> While I acknowledge not all job postings result in a hire, and some are ‘ghost jobs’, since I was comparing the relative growth in job titles, this didn’t seem like a big issue to me.

Uhhh... That's a very big issue. In addition, there is also a glaringly obvious analysis error here related to layoffs/attrition.

No offence but is this analysis vibe analyzed or something?

All this is actually measuring is how the number of job listings in a specific industry have changed globally. That's not the same thing as "what jobs AI is replacing" at all!

Like nurses decreasing 11%. There is 0% chance that AI is disrupting nurses. If anything, nursing is probably in more demand due to continual aging. It might just be that fewer people are quitting because of covid being over. The total number of nurses might be going up still!

Are we just upvoting anything with AI in the title now? HN used to be pretty respectful of scientific methods. The methodology section here just reads like personal resume filler for showing that you can use AI. I mean I get it and I admire the hustle, but the quality here is pretty lacking overall. https://bloomberry.com/blog/i-analyzed-180m-jobs-to-see-what...