Here's an interesting letter to the WSJ arguing that it will be. The letter is short, so I copy it in its entirety:
“Parents in Tech Engineer a Career Switch for Their Kids” (Personal Journal, March 10) highlights an important shift in workforce priorities, but it overlooks those caught in the middle: new college graduates entering industries where artificial intelligence is rapidly reshaping jobs. For most of my time in school, science, technology, engineering and mathematics, or STEM, was prioritized over the arts. However, many STEM graduates now find their work automated before they’ve even settled into a career. What once took weeks of coding can now be done in minutes, leaving many wondering: Where do we add value?
From my perspective, creativity is the ultimate job security. AI can generate, but it can’t originate. The professionals who will thrive in this new era aren’t simply those who can use AI tools but those who bring new ideas to the table—whether in STEM, the arts or business. AI still needs someone to prompt it. Be that person. The future belongs to those who think beyond automation.
The old adage amongst Asian parents like myself is that choosing a creative career is risky. That if you want a more secure job, learn engineering, medicine, law, or business.
But now that AI can do so much of the technical work, is the demand for creatives in the marketplace going to see a resurgence?
It's a very relevant question as I have teenage children. I am sort of pushing them to double up... be technically proficient in STEM skills, but keep developing your interest and skills in the creative subjects as well.
The skill of collaboration with machines is, IMO, the most important skill. The idea that you can know nothing at all about the domain, and that AI will do it all and do it well, is an illusion. It will stay an illusion, and if it doesn't, it will mean that humanity has serious, serious problems, at which point choice of career will be irrelevant.
In my own experience, figuring out what it takes to collaborate, and to learn, is a deep, deep well. It's giant alpha waiting for people.
I agree with that. But it remains to be seen how much domain expertise you'll need to collaborate effectively with the machine... or whether AI collaboration is actually an orthogonal set of skills. I imagine there's an element of both... an orthogonal component as well as a component that requires domain knowledge. It'll be both interesting and scary to see how it plays out.
If the trajectory continues and collaborating with machines requires less and less domain expertise, the orthogonal components will be more important. But which orthogonal components will be more important? Probably things most supplemental to what machines are able to do? At the limit, I imagine articulating personal/human desire is all that's left (if anything is left).
Setting good objectives. I think about Star Trek a lot. The computer is super useful and can do a lot, but the humans are still the main characters
I'm not sure if you intended it, but this advice even back tests well.
Meaning: figuring out collaboration + learning is a good strategy in any era? If so, I didn't have it in mind, but agree that it's true historically.
Specifically, "the skill of collaboration with machines is the most important skill" seems like timeless advice.
Technology is just a tool at our service... learn how to use it! It's not someone we can collaborate with.
Is like saying in the 19th century that collaborating with cars was the most important skill to learn. I can understand collaborating with horses, but with cars...
I do not use language like math or as it’s used in law. Feel free to replace “machines” with “tools” and “collaboration” with “using” if it suits your senses better.
Don't give in to the pedants. Collaborate is the right word in this case.
There's tons of creativity at the higher levels of STEM. What will be automated are the jobs that just implementing "best practices".
Like the letter says, anyone originating solutions to novel problems or researching new questions will continue having opportunities for valuable contributions.
The other area that I think will continue being human jobs are those requiring interpersonal skills.
But what percent of the STEM majors learn and display that kind of creativity in their field? This might be why it's getting harder to get a STEM job with just an undergraduate degree(?)
Fine motor physical skills too. Home health aide is a booming industry.
Very few are creative. They're the Oompa Loompa's of science.
Really, there will be lots of stuff that we never thought of. Comparative advantage can be hard to predict: for example, there was a period in the 80's when South Korea dominated wig production (who could have predicted that?).
creativity is also a skill that needs to be practiced, and I think you just don't get enough of that opportunity in undergrad
Maybe that will change though as departments tailor their curriculums to the age of AI
I could see that. More contests and challenges. Fewer exams with known answers.
At my university we've got two forces pushing in opposite directions. Tailoring curriculum to AI pushes towards more creative assignments but it's hard to grade. Funding challenges on the other hand is pushing toward larger class sizes which pushes towards easier to grade multiple choice assignments
I enjoyed trying to figure out scaling solutions for those problems. It'll take creativity on our parts, as well.
Let me know if you come up with any good scaling solutions!
Part of me wonders whether we even need to bother with assessment. Make them do a project, help them where they need help, but don't worry about accurate grades. Their future employers will assess whether the projects were good and whether they acquired any skills
You are asian?
Yes I'm what could be called an ABC
a banana! lol
Indeed, we often called ourselves that. I don't actually feel white on the inside though haha
Which area of study were you pushed into?
Did you want to pursue one of the arts?
Electrical engineering, though not necessarily by my parents. Culturally it's just what I was told is the smart thing to do
I heard the same thing when I was growing up.
I became an engineer.
Yep I ended up with my undergrad degree in engineering but went to grad school in economics
I'm glad I studied engineering though
那你会中文吗？
我會一點
Cool. I have a silly grin on my face rn
Always nice to have cross cultural engagement on the internet!
That was the first question that came to my mind haha
Quite possibly, yeah.
I do enjoy the flippening in general: manual labor more secure than office jobs, non-tradeable services more valuable than easily outsourced ones
Until robots...
Some physical tasks are surprisingly hard to automate, like folding clothes haha
That sounds like it will be trivial soon enough...
Now twisting under a sink or squeezing through a wall to do plumbing or electrical wiring...
I definitely see the skilled trades making a resurgence as a respectable and desirable path for a young person to take
I disagree. Just because AI is getting more prevalent doesn’t mean tech skills will be relegated to the side. Sure, the mediocre executives and engineers will find it hard to compete against AI tools, but those who rise to the top in science and engineering fields manage to do so because they know how to leverage AI to solve complex problems.
I also think the extent to which creativity is prized depends on the structure of the society. I won’t say that Singapore is largely conformist, but I do think that if someone is too unorthodox (too creative), he will be judged as someone who “rocks the boat”. Do I wanna unleash my full creativity when I arrive at a new job? Probably not. I will adopt a wait-and-see mentality first. Unless I encounter an existing process that I think is so stupid that I feel like I will be doing myself an injustice by keeping quiet
It's true that tech skills are still needed, but I wonder if there will be any good jobs that only require such skills. I think you used to be able to make a pretty good living just by coding up other people's ideas, but I wonder if that's still gonna be possible
I agree that these days, you need creative computational thinking to thrive. See not just the problem, but how it is embedded within a system. And tackle systemic issues in novel ways
These worries are unjustified. AI can hack together some buggy code for a very basic program. But tell it to write some device driver for Linux and it will fail completely.
It's not like there's an abundance of jobs in the arts.
I think that creativity is a good "skill" to practice. Some people say they just don't have it, but I think its more about allowing rules to be broken or being open to trying something new.