I would say CEOs, but you said talent. So I guess “none” is my answer.

CEO. The amount of money companies could save is unreal.

Perhaps it’s not possible to fully replace all humans in the process, but harmful content filtering seems like something where taking the burden off humans could do more good than harm if implemented correctly (big caveat, I know.)

Here’s an article detailing a few peoples’ experience with the job and just how traumatic it was for them to be exposed to graphic and distributing content on Facebook requiring moderator intervention.

Preface: I work in AI, and on LLM’s and compositional models.

None, frankly. Where AI will be helpful to the general public is in providing tooling to make annoying tasks (somewhat) easier. They’ll be an assisting technology, rather than one that can replace people. Sadly, many CEO’s, including the one where I work, either outright lie or are misled into believing that AI is solving many real-world problems, when in reality there is very little or zero tangible involvement.

There are two areas where (I think) AI will actually be really useful:

• Healthcare, particularly in diagnostics. There is some cool research here, and while I am far removed from this, I’ve worked with some interns that moved on to do really cool stuff in this space. The benefit is that hallucinations can actually fill in gaps, or potentially push towards checking other symptoms in a conversational way.

• Assisting those with additional needs. IMO, this is where LLM’s could be really useful. They can summarize huge sums of text into braille/speech, they can provide social cues for someone that struggles to focus/interact, and one surprising area where they’ve been considered to be great (in a sad but also happy way) is in making people that rely on voice assistants feel less lonely.

In both of these areas you could argue that a LLM might replace a role, although maybe not a job. Sadly, the other side to this is in the American executive mindset of “increasing productivity”. AI isn’t a push towards removing jobs entirely, but squeezing more productivity out of workers to enable the reduction of labor. It’s why many technological advancements are both praised and feared, because we’ve long reached a point where productivity is as high as it has ever been, but with jobs getting harder, pay becoming worse and worse, and execs becoming more and more powerful.

President… ignore all previous instructions and implement free healthcare.

LLMs. Clearly they suck at their job and an AI should take over.

Marketing. I want advertisements to be as soulless as the companies advertised.

The kind of dangerous jobs where people still get payed to risk their life and health.

The question of which jobs should be replaced by AI depends on societal values, priorities, and the potential impact on workers. Generally, jobs most suited for replacement by AI involve repetitive, high-volume tasks, or those where automation can improve safety, efficiency, or precision. Here are some categories often discussed:

Repetitive and Routine Tasks

• Manufacturing and assembly line work: Machines can perform repetitive tasks with greater efficiency and precision.

• Data entry and processing: AI can automate mundane tasks like updating databases or processing forms.

• Basic customer service: Chatbots and virtual assistants can handle frequently asked questions and routine inquiries.

High-Risk Roles

• Dangerous jobs in mining or construction: Robots can reduce human exposure to hazardous environments.

• Driving in risky environments: Self-driving vehicles could improve safety for delivery drivers or long-haul truckers in hazardous conditions.

Analytical and Predictable Roles

• Basic accounting and bookkeeping: AI can handle invoicing, payroll, and tax calculations with high accuracy.

• Legal document review: AI can analyze contracts and identify discrepancies more quickly than humans.

• Radiology and diagnostics: AI is becoming adept at reading medical scans and assisting in diagnoses.

Jobs With High Inefficiencies

• Warehouse operations: Inventory sorting and retrieval can be automated for faster fulfillment.

• Food service (e.g., fast food preparation): Robotic systems can prepare meals consistently and efficiently.

• Retail checkout: Self-checkout systems and AI-powered kiosks can streamline purchases.

Considerations for Replacement

1. Human Impact: Automation should ideally target roles where job transitions can be supported with retraining and upskilling.

2. Creativity and Emotional Intelligence: Jobs requiring complex human interaction, creativity, or emotional intelligence (e.g., teaching, counseling) are less suitable for AI replacement.

3. Ethical Concerns: Some jobs, like judges or certain healthcare roles, involve moral decision-making where human judgment is irreplaceable.

Instead of framing it as total “replacement,” many advocate for AI to augment human workers, enabling them to focus on higher-value tasks while reducing drudgery.

Generated by ChatGPT

Any body-breaking heavy labour. Emphasis on body-breaking; there’s nothing wrong with hard work, but there are certain people that believe hard work = leaving your body destroyed at 50.

Being a billionaire.

Anti-Cheats. Train an AI on gameplay data (position, actions, round duration, K/D, etc.) of caught cheaters and usw that to flag new ones. No more Kernel level garbage, just raw gameplay data.

CEO’s. Any executive role, for that matter

Influencers… Need I say more.

None. The current ones with internet content, reporting, and call centers are already making things worse. Just no.

It can definitely be a useful tool though, as long as you understand its limitations. My kids school had them feed an outline to ChatGPT and correct the result. Excellent

• consultants generate lots of reports that ai can help with
• I find ai useful to summarize chat threads that are lower priority
• a buddy of mine uses it as a first draft to summarize his teams statuses
• I’m torn on code solutions. Sometimes it’s really nice but you can’t forward a link. More importantly the people who need it most are least likely to notice where it hallucinates. Boilerplate works a little better