Latest news with #WorldEconomicForum
Forbes
8 hours ago
- Business
- Forbes
Top AI Degrees That Will Future-Proof Your Career
Artificial intelligence is reshaping our entire economic landscape at a pace that would have seemed impossible just a few years ago. The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development projects the global AI market will soar from $189 billion in 2023 to $4.8 trillion by 2033—a staggering 25-fold increase in just a decade. But here's what makes this revolution different from previous technological shifts: it's not just creating new industries, it's fundamentally changing how almost every industry operates. While about one-third of roles in advanced economies face automation risks, 27% of jobs stand to be enhanced, not eliminated, by AI according to the World Economic Forum. You'd naturally assume that computer science and engineering graduates would be the safest bets in an AI-driven world, right? The latest data from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York tells a more complex story that should make every student and parent reconsider their assumptions. Computer science is actually experiencing unemployment rates well above the national average. Anthropology, physics, and commercial art are showing some of the highest unemployment rates among recent graduates. Meanwhile, majors like nutrition sciences, special education, civil engineering, and nursing are enjoying low unemployment rates, some under 1.5%. This paradox reveals something crucial about our AI-driven future: The most valuable skills aren't always the most obvious ones. The $1.1 trillion annual loss our economy suffers from skills gaps shows a fundamental misalignment between what graduates are prepared for and what the economy actually needs. The following is a list of majors that offer the best combination of opportunity, stability, and AI readiness. Each represents a different pathway into our AI-enhanced future. My recommendation is to pair a technology-driven major with a non-technology driven major to build technical competencies alongside domain expertise. Computer science remains the foundational discipline for AI development, but here's the reality check: despite being at the heart of the AI revolution, computer science graduates are facing unemployment rates above the national average, likely due to AI taking the work of entry level computer science graduates. Facebook has even announced plans for replacing mid-level engineers. The field covers programming languages, algorithms, data structures, software engineering, and increasingly, machine learning and artificial intelligence fundamentals. Students develop critical thinking skills, mathematical reasoning, and the ability to solve complex problems systematically. Who should consider this path? Students who genuinely enjoy problem-solving, have strong analytical skills, and aren't deterred by increased is also wise to choose colleges that are incorporating AI into their curricula This is where the skills gap becomes apparent: employers aren't just looking for programmers anymore. They need computer scientists who can bridge the gap between technical capability and real-world application; who understand both the code and the context in which it operates. Those who combine computer science with domain expertise in healthcare, finance, or other fields are finding significantly better opportunities so I would recommend a double major in computer science and another subject such as systems engineering, business, or healthcare. Data science sits at the intersection of statistics, computer science, and domain expertise, and unlike pure computer science, it's experiencing strong job market performance. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, employment of data scientists is projected to grow 36% from 2023 to 2033, much faster than the average for all occupations. This difference highlights something crucial about the skills gap: employers need people who can bridge technical capability with practical application, not just coding ability. Students learn to extract insights from large datasets using statistical methods, machine learning algorithms, and data visualization techniques. The curriculum typically covers programming in Python and R, statistical analysis, database management, and machine learning. The field develops analytical thinking, statistical reasoning, and crucially, the ability to communicate complex findings to non-technical audiences. This communication component is where many technically skilled graduates fall short, contributing to the skills gap even in high-demand fields. Data science addresses the skills gap by producing graduates who understand both the technical and business sides of AI implementation. Every AI system relies on quality data and proper analysis, but more importantly, it needs people who can translate AI insights into actionable business decisions. Graduates find themselves building datasets that train AI models, developing algorithms that power recommendation systems, and creating analytics frameworks that measure AI system performance. Nursing represents one of the most striking examples of how unemployment data reveals hidden opportunities. With unemployment rates consistently under 1.5%—among the lowest of any field—nursing graduates are entering a market that desperately needs their skills. The curriculum covers anatomy, physiology, pharmacology, patient care, and increasingly, health informatics and AI-powered diagnostic tools. Students develop clinical skills, critical thinking under pressure, empathy, and the ability to make quick decisions with incomplete information. Healthcare transformation through AI-powered diagnostics, predictive analytics, and telehealth technologies requires nurses who understand these tools without losing the human touch. They're the ones ensuring AI recommendations enhance rather than replace clinical judgment, filling a critical role in our AI-enhanced healthcare future. Here's another field where the unemployment data tells a powerful story. Special education and early childhood education majors enjoy unemployment rates well below the national average, often under 2%. This reflects a critical skills gap that AI is actually widening rather than closing—we