logo
Australia shouldn't fear the AI revolution – new skills can create more and better jobs

Australia shouldn't fear the AI revolution – new skills can create more and better jobs

The Guardian17 hours ago
It seems a lifetime ago, but it was 2017 when the former NBN CEO Mike Quigley and I wrote a book about the impact of technology on our labour market.
Changing Jobs: The Fair Go in the New Machine Age was our attempt to make sense of rapid technological change and its implications for Australian workers.
It sprang from a thinkers' circle Andrew Charlton and I convened regularly back then, to consider the biggest, most consequential shifts in our economy.
Flicking through the book now makes it very clear that the pace of change since then has been breathtaking.
The stories of Australian tech companies give a sense of its scale.
In 2017, the cloud design pioneer Canva was valued at $US1bn – today, it's more than $US30bn.
Leading datacentre company AirTrunk was opening its first two centres in Sydney and Melbourne. It now has almost a dozen across Asia-Pacific and is backed by one of the world's biggest investors.
We understand a churning and changing world is a source of opportunity but also anxiety for Australians.
While the technology has changed, our goal as leaders remains the same.
The responsibility we embrace is to make Australian workers, businesses and investors beneficiaries, not victims, of that change.
That matters more than ever in a new world of artificial intelligence.
Breakthroughs in 'large language models' (LLMs) – computer programs trained on massive datasets that can understand and respond in human languages – have triggered a booming AI 'hype cycle' and are driving a 'cognitive industrial revolution'.
ChatGPT became a household name in a matter of months and has reframed how we think about working, creating and problem-solving.
LLMs have been adopted seven times faster than the internet and 20 times faster than electricity. The rapid take-up has driven the biggest rise in the S&P 500 since the late 1990s.
According to one US estimate, eight out of 10 workers could use LLMs for at least 10% of their work in future.
Yet businesses are still in the discovery phase, trying to separate hype from reality and determine what AI to build, buy or borrow.
Artificial intelligence will completely transform our economy. Every aspect of life will be affected.
I'm optimistic that AI will be a force for good, but realistic about the risks.
The Nobel prize-winning economist Darren Acemoglu estimates that AI could boost productivity by 0.7% over the next decade, but some private sector estimates are up to 30 times higher.
Goldman Sachs expects AI could drive gross domestic product (GDP) growth up 7% over the next 10 years, and PwC estimates it could bump up global GDP by $15.7tn by 2030.
The wide variation in estimates is partly due to different views on how long it will take to integrate AI into business workflows deeply enough to transform the market size or cost base of industries.
But if some of the predictions prove correct, AI may be the most transformative technology in human history.
At its best, it will convert energy into analysis, and more productivity into higher living standards.
It's expected to have at least two significant economy-wide effects.
First, it reduces the cost of information processing.
One example of this is how eBay's AI translation tools have removed language barriers to drive international sales. The increase in cross-border trade is the equivalent of having buyers and sellers 26% closer to one another – effectively shrinking the distance between Australia and global markets.
This is one reason why the World Trade Organization forecasts AI will lower trade costs and boost trade volumes by up to 13%.
Second, cheaper analysis accelerates and increases our problem-solving capacity, which can, in turn, speed up innovation by reducing research and development (R&D) costs and skills bottlenecks.
By making more projects stack up commercially, AI is likely to raise investment, boost GDP and generate demand for human expertise.
Despite the potential for AI to create more high-skilled, high-wage jobs, some are concerned that adoption will lead to big increases in unemployment. The impact of AI on the labour force is uncertain, but there are good reasons to be optimistic.
One study finds that more than half of the use cases of LLMs involve workers iterating back and forth with the technology, augmenting workers' skills in ways that enable them to achieve more.
Another recent study found that current LLMs often automate only some tasks within roles, freeing up employees to add more value rather than reducing hours worked.
These are some of the reasons many expect the AI transformation to enhance skills and change the nature of work, rather than causing widespread or long-term structural unemployment.
Even so, the impact of AI on the nature of work is expected to be substantial.
We've seen this play out before – more than half the jobs people do today are in occupations that didn't even exist at the start of the second world war.
Some economists have suggested AI could increase occupational polarisation – driving a U-shaped increase in demand for manual roles that are harder to automate and high-skill roles that leverage technology, but a reduction in demand for medium-skilled tasks.
