Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > ger.ct > #656996

Die unteren 75% sind gefährdet (was: AI agent mit starkem Ego)

Show all headers | View raw

Lothar Kimmeringer <news201705@kimmeringer.de> wrote:
> Thomas Hochstein wrote:
> 
>> <https://crabby-rathbun.github.io/mjrathbun-website/blog/posts/2026-02-11-gatekeeping-in-open-source-the-scott-shambaugh-story.html>
> 
> Dieser Blogpost hat auch noch einen PR, der einem Vorfreude
> darauf gibt, wenn AI Agenten mehr Verbreitung finden:
> https://github.com/crabby-rathbun/mjrathbun-website/pull/6#pullrequestreview-3792859305
> Eine AI kommentiert einen PR, den eine andere AI für eine
> Änderung einer Webseite aufgemacht hat, die von einer
> dritten AI erstellt wurde.
> 
> 
> Grüße, Lothar

Die Autoren und Researcher des folgenden Artikels glauben, daß alle Jobs
bis zur 75. Perzentile des Einkommens nun rasch gefährdet sind.
Hinter Paywall, ohne JavaScript kann man es aber lesen.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/02/15/the-desperate-race-to-escape-ais-permanent-underclass/

She was earning £65,000 before AI came along. What happened next is a
warning to us all
As the first wave of job losses hits, nobody is safe from artificial
intelligence’s white-collar

15 February 2026 6:00am GMT
Leonie Tucker has poured two decades of her life into the film industry. As
a graphic designer, she finesses the details on movie sets: the posters in
the background of scenes, the packaging, everything that is copyrighted –
from the branding of a tomato can to phone displays.

“I worked my way up to become successful, to become a lead graphic designer
for things like Apple TV. I worked very, very hard for it. And then the
work just disappeared,” Tucker says.

Until recently, the 36-year-old graphic designer was making more than
£65,000 a year.

“Then last year, it was £26,000. A big old drop. In the past six months,
it’s been drastic. I’m a homeowner. I’ve got a leased car. You can’t give
up your car, and you can’t [not] pay your mortgage because something has
happened that’s beyond your control.”

It wasn’t Covid or the Hollywood writers’ strikes that dealt the blow. Even
after such big disruptions, the work always came back.

But AI has proved a different beast.

“Everything I’ve ever worked for is this industry, it’s now been ripped
away from [under] my feet. I’ve been doing it for 15 years. I’m very
qualified and sought-after in this job. Now, I’m on Universal Credit,” she
says. “I’ve been telling everyone who will listen.”

Workers like Tucker are among the first to see their jobs disrupted by AI.
Much of the sort of design work she specialised in can now be done with AI
in post-production.

Rapid leaps in AI’s capabilities are upending jobs in everything from call
centres to copywriting and coding. And law, consulting and finance could be
next.


Within years, millions could experience the same fate as Tucker: a steep
drop in income, carefully honed skills obsolete, an entire career path
gone.

Anton Korinek, one of the world’s most influential economists studying
transformative AI, says: “It may happen later this year or later this
decade. Given the uncertainty, I think it’s prudent to be prepared for
potential worst-case scenarios, like unemployment rising by several
percentage points by the end of the year but with no end in sight.”

The professor at the University of Virginia is one of the growing number of
voices warning we may be in a race against time.

“I’m worried, although there is tremendous uncertainty,” he says.

It is still too early to tell from employment data what is really
happening. But it is clear that AI systems are “advancing rapidly and with
them, their ability to perform many work tasks that used to be exclusively
human.”

AI ‘better than humans at essentially everything’
Less than a year ago, ChatGPT was so confident there were only two ‘r’s in
the word strawberry that the chatbot said it would bet $1m (£732,000) on
it.

Now, some of the world’s smartest people are warning that AI is making
their skills obsolete. One of them is Aditya Agarwal, one of Facebook’s
earliest engineers.

“I spent a lot of time over the weekend writing code with Claude. And it
was very clear that we will never ever write code by hand again. It doesn’t
make any sense to do so,” Agarwal wrote on X.

“Something I was very good at is now free and abundant.”

