I think people will still pay people for quality. These AI tools are only going to take out of business the folks at the lower end of skill, talent, price, etc.
I've been telling my doctor friends for a long time this is coming. For the most common and simple to treat diseases talk to the AI, get a pill, maybe even get notifications to take the pill and that's it. For the high end - research, rare diseases, complicated treatments, etc - doctors will still be needed and payed really well.
To be frank, I tried to poke around the AI with anything that's more technical it struggles. It struggles badly. For example I haven't managed to get AI to admit that there is no such variable that takes less than a byte of ram. It would reject the very idea that some metadata can use a byte or more of memory usage.
Given how many cardinal errors it makes at least for now I think ya'all are safe.
To be frank, I tried to poke around the AI with anything that's more technical it struggles. It struggles badly.
Google Translate is happily eating lots of jobs. Content translation has collapsed as an industry over the past decade. There's two factors involved: firstly, companies are happy to accept a worse result that they can get practically for free rather than paying a translator, and secondly, translation teams are far more productive if they use AI as a first pass and then fix the results.
The same will happen over the next decade in lots of other areas. Jobs will transition from creating solutions by hand to creating things with AI providing a foundation. FWIW I doubt tools like Copilot will replace writing code, but they definitely will augment chores like writing tests, keeping docs up to date, and doing refactoring work. They already are. The new 'Code Brushes' tool in Copilot makes things like tidying up code far faster.
Okay that's fair enough that it might eat some jobs, although I don't think the AI will get good enough to replace dev jobs. For copywriting I think that it's likely that it may divide the work to 2 segments - "very cheap but comparatively low quality" one and one where it's actual human work, who may or may not use AI to increase own work efficiency. Anyhow - I see it as a tool, rather than replacement - and isn't that great that we are getting more and more potent tools? Same goes with google translate at the moment, it's translations are good enough to convey the thing that you want to say in other language, but it's far from good quality translation. I think it's awesome that people and companies can communicate without language barrier and without breaking the bank for it, especially if someone is on low budget. Professionally translated message is still better than machine translated one, even though the tech had many years to mature.
I know that that's neighter here or there - but my biggest worry with AI is completely different - it isn't big stretch if the tech progresses that it could be used to check on our private communications, to for example probe if we aren't speaking a thing that given corporation disagrees with at given moment. Otherwise they would need a lot of manual labor for that.
I've been telling my doctor friends for a long time this is coming. For the most common and simple to treat diseases talk to the AI, get a pill, maybe even get notifications to take the pill and that's it. For the high end - research, rare diseases, complicated treatments, etc - doctors will still be needed and payed really well.