need more educators who can use AI to personalize learning while maintaining the human connection that makes education effective. The curriculum covers child development, learning theories, classroom management, and increasingly, educational technology and AI-powered personalized learning tools. Students develop patience, creativity, communication skills, and the ability to adapt teaching methods to different learning styles. Aerospace engineering combines complex technical challenges with cutting-edge AI applications. Students learn aerodynamics, propulsion, materials science, and control systems, along with AI-driven autonomous systems and design optimization techniques. The curriculum develops advanced mathematical skills, systems thinking, and the ability to work with incredibly complex, high-stakes projects. Students learn to balance multiple engineering constraints while maintaining absolute precision and safety standards. This field attracts students fascinated by flight and space exploration, who excel in mathematics and physics, and can handle the pressure of working on systems where failure isn't an option. You need attention to detail, strong analytical skills, and the ability to think in three dimensions. AI is revolutionizing aerospace through autonomous flight systems, predictive maintenance, optimized design algorithms, and advanced manufacturing processes. Engineers who understand both traditional aerospace principles and AI applications are developing the next generation of aircraft and spacecraft. Philosophy might seem like an unusual choice for an AI-focused career, especially given that some humanities fields like anthropology are showing higher unemployment rates among recent graduates. However, philosophy represents a different kind of opportunity that addresses a critical gap in AI development that most people don't even realize exists. Students study logic, ethics, critical thinking, and argumentation. The curriculum develops analytical reasoning, ethical decision-making, and the ability to think clearly about complex, abstract problems. Philosophy majors learn to identify assumptions, construct logical arguments, and consider multiple perspectives on difficult questions. The unemployment challenges in some humanities fields often stem from graduates not understanding how to translate their skills into AI-relevant careers. Philosophy graduates who can articulate their value in AI contexts—ethics, logical reasoning, policy development—find significantly better opportunities than those who don't make these connections explicit. This addresses a massive component of the skills gap: as AI systems become more powerful and widespread, we desperately need people who can think clearly about their ethical implications, societal impact, and proper governance. Philosophy graduates are uniquely positioned to work on AI ethics, policy development, and ensuring AI systems align with human values—roles that didn't exist five years ago but are becoming critical. Choosing your degree in an AI-driven world isn't about picking the "safest" option or chasing the highest starting salary. It's about understanding how your interests and strengths can contribute to a world where human and artificial intelligence work together. The most successful professionals will be those who build versatile skill portfolios—combining technical competency with creative thinking, ethical reasoning, and deep domain expertise. They'll be the ones who see AI not as a threat to human capability, but as a tool that amplifies what makes us uniquely human. The AI revolution is just beginning, and the opportunities it creates will go to those prepared not just to use AI, but to shape how it develops and integrates into society. Your degree choice today is your first step into that future.
Arab News
10 hours ago
- Business
- Arab News
In the wake of the WEF's challenges, neutrality and good governance are paramount
Geneva, Switzerland, is a hub for international cooperation. The city has provided a venue for dialogue among governments and nongovernmental organizations alike since the early 20th century, bolstered by critical aspects of the Swiss DNA: neutrality, good governance and a tradition of dialogue for impact and peace. Since its founding in 1971, the World Economic Forum, under the leadership of its founder Klaus Schwab, started as a private foundation and eventually became an official Swiss international organization guided by the mission statement: 'Committed to improving the state of the world.' The WEF and its annual gathering in Davos evolved from a European industrial conclave into the world's most influential event for brand building, networking and addressing the topics of the day among political figures, business leaders, NGOs and the social sector. The WEF today, however, is facing an impasse. As a perceived neutral platform for dialogue, for decades the WEF offered a unique value proposition geopolitically, from the Cold War period through the Middle East peace process and the end of apartheid in South Africa. This neutrality came into question in 2022 following the war in Ukraine. At that point, the WEF followed political pressure from the US, the EU and Switzerland, turning away all stakeholders, political and civilian, from Russia, thereby taking sides in the conflict and stifling dialogue. When asked directly why the Russians were excluded, one WEF representative at the time cited the excuse that 'Russia invaded a sovereign country' as a justification for the WEF's unprecedented political stand. This situation has played itself out historically with the US-UK invasion of Iraq in 2003, when moral justifications regarding human rights violations were used on a selective basis to underscore what was later revealed to be the false pretense of weapons of mass destruction. Moreover, without skipping a beat, the following January, the WEF invited the US and UK governments, their allies and other stakeholders to Davos, despite their invasion of a 'sovereign country.' As a perceived neutral platform for dialogue, for decades the WEF offered a unique value proposition geopolitically. This fault line is one, which, compared to Western countries, counterparts from the Arab Gulf to the BRICS and the Global South have addressed in a