Dario Amodei, the chief executive of Anthropic, the creator of the Claude
chatbot, warned in a recent essay that AI could create “an unemployed or
very-low-wage ‘underclass’.”

On the current trajectory, “it cannot possibly be more than a few years
before AI is better than humans at essentially everything,” he wrote.

Tech bosses like Amodei may have an interest in talking up the speed and
capabilities of AI. But economists are also nervously considering such
scenarios.

Daron Acemoglu, an economics professor at Massachusetts Institute of
Technology and a Nobel Prize winner, says: “If AI is used ultimately as an
automation tool and nothing else, or mostly as an automation tool, it will
create an underclass because it will automate a lot of jobs, and it will
make a lot of skills redundant as a result.

“Many people will either withdraw from the labour market or will work in
menial, not so meaningful and low-paying jobs. And that’s the underclass.”

Acemoglu is slightly more optimistic than Amodei: “I am worried about a
permanent underclass, not in two years but in 25 years.”

But the danger is real and he is urging politicians around the world to act
fast or risk the vast majority of workers being sucked into the “permanent
underclass”.

“Roughly speaking, anybody who is below the 75th income percentile would be
at the risk of having their jobs either devalued, commodified or
eliminated,” Acemoglu says.

In other words, you may only escape if you are already among the 25pc
highest-earning workers. In the UK, someone earning less than £43,000 in
2023 would be at risk, according to the latest data.

“Jobs that require high levels of judgment are safe for now. I don’t think
we’re going to have AI take over airline traffic control any time soon.
We’re

not going to have AI take over chief financial officers, chief executives
or chief operating officers,” Acemoglu says.

“We’re going to have high-quality journalism. We’re going to have academic
research. We’re going to have lawyers and judges.”

But many other white-collar office jobs could disappear – or those doing
them could see themselves reduced to undervalued worker bees simply
directing the AI.

The technology could do to their jobs what globalisation and automation did
to factory workers, miners and other blue-collar workers over the last few
decades.

 
Brace for 2027
Change is already under way.

Dr Ben Maruthappu, founder of Cera, one of Europe’s largest health tech
companies, says: “We’ve deployed ‘Ami,’ our AI recruitment agent, who has
fundamentally rewritten how we hire.

“Ami interviews thousands of candidates simultaneously, picking up the
phone seconds after they apply – 24/7.”

Cera also uses predictive AI to flag everything from staff at risk of
quitting to patients developing dehydration or UTIs.

The firm has also developed care robots, “physical, droid-like companions
that sit in people’s homes” and remind them to take medications, drink
water and check their mood.

“In our pilots, they achieved a 96pc success rate in medication compliance
– numerous care companies and local governments have adopted them. We are
effectively turning the home into a digitally enabled hospital ward,
preventing admissions and saving the NHS millions,” Maruthappu says.

“We are moving from a model where humans do everything, to one where
technology handles the routine so humans can handle the complex.”

The care robots highlight another worrying trend: even manual jobs may not
be safe.

“Are we going to have blue-collar workers? Yes, for the next 10 years,”
Acemoglu says. “But if there are big breakthroughs in robotics and AI’s
sense of geography and spatial understanding, there is a possibility of
much greater automation.”

In other words, even retraining as a plumber may not be enough to escape
the underclass.

 
The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) has warned that without
intervention, AI could destroy some eight million jobs in the UK “in the
near term”.

“2026 will be the year of adoption. 2027 will be the year where we will see
the early, more significant labour market impacts that can be felt. Then
the big, worrying macro impacts will probably still take a bit longer,”
says Carsten Jung at the IPPR.

‘Jobs apocalypse’
Fears of the looming AI jobs bloodbath appear to have given rise to a new
type of “prepper” – with a distinctly different profile to people who hoard
tinned beans and toilet paper as they brace for a possible world war.

On the Reddit forum HenryUK, for people who describe themselves as “High
Earners, Not Rich Yet”, users are already exchanging advice on how to
future-proof their finances from the “AI jobs apocalypse”.

One user writes: “Getting some serious existential dread about the
medium-term jobs outlook and the prospects for our young family.

“Household is double high-earner with a chunky London mortgage – husband a
finance director in retail and me a marketing director in financial
services.

