[Goose]

I imagine this is not unfamiliar to CardBoard members, but this LA Times article provides some depth on the effects of AI on the recent grad job market.

Anthropic's (Claude) CEO Dario Amodei says that AI's capabilities will wipe out 50% of entry-level white-collar jobs in five years. 

They graduated from Stanford. Due to AI, they can't find a job - Los Angeles Times

Actually, I have a different take on "what the real issue is (and has been)". Computer Science majors were not originally envisioned to be "coders". They were expected to know about the theory and the "why" of computer software. Numerical analysis, for example, is a "computer science" thing. Unfortunately the degree has degenerated into being "coders". The business community treats software as a product where a few really smart people "design" the software and a large number of much less smart people implement (code) the software. IMO this is a really bad model, but that is what business/government wants to do. The result is that software projects often take much longer than expected, don't actually work well/fit their intended purpose and cost lots more money than anticipated. They are often cancelled before completion, and if completed contain orders of magnitude more "code" that is really required. The "designed by geniuses to be implemented by drones" approach has real problems, but that is what "computer science" has become because that is what the model wants. Years ago, when a UCB software graduate actually said to me "Just tell me what to do and I will do it" I knew for certain the computer software community was in real trouble :-). So yes, AI can be seen as useful if the implementers are modeled as drones and knowing what you are actually doing and why you are doing it is not required (or even desired). Of course, that is how Boeing got their MCAS problem, so YMMV.

[Goose]

I imagine this is not unfamiliar to CardBoard members, but this LA Times article provides some depth on the effects of AI on the recent grad job market.

Anthropic's (Claude) CEO Dario Amodei says that AI's capabilities will wipe out 50% of entry-level white-collar jobs in five years. 

They graduated from Stanford. Due to AI, they can't find a job - Los Angeles Times

Actually, I have a different take on "what the real issue is (and has been)". Computer Science majors were not originally envisioned to be "coders". They were expected to know about the theory and the "why" of computer software. Numerical analysis, for example, is a "computer science" thing. Unfortunately the degree has degenerated into being "coders". The business community treats software as a product where a few really smart people "design" the software and a large number of much less smart people implement (code) the software. IMO this is a really bad model, but that is what business/government wants to do. The result is that software projects often take much longer than expected, don't actually work well/fit their intended purpose and cost lots more money than anticipated. They are often cancelled before completion, and if completed contain orders of magnitude more "code" that is really required. The "designed by geniuses to be implemented by drones" approach has real problems, but that is what "computer science" has become because that is what the model wants. Years ago, when a UCB software graduate actually said to me "Just tell me what to do and I will do it" I knew for certain the computer software community was in real trouble :-). So yes, AI can be seen as useful if the implementers are modeled as drones and knowing what you are actually doing and why you are doing it is not required (or even desired). Of course, that is how Boeing got their MCAS problem, so YMMV.