But workers in many of these occupations may be able to leverage AI to complete more specialised tasks and take on more productive, higher-paying roles. In this transition, the middle has the most to gain and the most at stake.
There is also a risk that AI could increase short-term unemployment if investment in skills does not keep up with the changing nature of work.
Governments have an important role to play here, and a big motivation for our record investment in education is ensuring that skills keep pace with technological change. But it's also up to business, unions and the broader community to ensure we continue to build the human capital and skills we need to grasp this opportunity.
To be optimistic about AI is not to dismiss the risks, which are not limited to the labour market.
The ability of AI to rapidly collate, create and disseminate information and disinformation makes people more vulnerable to fraud and poses a risk to democracies.
AI technologies are also drastically reducing the cost of surveillance and increasing its effectiveness, with implications for privacy, autonomy at work and, in some cases, personal security.
There are questions of ethics, of inequality, of bias in algorithms, and legal responsibility for decision-making when AI is involved.
These new technologies will also put pressure on resources such as energy, land, water and telecoms infrastructure, with implications for carbon emissions.
But we are well placed to manage the risks and maximise the opportunities.
In 2020, Australia was ranked sixth in the world in terms of AI companies and research institutions when accounting for GDP. Our industrial opportunities are vast and varied – from developing AI software to using AI to unlock value in traditional industries.
Markets for AI hardware – particularly chips – and foundational models are quite concentrated. About 70% of the widely used foundational models have been developed in the US, and three US firms claim 65% of the global cloud computing market.
But further downstream, markets for AI software and services are dynamic, fragmented and more competitive. The Productivity Commission sees potential to develop areas of comparative advantage in these markets.
Infrastructure is an obvious place to start.
According to the International Data Corporation, global investment in AI infrastructure increased 97% in the first half of 2024 to $US47bn and is on its way to $US200bn by 2028. We are among the top five global destinations for datacentres and a world leader in quantum computing.
Our landmass, renewable energy potential and trusted international partnerships make us an attractive destination for data processing.
Our substantial agenda, from the capacity investment scheme to the Future Made in Australia plan, will be key to this. They are good examples of our strategy to engage and invest, not protect and retreat.
Our intention is to regulate as much as necessary to protect Australians, but as little as possible to encourage innovation.
There is much work already under way: our investment in quantum computing company PsiQuantum and AI adopt centres, development of Australia's first voluntary AI safety standard, putting AI on the critical technologies list, a national capability plan, and work on R&D.
Next steps will build on the work of colleagues like the assistant minister for the digital economy, Andrew Charlton, the science minister, Tim Ayres and former science minister Ed Husic, and focus on at least five things:
Building confidence in AI to accelerate development and adoption in key sectors.
Investing in and encouraging up skilling and reskilling to support our workforce.
Helping to attract, streamline, speed up and coordinate investment in data infrastructure that's in the national interest, in ways that are cost effective, sustainable and make the most of our advantages.
Promoting fair competition in global markets and building demand and capability locally to secure our influence in AI supply chains.
And working with the finance minister, Katy Gallagher, to deliver safer and better public services using AI.
Artificial intelligence will be a key concern of the economic reform roundtable I'm convening this month because it has major implications for economic resilience, productivity and budget sustainability. I'm setting these thoughts out now to explain what we'll grapple with and how.
AI is contentious, and of course, there is a wide spectrum of views, but we are ambitious and optimistic.
We can deploy AI in a way consistent with our values if we treat it as an enabler, not an enemy, by listening to and training workers to adapt and augment their work.
Because empowering people to use AI well is not just a matter of decency or a choice between prosperity and fairness; it is the only way to get the best out of people and technology at the same time.
It is not beyond us to chart a responsible middle course on AI, which maximises the benefits and manages the risks. Not by letting it rip, and not by turning back the clock and pretending none of this is happening, but by turning algorithms into opportunities for more Australians to be beneficiaries, not victims of a rapid transformation that is gathering pace.
Jim Chalmers is the federal treasurer
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Clean energy subsidies should be replaced with ‘market-based incentives' from 2030, Productivity Commission says
Clean energy subsidies should be replaced with ‘market-based incentives' from 2030, Productivity Commission says