“In both workplaces, the direction of travel is towards replacing people
with automation and AI. It’ll start further down the food chain of course,
but we’d be naive to think it’s not a major threat to our employability
fairly soon.”

They fear house prices crashing if there are sharp rises in middle-class
unemployment over the next three to 10 years.

“It sounds rash, but should we sell up now? We’ve enough equity to be
mortgage-free outside London,” they ask.

The most-liked advice ranges from not sending the kids to private school,
saving aggressively and doing AI training.

The observation that further down the chain, AI is already starting to
wreck jobs is apt.

Morgan Stanley analysis suggests the UK suffered the biggest net loss in
jobs from AI in the last 12 months when compared to Japan, Germany and
Australia. The finding was based on a survey of employers.

Of course, AI may be just part of the story. A weak economy and Rachel
Reeves’s £26bn tax raid on employers are also driving companies to rethink
their staffing needs.

Adrian Cox at Deutsche Bank says: “There is some evidence that suggests
that graduates are finding it harder to get jobs now than they did three or
four years ago. But there’s a lot of noise in that data. It’s really hard
to strip out what is caused by AI, if anything.

“I suspect that is where we will see the first evidence – employers saying,
‘I will upskill my existing workforce and hold off on new hiring at a very
junior level, and see how things play out’.”

 
Ed Newton-Rex, an entrepreneur, composer and founder of the AI non-profit
Fairly Trained, says: “I know of people who have taken job ads down because
they have realised that AI can do the job of a junior person.

“In the creative spaces, I have spoken to a lot of artists, musicians and
writers who have lost work because of AI. We’re in this interim phase where
I think people are being lulled into a false sense of security. People are
starting to see the productivity benefits of AI without seeing the
trajectory that it’s on.

“We should take these claims and these predictions and these explicit
statements incredibly seriously. There is a chance they’re wrong, but
clearly, there is also a chance they’re right. And if they are, the job
market is frankly going to be destroyed.”

He adds: “The Government is not taking this seriously. [It] has been
hoodwinked by Silicon Valley and people in the tech ecosystem into
believing that it can solve all its growth problems. That is a huge
mistake.”

White-collar cull
Lucy, a 28-year-old copywriter, is one of the young workers already bearing
the brunt of AI. She has worked for a major financial company for the past
four years but soon will be without a job.

Last summer, she experienced what any worker fears – a sudden meeting
invite with no explanation. It quickly became clear it was bad news.

“It was on a big call with everyone who might be affected. The initial call
was just someone talking at us, saying: ‘This is what is happening.’ There
wasn’t really any detail about why.

“Across marketing, it’s around 50 people who were impacted by the
restructure. This increased talk of AI has happened at pretty much exactly
the same time,” says Lucy, who preferred not to use her real name.

She is still in her job, but knows she’ll be let go in a few months.

“The job market is pretty rough, and from my own job hunting so far, it’s
not easy, so I am quite worried about finding something after this. I’m on
£48,000, which I’m not expecting to get again any time soon,” she says.

 
More than just the loss of a comfortable salary, she also worries that AI
is taking the writing out of the job, making it much less fulfilling.

She explains: “The main part that I like about it is the ability to be
creative and solve problems with copy. That’s what feels the most rewarding
for me. I can see that being watered down if AI is doing most of the
writing.”

Such disruption doesn’t just impact the workers losing their jobs. The few
still clinging on to employment in affected sectors are also seeing the
ground move beneath their feet.

Joanna, 36, is a lead graphic designer for TV shows airing on BBC, ITV,
Netflix and Apple TV. She too preferred not to use her real name for fear
it could impact her work.

“They’re using AI to cut corners where before they might have employed an
assistant. The impact that has on people like me, the lead designers, is
that we are worked harder. I’m getting the jobs, but I’m seeing the squeeze
everywhere. It’s happening bit by bit.

“I’m concerned for my own mental health. The whole middle, which makes up
all teams, is being cut out. That leaves very, very stressed heads of
departments, no work for people in the middle climbing up, and very
stressed juniors.

“Personally, I don’t want to be in an industry where I’m that stressed all
the time.”

Such disruption will inevitably soon rip through other industries. Today
it’s copywriters and graphic designers finding themselves unemployed, but
tomorrow it could be bankers and lawyers.