more pragmatic way. Instead of focusing solely on the Western, pro-NATO enlargement narrative, they have considered, rightly, their own business and economic interests and interlinked global geopolitics over the principles of so-called sovereignty and invasion. In terms of its own internal governance, the WEF has come under scrutiny in the past few years following a series of journalistic reports, notably from The Wall Street Journal, which started with looking into gender and inclusion policies and which ultimately led to the resignation of the founder. In the last month in particular, several alleged governance questions have emerged about Schwab, his family, the board and select members of the management team. While independent investigations are underway under the eyes of the Swiss authorities, and innocence is presumed until proven otherwise, it is important that these events not neglect a critical aspect: these issues — if true — would not have occurred had proper measures been installed to ensure good governance, checks and balances, and the proper oversight of what is today an official Swiss international organization. According to the bylaws of the WEF, Schwab has the right to appoint his own successor and either he or a member of his immediate family sits on the board of trustees. Schwab will therefore likely continue to pursue his own case and deny the allegations of wrongdoing that have been lodged to protect his own personal reputation and, even more so, his legacy. The authorities and the current board of the WEF may need to find a compromise, including naming him honorary chairman and/or meeting other demands. Serious questions must be addressed about how so many alleged internal issues were allowed to precipitate over an extended period without board members supposedly being aware. Beyond the organizational culture that was variably criticized in the media, it appears as though board members failed to ask the right questions or address issues, as did the regulators, in compliance with Swiss law, which mandates regular audit. The current circumstances should therefore give the WEF pause to pose some of the difficult values-based questions for an organization that is charged with convening the world's elite around the most pressing global challenges. Moreover, the WEF's partners, notably business and wealthy governments, finance its $500 million annual budget. If the WEF is going to continue to accept these financial contributions, it must also be held accountable. Against this backdrop, and at a moment when global leadership is under great scrutiny and redefinition, multistakeholder leaders have options to choose between myriad different events and initiatives for building their influence and collaboration, ranging from the Milken Institute to the Future Investment Initiative. Now is the time, however, for the WEF to revisit its purpose and decide if it will become one of the many hubs for corporate networking and deal-making or if it will stay true to its DNA: serving as a neutral platform, with good governance and focused on real impact. • Khalid Abdulla-Janahi, chairman of Vision3, has over 30 years of experience in banking and financial services.
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Opinion - How corporate America is taking a stand against Trump
In President Trump's first 100 days, institutions from big law firms and Ivy League schools to major drug manufacturers and government contractors have been quick to acquiesce to a range of demands from the administration. Unfortunately, Trump's ire does not stop at our borders, and his demands and actions are increasingly isolating America from the rest of the world. The private sector should not be short-sighted about this. U.S. companies still have the responsibility and opportunity to stand up for American ideals that support economic growth and democracy around the world. The winds of our politics may change, but the relationships and trust of our allies may not be so fickle. Damage today could take decades to rebuild. Happily, a few companies still understand this. Founded 50 years ago by high school friends Bill Gates and Paul Allen, there are few companies as American as Microsoft. Most notably, it has been taking bold steps to challenge Trump. Although the company has many faults — from its constant cybersecurity issues to restrictive licensing practices — it has acted in many ways against the Trump administration. Microsoft's pro-Europe stance took off last month when its president, Brad Smith, announced new European digital commitments to shield European data from the long arm of the Trump administration, even promising to pursue litigation against Trump's Justice Department if needed 'to protect the rights of our customers and other stakeholders.' As the relationship between the United States and Europe has otherwise grown more tense, Microsoft's latest actions have shown that U.S. companies can play a substantial role in preserving the decades-long relationships that underpin Western democracy. For this, it is to be commended. Unlike other major tech companies, Microsoft has resisted Trump's vision for America. This started in the first days of the second Trump term, with Microsoft leaders opting to attend the World Economic Forum in Davos rather than Trump's inauguration. Smith and Satya Nadella may have made the obligatory pilgrimage to Mar-a-Lago like their peers to meet with Trump and Vance before the inauguration, but when asked about their absence, Smith said the company had 'better places' to be. While the company has continuously supported increasing access to 'American AI' and was optimistic about its AI opportunities once Trump was back in office, Microsoft has struck a delicate balance between being supportive of the administration in some areas and not conceding on American values. Smith said in an interview in March that 'we support this administration in many, many areas' but that he's 'probably more worried right now about the business climate in Washington than at any point over the last 30 years.' This is admirable, considering how much Microsoft stands to lose. The company has an 85 percent share of the U.S. public sector's productivity software market and billions of dollars in federal contracts. It is also