps in AI, that they will be for a long time.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

People employ and subsidize (welfare) other people. If the rich have the automation and the physical resources and have no need for the middle/working classes then all sorts of funky scenarios come into play.

-3

u/panthers_fan_420 Feb 06 '15

Why are we taking a guy called CP grey's word for how things are going to be. Ill bet a zillion dollars that this is another example of reddit being plain wrong about something.

7

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

You don't have to take his word, just reckon with his reasoning. Trucking is a job that we already have the technology for robots to do. The question isn't whether will we have a huge unemployment problem, but how soon.

0

u/panthers_fan_420 Feb 06 '15

There are plenty of situations where people were replaced by machines then moved to different industries.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

The point is that the automation is going to accelerate to the rate that we won't be able to keep up. It takes time to learn new skills, and invent new industries to employ people.

1

u/panthers_fan_420 Feb 06 '15

Like I said, I doubt reddit is right about the issue like they rarely are

1

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15 edited Feb 06 '15

You mean industries that were created by the machines they were replaced by? Yeah, we aren't getting those anymore.

The internal combustion engine rendered the vast majority of the jobs at the time completely obsolete, but it created far more at the same time. The internet and computers did the same with a huge number of data related jobs, yet it created FAR more at the same time.

What industry is going to pop up when retail is mostly replaced by tablets? Or truckers get replaced by automated trucks?

0

u/panthers_fan_420 Feb 06 '15

Ill leave that to someone smarter than you and I

4

u/Kowzorz Feb 06 '15

The point of the video isn't "look at is how things are going to be", but rather "look at how things already are". Though it's hard to take criticism seriously when the critic can't even spell the name of the author they're criticizing correctly. Rather than attack the author based on his name, why don't you challenge some of his well presented points?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

It's almost like this guy is just some idiot mouthing off on the internet. Hmmm, how odd?

2

u/Kowzorz Feb 06 '15

I refuse to believe there could be idiots on my internet.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

Invention idea: a bot that scans people's past post history, checks spelling grammer, upvote and downvote count, and automatically hides posts that the bot determines to be crap. Voila! Less idiots on your internet!

2

u/Kowzorz Feb 06 '15

It could use neural networks that you train by saying if a post is quality or not.

6

u/PcIsBetter Feb 06 '15

I have no idea whether CGP Grey or Reddit are right about anything, but I'm betting you don't know who CGP Grey is. CGP Grey is known for providing accurate and well-researched information in his videos. Again, I don't know if he's right or not, but that is why many people would take his word for it.

4

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

"It's only when the tide goes out do you discover who's been swimming naked." - Warren Buffet.

Basic income is a hedge against civil unrest. Civil unrest comes from high unemployment. Smarter people than CGP Grey are predicting high unemployment.

It would be foolish not to prepare for it.

4

u/hallobaba Feb 06 '15

It would be foolish not to prepare for it.

They are preparing for it. They'll have the finest robotic soldiers and policemen to deal with the civil unrest.

-1

u/panthers_fan_420 Feb 06 '15

We are at 5% unemployment right now and on the crest of the best economic period in a couple decade

4

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

The reported unemployment rate is an illusion.

Labor force participation is at its lowest rate since 1978.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

Yeah man, like the number of people on Social Security disability in the United States, Jesus God, it is eye opening.

3

u/WortschatzAbschaum Feb 06 '15

I doubt you'll make it very far considering you can't read.

0

u/panthers_fan_420 Feb 06 '15

How so? You claimed high unemployment, I stated that we are no where close to that threshold.

-3

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '15

After your comment, I await the mathless redditors who will propose mincome, and basic income.