For now, there are some technical barriers holding back such change. Banks,
for example, do not have real-time data in the right format to make the
most of AI yet, says Stuart Cheetham, chief executive of AI fintech
MPowered Mortgages and former boss of Lloyds in Hong Kong and Japan.

He adds: “For a bank to change its tech stack, think five or six years.
It’s not going to be tomorrow.”

But when it happens, change could be widespread. “There are very few jobs I
see within financial services that AI will not be able to perform in the
current state that they’re in today,” Cheetham says.

 
AI is hardly the first technological revolution to hit the world. From the
spinning jenny to the internet, the world has experienced wave after wave
of disruption.

Past breakthroughs have destroyed jobs that became obsolete but ultimately
created new ones – avoiding the creation of a permanent underclass.

But experts question whether the same will hold true this time around.

“This time is different from previous technological waves that we have
experienced over the past few centuries,” Korinek says. “Intelligence is
what has made humans into the most powerful species on the planet, and we
are now creating machines that may end up more intelligent than us.

“So you can say the most relevant previous historical episode is the
emergence of homo sapiens.”

Acemoglu adds: “The Industrial Revolution has lessons because it goes
against the common narrative that somehow automatically new technologies
benefit us all. Workers didn’t benefit for about 80 to 90 years in the
Industrial Revolution.

“Some groups of workers, like weavers, lost two thirds of their real
earnings as weaving was mechanised. But the Industrial Revolution was in a
few sectors and slowly acting. We have AI impacting all the sectors and
acting fast.”

Political crisis
These ruptures leave political leaders around the world grappling with how
to handle possibly the biggest disruption to the jobs market in modern
history.

Experts have suggested anything from “universal basic capital” – giving
every newborn a portfolio of AI stocks – to wage insurance.

There are already talks within the Labour Government about introducing a
universal basic income (UBI) for workers in industries about to be wiped
out by AI.

Lord Jason Stockwood, the investment minister, said in a recent interview
that the Government would “undoubtedly” have to consider UBI for impacted
workers and ensure they have options to retrain.

However, the polls suggest it could be Nigel Farage and Richard Tice
overseeing what comes next.

Tice, the deputy leader of Reform UK, tells the Telegraph that “net
negative immigration” may be needed to ensure there are enough jobs for
British people.

“AI will disrupt the jobs market significantly. With sizeable job
reductions likely in certain trades, the challenge will be to keep employed
those already here, so the last thing we need is more immigration.

“The maximum should be net zero, but we may need net negative immigration
to respond to AI,” Tice says.

  Richard Tice speaks during a Reform UK rally at the National Exhibition
Centre (NEC) in Birmingham
Richard Tice thinks Britain may need net negative immigration to protect
jobs Credit: Ioannis Alexopoulos/Anadolu
Net migration will already fall to a near three-decade low this year,
according to Oxford Economics projections, dipping below 100,000.

Reducing it below zero suggests even tighter rules – possibly even forcing
out people who are living legally in the UK.

Andrew Griffith, the shadow business secretary, says the Government needs
to make hiring as easy as possible.

Griffith says: “We don’t know definitively how AI will impact jobs, but the
two things that will help are a growing economy and an agile jobs market.
Unfortunately, this Government is delivering neither.

“As careers change, tying up employers of humans with expensive red tape is
a sure-fire way to accelerate the rise of the machines.”

Acemoglu hopes politicians steer clear of UBI. He believes they should
instead use the levers they have to ensure companies develop AI in a way
that complements jobs, rather than destroys them.

He arns: “If 60pc of the population live off just UBI without a job,
they’re going to become an underclass no matter how generous that UBI is.

“Whether you’re in the underclass or not is not about how much money you
have to buy video games or the newest sneakers. It’s about the social
status that you command in society.”

Back in London, Lucy is still mourning the copywriting job she will soon
lose.

“It’s just frustrating. In the grand scheme of things, a job like mine is
not massively consequential or important, but it helps me live
comfortably,” she says.

Joanna, meanwhile, is plotting her way out of graphic design, feeling
defeated by the unsustainable pressure AI has put on her job.