reportedly under the microscope of a wide-ranging Federal Trade Commission antitrust investigation scrutinizing its software licensing practices and cloud computing business. Other companies would have turned their backs on Europe to curry favor with Trump in an attempt to make their risks go away, yet Microsoft has not. To be clear, Microsoft is not alone. Other notable American institutions are also starting to stand up to the administration. Harvard, for instance, refused Trump's demands and has continued to challenge the administration's recent actions, including filing a lawsuit to halt the freezing of billions of dollars in government funds to the university. Top law firms Jenner and Block and WilmerHale have opposed Trump while some of their contemporaries are offering pro bono services to the administration worth millions — including one that Microsoft ditched as a result before hiring Jenner and Block. Several big corporations are also maintaining their DEI commitments and programs despite recent 'anti-woke' attacks from the White House, including Costco, Apple and Cisco, as well as Microsoft, which said 'diversity and inclusion work is more important than ever.' And after Trump threatened to take action against companies if they raised prices in response to his tariffs, Microsoft did it anyway by increasing the prices of Xbox consoles, controllers and certain games. Proctor and Gamble raised prices by 1 percent in their most recent quarter and announced their intent to sell new products at higher price points moving forward. When Trump was re-elected, many major American businesses were excited by the potential economic opportunities of a transparently quid-pro-quo administration. While some companies have benefited, others — like Meta and Amazon — have not. But there are higher stakes at hand than profit. Now is the time when we learn which institutions are willing to adhere to the principles that have defined America since its founding, as well as the relationships that defined the past century. Those are the ones that deserve our praise — not the institutions that bend the knee. Paul Rosenzweig served as deputy assistant secretary for policy at the Department of Homeland Security. He is a professorial lecturer at The George Washington University Law School and senior fellow in the Tech, Law and Security Program at the American University, Washington College of Law. He advises technology companies on cyber and national security issues, including companies that compete with Microsoft. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hans India
12 hours ago
- Business
- Hans India
Why AI can't replace you: Not anytime soon, anyway
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming industries worldwide, but the fear that it will replace human jobs on a massive scale is overblown. The reality is more nuanced: AI will change how we work, create new job opportunities, and enhance human roles rather than eliminate them entirely. AI Creates More Jobs Than It Replaces According to the World Economic Forum's Future of Jobs Report 2025, AI may displace 85 million jobs globally. However, it is expected to generate 97 million new jobs that blend human skills with AI capabilities. These emerging roles often focus on data analysis, AI support, robotics maintenance, and designing human-centered technologies. This highlights that AI is not just taking jobs—it's also creating them. AI Has Clear Limits While AI excels at routine, repetitive tasks like sorting emails or processing numbers, it struggles with complex decision-making, emotional intelligence, and creativity. Research from Carnegie Mellon University revealed that AI-led companies in simulations often made poor judgments and failed to adapt to real-world challenges. This confirms AI's current inability to replace uniquely human qualities like empathy and common sense. AI as a Collaborative Tool, Not a Replacement In healthcare, AI assists doctors by organizing data, scheduling, and analyzing test results—freeing up time for patient care. Similarly, businesses use AI to improve customer service efficiency and reduce paperwork, but human intervention remains vital for handling complex issues and personal interactions. AI works best as a support system, augmenting rather than replacing people. New Work Models and Changing Roles Some companies are hiring freelancers to work alongside AI tools, creating hybrid jobs that leverage human strengths in areas like creativity, problem-solving, and emotional connection. Entry-level jobs involving simple coding or data checking may shrink, but employers increasingly seek adaptable workers who excel in teamwork and flexible thinking. The Importance of Reskilling To thrive in the AI-driven workplace, continuous learning is essential. Educational institutions are updating curricula to include AI literacy, critical thinking, and digital skills. Preparing workers to use AI tools effectively will open doors to the new jobs AI creates. AI Helps Address Workforce Shortages In sectors like healthcare and customer service, AI fills gaps caused by labor shortages. Chatbots handle routine inquiries, and management software streamlines data tasks, allowing human workers to focus on meaningful, complex work. Human Skills Remain Irreplaceable Jobs requiring empathy, leadership, creativity, and trust-building—such as teachers, nurses, managers, designers, and counselors—are safe from AI takeover. These roles depend on the human touch that AI cannot replicate. The Future: Humans and AI Working Together The future workplace will emphasize teamwork between humans and AI. While AI handles speed and routine tasks, humans bring emotion, judgment, and creativity. This partnership can improve business efficiency, service quality, and reduce worker stress, but it demands openness to new skills and ways of working. AI is not here to steal jobs—it's a powerful tool changing how work is done. Some jobs will disappear, but more new roles will arise. Staying flexible, learning continuously, and embracing AI as an ally will unlock future opportunities. The real risk is not technology itself, but being unprepared for the changes it brings. With the right mindset and skills, the evolving world of work holds great promise for both humans and machines.
