Podiumsdiskussion: Arbeit nach der Automatisierung
Press play and listen as many times as you like — the transcript appears once you check your answers.
C2.2 · 24 of 34
Hören: Podiumsdiskussion (Capstone)
Lesson · 4 rules · about 4 min
Folge einer Podiumsdiskussion mit vier Stimmen über KI und Arbeitsplätze und halte die wirkliche Position jeder Person samt dem Kleingedruckten fest.
- 1Der Skeptiker: nicht X an sich, sondern Y
- 2Die Optimistinnen: vorausgesetzt / sofern / unter einer Bedingung
- 3Einräumung + aber: einräumen, dann widersprechen
- 4Das letzte Wort der Moderatorin: Zusammenfassung + offene Frage + Ausblick
Why this matters
Die abschließende Hörübung: eine Podiumsdiskussion zur Frage „Bedroht künstliche Intelligenz unsere Arbeitsplätze?“, einmal gehört. Vier Stimmen: die Moderatorin; Martin Weber, ein Soziologe, der als Skeptiker vorgestellt wird und seine Position mit „nicht … an sich, sondern …“ eingrenzt (das Tempo, nicht die Technik); Katrin Söll, Unternehmerin und Optimistin unter Vorbehalt („unter einer Bedingung: vorausgesetzt …“); und Selin Kaya, Betriebsrätin, die mit „sofern“ eine zweite Bedingung anfügt und ein konkretes Gegenbeispiel aus ihrer eigenen Firma bringt. Die Moderatorin schließt, indem sie zusammenfasst, worin sich die Runde einig ist, und darauf hinweist, was offen geblieben ist. Die acht Fragen wollen wissen, wer welche Position vertritt, mit welcher Einschränkung und warum. Notier dir also jede Behauptung zusammen mit ihrer Einschränkung (an sich, nur bedingt, durchaus, nicht für ein Allheilmittel), sobald sie kommt, und bleib bis zum letzten Satz aufmerksam.
Translation
Moderator: Good evening and a warm welcome to our panel discussion "Work after automation". The question of the evening is: does artificial intelligence threaten our jobs? With me are the sociologist Martin Weber, the entrepreneur Katrin Söll and Selin Kaya, works council member at a large insurance group. Mr Weber, you are regarded as a sceptic. Rightly? Weber: The label is a bit too crude for me. It is not the technology as such that worries me, but the pace at which it is upending entire sectors. The steam engine took decades to become established; people could retrain, and their children could take up different occupations from their parents. Today a job profile changes within two or three years. Someone who is a clerk at fifty simply does not have that time. Moderator: Ms Söll, in your company software already checks invoices and answers customer enquiries. Do you share this concern? Söll: I understand it, but I share it only to a limited extent. So far every technological upheaval has in the end created more work than it destroyed – history shows that fairly clearly. So I am certainly optimistic, but on one condition: provided companies and the state invest in further training in good time, that is, before the jobs disappear, not afterwards. With us nobody has lost their job, because we trained people two years in advance. Kaya: I have to cut in there. That sounds wonderful in a firm with three hundred employees. In our group not a single dismissal was issued last year, but positions that fall vacant are simply no longer filled. The work disappears quietly, and no loser shows up in any statistics. Moderator: You mean the change is already here, it just can’t be seen? Kaya: Exactly. And I don’t consider further training a cure-all. It only helps if in the end there are also jobs to train for. Otherwise we are training people for jobs that don’t exist. Weber: That is the point I was getting at. The question is not whether enough work is created overall, but where and for whom. The new jobs rarely appear where the old ones disappear. Söll: I don’t dispute that at all. But it doesn’t follow that we should slow the technology down. What follows is that we must organise the transition better. Moderator: Unfortunately we have to come to an end here. Let me sum up: you agree that it is less about the technology itself than about the transition. What remains open is the question of who pays for this transition – companies, the state or the employees themselves. That is exactly what we will discuss in four weeks, then with representatives of the employment agency and the employers’ associations. Many thanks to the three of you and to all of you for listening.
Report a problem
Exercise
Hören: Podiumsdiskussion (Capstone) · C2.2
No single question is on screen — the report is about the whole exercise.
Reports go to the forum, where anyone can read them and the answer is kept for the next learner. To send one — and to be told when it is answered — sign in first. It takes one email, and no password.
Signing in lets us reply to your report, and shows you the answer the next time you are here. We email you a one-time link: no password, and nothing is shared with anyone.