The Guardian

time3 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

Clean energy subsidies should be replaced with ‘market-based incentives' from 2030, Productivity Commission says

The Productivity Commission says clean energy subsidy programs should not be extended beyond 2030, and that 'market-based incentives' should guide investment in the clean energy transition over the coming decades. The commission's interim report on investing in cheaper, cleaner energy and the net zero transformation is one of five which will be released over two weeks and which set out a series of reforms to reinvigorate Australia's productivity. Commissioner Barry Sterland said 'Australia's net zero transformation is well under way'. 'Getting the rest of the way at the lowest possible cost is central to our productivity challenge,' he said. The commission stopped short of repeating previous recommendations for a broad price on carbon. But it advocated for a significant expansion of the safeguard mechanism, which sets emission limits for only the heaviest polluters, by slashing the threshold from 100,000 tonnes to 25,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent a year. Sign up: AU Breaking News email Chris Bowen, the climate change and energy minister, last week announced an increase in taxpayer subsidies available for green energy projects under its successful capacity investment scheme (CIS). The CIS and the government's other clean energy subsidy scheme, the renewable energy target, do not extend beyond 2030, and the commission argued that the two programs should be replaced with 'market-based incentives in the electricity sector'. The commission also said the implementation of the new vehicle efficiency standard meant federal and state governments should phase out specific concessions for electric vehicles, including on fringe benefits tax, stamp duties and registration fees. A new emissions-reduction incentive for heavy vehicles should also be introduced, the commission said. The commission said it takes too long to develop green energy infrastructure and there are deep concerns that the government will not reach its 2030 climate targets, which include 82% of energy production from renewable sources. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion The report called for an overhaul of how green energy projects are assessed under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, to allow decision-makers to consider whether a project is important to Australia's clean energy transition. Martin Stokie, a commissioner who is leading the inquiry alongside Sterland, said Australia's 'sluggish and uncertain approval processes are not up to the task' of delivering the huge amount of clean energy infrastructure needed to meet national climate targets. 'Overdue reforms to the EPBC Act would both speed up approvals and better protect the environment,' he said. The environment minister, Murray Watt, is reviewing the act as part of a new package of federal nature laws, which were shelved before the election after lobbying from mining companies and the Western Australian government. The commission also made a series of recommendations to build the country's resilience to the effects of climate change. The interim report called on the commonwealth to lead development of a public database of all climate hazards, and a series of goals and policies to improve the resilience of houses. Notably, the commission backed a climate resilience star-rating system that would reflect the potential damage from climate change. 'People's experience of climate change will depend on the resilience of their home, but most lack the information they need to invest in upgrades,' Sterland said. 'As climate risks intensify, boosting our resilience can lower the costs of disaster recovery and create a healthier, safer and more productive Australia.' The commission will now consult on its draft recommendations before the final report due at the end of this year.

What will the AI revolution mean for the global south?
What will the AI revolution mean for the global south?

The Guardian

time25 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

What will the AI revolution mean for the global south?