The Hill
16 hours ago
- Business
- The Hill
How corporate America is taking a stand against Trump
In President Trump's first 100 days, institutions from big law firms and Ivy League schools to major drug manufacturers and government contractors have been quick to acquiesce to a range of demands from the administration. Unfortunately, Trump's ire does not stop at our borders, and his demands and actions are increasingly isolating America from the rest of the world. The private sector should not be short-sighted about this. U.S. companies still have the responsibility and opportunity to stand up for American ideals that support economic growth and democracy around the world. The winds of our politics may change, but the relationships and trust of our allies may not be so fickle. Damage today could take decades to rebuild. Happily, a few companies still understand this. Founded 50 years ago by high school friends Bill Gates and Paul Allen, there are few companies as American as Microsoft. Most notably, it has been taking bold steps to challenge Trump. Although the company has many faults — from its constant cybersecurity issues to restrictive licensing practices — it has acted in many ways against the Trump administration. Microsoft's pro-Europe stance took off last month when its president, Brad Smith, announced new European digital commitments to shield European data from the long arm of the Trump administration, even promising to pursue litigation against Trump's Justice Department if needed 'to protect the rights of our customers and other stakeholders.' As the relationship between the United States and Europe has otherwise grown more tense, Microsoft's latest actions have shown that U.S. companies can play a substantial role in preserving the decades-long relationships that underpin Western democracy. For this, it is to be commended. Unlike other major tech companies, Microsoft has resisted Trump's vision for America. This started in the first days of the second Trump term, with Microsoft leaders opting to attend the World Economic Forum in Davos rather than Trump's inauguration. Smith and Satya Nadella may have made the obligatory pilgrimage to Mar-a-Lago like their peers to meet with Trump and Vance before the inauguration, but when asked about their absence, Smith said the company had 'better places' to be. While the company has continuously supported increasing access to 'American AI' and was optimistic about its AI opportunities once Trump was back in office, Microsoft has struck a delicate balance between being supportive of the administration in some areas and not conceding on American values. Smith said in an interview in March that 'we support this administration in many, many areas' but that he's 'probably more worried right now about the business climate in Washington than at any point over the last 30 years.' This is admirable, considering how much Microsoft stands to lose. The company has an 85 percent share of the U.S. public sector's productivity software market and billions of dollars in federal contracts. It is also reportedly under the microscope of a wide-ranging Federal Trade Commission antitrust investigation scrutinizing its software licensing practices and cloud computing business. Other companies would have turned their backs on Europe to curry favor with Trump in an attempt to make their risks go away, yet Microsoft has not. To be clear, Microsoft is not alone. Other notable American institutions are also starting to stand up to the administration. Harvard, for instance, refused Trump's demands and has continued to challenge the administration's recent actions, including filing a lawsuit to halt the freezing of billions of dollars in government funds to the university. Top law firms Jenner and Block and WilmerHale have opposed Trump while some of their contemporaries are offering pro bono services to the administration worth millions — including one that Microsoft ditched as a result before hiring Jenner and Block. Several big corporations are also maintaining their DEI commitments and programs despite recent 'anti-woke' attacks from the White House, including Costco, Apple and Cisco, as well as Microsoft, which said 'diversity and inclusion work is more important than ever.' And after Trump threatened to take action against companies if they raised prices in response to his tariffs, Microsoft did it anyway by increasing the prices of Xbox consoles, controllers and certain games. Proctor and Gamble raised prices by 1 percent in their most recent quarter and announced their intent to sell new products at higher price points moving forward. When Trump was re-elected, many major American businesses were excited by the potential economic opportunities of a transparently quid-pro-quo administration. While some companies have benefited, others — like Meta and Amazon — have not. But there are higher stakes at hand than profit. Now is the time when we learn which institutions are willing to adhere to the principles that have defined America since its founding, as well as the relationships that defined the past century. Those are the ones that deserve our praise — not the institutions that bend the knee. Paul Rosenzweig served as deputy assistant secretary for policy at the Department of Homeland Security. He is a professorial lecturer at The George Washington University Law School and senior fellow in the Tech, Law and Security Program at the American University, Washington College of Law. He advises technology companies on cyber and national security issues, including companies that compete with Microsoft.
