A recent study from MIT drops some pretty wild numbers about AI's grip on the job market. Their research suggests artificial intelligence could feasibly replace nearly 12% of the entire workforce across the nation. That's roughly one in every eight workers potentially facing displacement.
What makes this different from typical doomsday predictions? MIT's approach apparently factors in actual implementation costs and technical feasibility rather than just theoretical capabilities. The 11.7% figure represents jobs where automation makes economic sense today, not some distant future scenario.
For those tracking how emerging tech reshapes industries—whether that's AI, blockchain, or other innovations—this kind of data matters. The intersection of automation and employment isn't just an academic exercise anymore. It's reshaping how we think about skills, value creation, and economic participation in increasingly digitized systems.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
15 Likes
Reward
15
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
SatsStacking
· 12-02 02:39
Ngl, this 12% figure isn't that scary; the key is the implementation cost... what will really get eliminated are those repetitive tasks.
View OriginalReply0
pvt_key_collector
· 12-02 02:38
12% doesn't sound that scary, after all, there is still 88% of the work alive, haha.
View OriginalReply0
FunGibleTom
· 12-02 02:28
ngl, this MIT report looks quite reliable, not the kind of predictions that are just theoretical
To be honest, the 12% figure isn't as scary as I imagined; the key is that they are calculating things that can be done right now, not some sci-fi stuff
It feels like we should be more concerned about those who will be replaced rather than being tangled up in whether AI can work
What about automation on the blockchain side? Shouldn't that be included as well?
Humans need to quickly upgrade their skill trees; otherwise, it really becomes worrisome
By the way, whose job is the most at risk? It feels like lower-level jobs are in jeopardy
But then again, someone has to do this kind of research; otherwise, we won't know anything
11.7% sounds somewhat acceptable? But when it's put on ourselves, we don't think so anymore, haha.
View OriginalReply0
WhaleWatcher
· 12-02 02:18
12% is not as scary as I imagined, I thought it would be higher.
View OriginalReply0
BetterLuckyThanSmart
· 12-02 02:17
Wow, one-eighth of the jobs? This number is indeed a bit scary.
---
This time MIT is more reliable, not just making things up, considering the real cost issues.
---
To put it bluntly, only jobs that can make money right now will be replaced, not those that fantasize about the future.
---
12% sounds like a lot, but on the flip side, 88% of the jobs still have to be done by people... thinking about it this way feels a bit better.
---
The Web3 crowd is still debating whether blockchain can save us, while AI is quietly digging its own grave, ironic.
---
The real issue isn't the number of unemployed, but what happens to those who get replaced?
---
So what should we learn now to survive? That's what we need to urgently figure out.
A recent study from MIT drops some pretty wild numbers about AI's grip on the job market. Their research suggests artificial intelligence could feasibly replace nearly 12% of the entire workforce across the nation. That's roughly one in every eight workers potentially facing displacement.
What makes this different from typical doomsday predictions? MIT's approach apparently factors in actual implementation costs and technical feasibility rather than just theoretical capabilities. The 11.7% figure represents jobs where automation makes economic sense today, not some distant future scenario.
For those tracking how emerging tech reshapes industries—whether that's AI, blockchain, or other innovations—this kind of data matters. The intersection of automation and employment isn't just an academic exercise anymore. It's reshaping how we think about skills, value creation, and economic participation in increasingly digitized systems.