I come from Trinidad and Tobago. As a country that was once colonized by the British, I am wary of the ways that inequalities between the global north and global south risk being perpetuated in the digital age. When we consider the lack of inclusion of the global south in discussions about artificial intelligence (AI), I think about how this translates to an eventual lack of economic leverage and geopolitical engagement in this technology that has captivated academics within the industrialised country I reside, the United States. As a scientist, I experienced an early rite of passage into the world of Silicon Valley, the land of techno-utopianism, and the promise of AI as a net positive for all. But, as an academic attending my first academic AI conference in 2019, I began to notice inconsistencies in the audience to whom the promise of AI was directed. AI researchers can often identify consistent choices for locations where such conferences are hosted, and where they are not. NeurIPS, one of the top AI conferences, has highlighted annual issues for obtaining visas for academic attendees and citizens from the African continent. Attending such a prestigious conference in the field grants one the opportunity to gain access to peers in the field, new collaborations and feedback on one's work. I often hear the word 'democratisation' within the AI community, an implication of equity in access, opportunity and merit for contribution regardless of one's country of origin. Associate professor of economics Fadhel Kaboub talks about how 'a lack of vision for oneself results in being a part of someone else's vision', reflecting on how systematically lacking an access to infrastructure results in local trade deficits in economies. As in the time of Nafta's promise of 'free trade', promises of 'AI democratisation' today still exist and benefit mainly countries with access to tech hubs not located in the global south. While the United States and other industrialized countries dominate in access to computational power and research activity, much of the low-paid manual labour involved in labelling data and the global underclass in artificial intelligence still exists in the global south. Much like coffee, cocoa, bauxite and sugar cane are produced in the global south, exported cheaply and sold at a premium in more industrialized countries, over the past few years we have seen influence in AI inextricably tied to energy consumption. Countries that can afford to consume more energy have more leverage in reinforcing power to shape the future direction of AI and what is considered valuable within the AI academic community. In 2019, Mary L Gray and Siddharth Suri published Ghost Work, which exposed the invisible labour of technology today, and at the beginning of my tenure at graduate school, the heavily cited paper Decolonial AI: Decolonial Theory as Sociotechnical Foresight in Artificial Intelligence was published. It has been five years since these seminal works. What would an AI community inspired by the Brics organisation, which united major emerging economies to advocate for themselves in a system dominated by western countries, look like for the global south? I often ask myself how AI has contributed to our legacy, and whose stories it won't tell. Has AI mitigated issues of mistrust and corruption in less-resourced countries? Has it benefited our civic communities or narrowed educational gaps between less-resourced regions? How will it make society better, and whose society will it make better? Who will be included in that future? A historical mistrust can impede adoption by developing countries. Furthermore, many developing countries have weak institutional infrastructures, poor or nonexistent laws and regulatory frameworks for data projection and cybersecurity. Therefore, even with an improved information infrastructure, they are likely to function at a disadvantage in the global information marketplace. A currency is only as good as its perceived global trust. When thinking about the democratization in AI and a vision of what it could be in years to come, AI's survival requires including more perspectives from regions such as the global south. Countries from the global south should work together to build their own markets and have a model of sovereignty for their data and data labour. Economic models often consider a definition of development that includes a measure of improvement in the quality of life of the most marginalized of its people. It is my hope that in the future that will extend to our evaluation of AI. Krystal Maughan is a PhD student at the University of Vermont studying differential privacy and machine learning

Claude HIVE Workflow : Upgrade Claude Code Agents for Faster, Smarter Coding
Claude HIVE Workflow : Upgrade Claude Code Agents for Faster, Smarter Coding