“As a millennial, you were brought up to believe that if you worked hard,
everything would work out. You would own a house and have a good life. That
just doesn’t seem obtainable any more at all,” she says.

She is thinking about retraining in “something to do with sociology or
wildlife or something that helps other people. It’s a total rejection of
everything,” she says.

Fellow graphic designer Tucker is trying to reinvent her career. She is
putting her design skills towards setting up an e-commerce business. Her
savings are decimated.

“I’m very angry, not at anyone in particular. It’s incredibly
disheartening. Not only have I worked my whole life for this, I’ve also
invested a lot of money in kit which I now have in my garage.

“I’m trying desperately to sell it, because I can’t afford to live.”

RECOMMENDED
The careers that will survive the AI revolution – and pay the highest
salary

-- 
please forgive my iPhone typos

Back to ger.ct | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

AI agent mit starkem Ego Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> - 2026-02-15 11:43 +0100
  Re: AI agent mit starkem Ego Thomas Hochstein <thh@thh.name> - 2026-02-15 13:24 +0100
    Re: AI agent mit starkem Ego Lothar Kimmeringer <news201705@kimmeringer.de> - 2026-02-15 14:23 +0100
      Die unteren 75% sind gefährdet (was: AI agent mit starkem Ego) Dr. Joachim Neudert <neudert@5sl.org> - 2026-02-15 13:32 +0000
        Re: Die unteren 75% sind gefährdet Michael Bode <m.g.bode@web.de> - 2026-02-15 15:59 +0100
          Re: Die unteren 75% sind gefährdet Lothar Kimmeringer <news201705@kimmeringer.de> - 2026-02-15 18:13 +0100
            Re: Die unteren 75% sind gefährdet Dietz Proepper <dietz.usenet@rotfl.franken.de> - 2026-02-15 18:30 +0100
              Re: Die unteren 75% sind gefährdet Lothar Kimmeringer <news201705@kimmeringer.de> - 2026-02-15 20:16 +0100
                Re: Die unteren 75% sind gefährdet Dietz Proepper <dietz.usenet@rotfl.franken.de> - 2026-02-16 09:51 +0100
              Re: Die unteren 75% sind gefährdet Stefan+Usenet@Froehlich.Priv.at (Stefan Froehlich) - 2026-02-16 07:55 +0000
                Re: Die unteren 75% sind gefährdet Dietz Proepper <dietz.usenet@rotfl.franken.de> - 2026-02-16 10:06 +0100
        Re: Die unteren 75% sind gefährdet (was: AI agent mit starkem Ego) ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) - 2026-02-15 17:58 +0000
      Re: AI agent mit starkem Ego Thomas Hochstein <thh@thh.name> - 2026-02-15 14:33 +0100
        Re: AI agent mit starkem Ego Martin Ebert <mx300@gmx.net> - 2026-02-16 23:09 +0100
          Re: AI agent mit starkem Ego Lars Gebauer <lgebauer@live.de> - 2026-02-16 23:28 +0100
            Re: AI agent mit starkem Ego Martin Ebert <mx300@gmx.net> - 2026-02-17 02:16 +0100
              Re: AI agent mit starkem Ego Martin Ebert <mx300@gmx.net> - 2026-02-17 06:29 +0100
          Re: AI agent mit starkem Ego Ulf Kutzner <user2991@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-02-17 08:00 +0000
          Re: AI agent mit starkem Ego Gunter Kühne <kuehne-g@freenet.de> - 2026-02-17 12:05 +0100
  Re: AI agent mit starkem Ego Lothar Kimmeringer <news201705@kimmeringer.de> - 2026-02-15 14:06 +0100
    Re: AI agent mit starkem Ego Thomas Hochstein <thh@thh.name> - 2026-02-15 14:30 +0100
      Re: AI agent mit starkem Ego Lothar Kimmeringer <news201705@kimmeringer.de> - 2026-02-15 18:11 +0100
        Re: AI agent mit starkem Ego Dietz Proepper <dietz.usenet@rotfl.franken.de> - 2026-02-15 18:31 +0100
        Re: AI agent mit starkem Ego Thomas Hochstein <thh@thh.name> - 2026-02-15 20:08 +0100

csiph-web