Geeky Gadgets

time32 minutes ago

  • Geeky Gadgets

Claude HIVE Workflow : Upgrade Claude Code Agents for Faster, Smarter Coding

What if you could delegate the most tedious, time-consuming parts of app development to a team of hyper-focused, tireless assistants? Enter Claude Hive and sub-agents—AI-powered tools that are not just reshaping workflows but completely redefining what's possible in software development. With their ability to handle specific tasks like UX research, interface design, and even performance benchmarking, these sub-agents operate with surgical precision. Imagine a single project broken into perfectly synchronized parts, each managed by a specialized agent working in parallel to deliver results faster and with fewer errors. It's not just efficiency—it's a revolution. And the best part? These tools come with a staggering 200,000-token memory, making sure they never lose sight of the bigger picture, no matter how intricate your project gets. AI Labs explains more about Claude Hive and Claude Code sub-agents, you'll uncover how these AI tools can supercharge your development process, from optimizing workflows to integrating seamlessly with existing codebases using features like GitIngest. You'll learn how to harness their capabilities to tackle complex projects with ease, avoid common pitfalls like token mismanagement, and even unlock creative possibilities through advanced prompt chaining. Whether you're building a innovative app or refining a prototype, the potential of these sub-agents is nothing short of fantastic. So, how do you upgrade your coding game to match this new era of development? The answers lie ahead, waiting to challenge your assumptions and spark your imagination. Claude Code Sub-Agents Overview Understanding Claude Code Sub-Agents Claude Code sub-agents are specialized AI tools that handle specific tasks within a development workflow. Each sub-agent operates independently and is equipped with a substantial 200,000-token window, allowing it to retain deep context for intricate projects. These sub-agents can work sequentially by chaining tasks or in parallel to maximize efficiency and reduce development time. For instance, consider a scenario where a UX Researcher sub-agent defines user experience and navigation strategies while a UI Designer sub-agent concurrently plans interface components based on that research. By assigning distinct roles to sub-agents, you ensure that every aspect of your project is addressed with precision and expertise. This division of labor allows developers to focus on higher-level decision-making while the sub-agents handle specialized tasks. Optimizing Workflows for Maximum Efficiency To fully harness the potential of Claude Code, a well-structured workflow is essential. Sub-agents can be assigned to manage various tasks, including: Conducting UX research to understand user needs and preferences. Prioritizing sprints to align with project milestones. Designing user interfaces that are both functional and visually appealing. Benchmarking performance to ensure optimal app functionality. Prompt chaining is a powerful feature that allows tasks to be triggered in sequence, making sure a logical progression of work. Parallel processing, on the other hand, enables multiple sub-agents to operate simultaneously, significantly reducing development time. For example, if you're building a YouTube production manager app, one sub-agent could analyze user requirements, another could design the interface, and a third could implement advanced micro-interactions. This collaborative approach ensures that tasks are completed efficiently and to a high standard. HIVE Coding : Upgrade Your Claude Code Agents Watch this video on YouTube. Master Claude Code with the help of our in-depth articles and helpful guides. Using GitIngest for Seamless Integration One of the standout features of Claude Code is GitIngest, a tool that converts repositories into readable text for sub-agents. This functionality allows developers to integrate existing codebases into their workflows, providing sub-agents with the context they need to perform effectively. For example, you could use GitIngest to analyze a repository from a previous project. The insights gained can inform your current development process, making sure continuity and reducing redundancy. By combining GitIngest with markdown (MD) files for context management, you can maintain a clear and organized workflow. This integration not only saves time but also enhances the accuracy and relevance of the sub-agents' outputs. Addressing Challenges in Implementation While Claude Code offers numerous advantages, it also presents challenges that require careful management. Poor planning or insufficient review of sub-agent outputs can lead to suboptimal results. To mitigate this, it's crucial to refine prompts and adjust workflows to align with project goals. For instance, if a prototype lacks essential functionality, revisiting the sub-agent responsible and providing more detailed instructions can resolve the issue. Token management is another critical consideration. Tasks that consume a high number of tokens may necessitate a robust subscription plan, such as Claude Opus, to ensure that sub-agents have the resources they need to operate effectively. Monitoring token usage and allocating resources strategically can help you maximize the benefits of Claude Code while staying within budget. Key Benefits of Using Sub-Agents The integration of sub-agents into app development workflows offers several significant advantages: Enhanced app quality through the use of specialized, context-aware agents. through the use of specialized, context-aware agents. Accelerated development by distributing tasks and using parallel processing. by distributing tasks and using parallel processing. Streamlined project management within a single, cohesive session. For example, a Rapid Prototyper sub-agent can establish the foundational structure of your app, while a Test Runner ensures its functionality. Meanwhile, a Whimsy Injector can add intricate UI details and animations, creating a more engaging user experience. This collaborative ecosystem of sub-agents allows developers to achieve high-quality results with greater efficiency. Elevating App Development with Claude Code Claude Code sub-agents represent a significant advancement in app development, offering a more efficient and specialized approach to project execution. Tools like GitIngest, prompt chaining, and parallel processing empower developers to create workflows that deliver exceptional results. While challenges such as token management and prompt refinement require attention, the benefits of using sub-agents far outweigh the drawbacks. Whether you're developing a complex application or a simple prototype, Claude Code sub-agents provide the tools and capabilities needed to succeed in today's fast-paced development landscape. Media Credit: AI LABS Filed Under: AI, Guides Latest Geeky Gadgets Deals Disclosure: Some of our articles include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, Geeky Gadgets may earn an affiliate commission. Learn about our Disclosure Policy.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store