변호사들

낮은 위험
29%
다음으로 어디로 가고 싶으신가요?
결과를 친구 및 가족과 공유하세요.
투표 댓글 (202)
또는, 이 직업을 더 자세히 탐구해보세요...
자동화 위험
계산된
23%
(낮은 위험)
투표 조사
34%
(낮은 위험)
Average: 29%
노동 수요
성장
5.2%
년도별 2033
임금
$145,760
또는 시간당 $70.07
볼륨
731,340
2023 기준으로
요약
직업 점수
7.7/10

사람들이 또한 조회했습니다

계산된 자동화 위험

23% (낮은 위험)

저위험 (21-40%): 이 수준의 직업은 기술적인 능력과 인간 중심의 기술을 모두 요구하기 때문에 자동화 위험이 제한적입니다.

이 점수가 무엇인지, 그리고 어떻게 계산되는지에 대한 자세한 정보는 여기에 있습니다.

일부 매우 중요한 직무 특성은 자동화하기 어렵습니다:

  • 협상

  • 설득

일부 중요한 직무 특성은 자동화하기 어렵습니다:

  • 사회적 인식력

  • 독창성

사용자 설문조사

다음 두 십년 안에 완전 자동화될 34%의 확률

우리의 방문자들은 이 직업이 자동화될 가능성이 낮다고 투표했습니다. 이 평가는 계산된 자동화 위험 수준에 의해 더욱 지지받고 있으며, 이는 자동화의 23% 확률을 추정합니다.

자동화의 위험성에 대해 어떻게 생각하십니까?

변호사들이 다음 20년 이내에 로봇이나 인공지능에 의해 대체될 가능성은 얼마나 됩니까?






감정

다음 그래프는 의미 있는 데이터를 제공할 수 있을 만큼 충분한 투표 수가 있을 때마다 포함됩니다. 이러한 시각적 표현은 시간 경과에 따른 사용자 투표 결과를 보여주며, 감정 추세에 대한 중요한 지표를 제공합니다.

시간에 따른 감정 (분기별)

시간별 감정 (연간)

성장

다른 직업에 비해 빠른 성장

'Lawyers' 직업 분야의 공석은 2033년까지 5.2% 증가할 것으로 예상됩니다.

총 고용량 및 예상 직업 공석

* 2021년부터 2031년까지의 기간에 대한 노동통계국의 데이터
업데이트된 예상치가 09-2024에 제출될 예정입니다..

임금

다른 직업에 비해 매우 높은 급여를 받는다.

2023년에 'Lawyers'의 중앙값 연간 급여는 $145,760이며, 시간당 $70입니다.

'Lawyers'은 전국 중위임금인 $48,060보다 203.3% 더 높은 금액을 지불받았습니다.

시간에 따른 임금

* 노동통계국의 데이터

볼륨

다른 직업에 비해 훨씬 더 많은 직업 기회 범위

2023년 현재, 미국 내에서 'Lawyers'로 고용된 사람들의 수는 731,340명이었습니다.

이는 전국의 고용 노동력 중 약 0.48%를 대표합니다.

다시 말해, 약 207명 중 1명이 'Lawyers'로 고용되어 있습니다.

직무 설명

범죄 및 민사 소송 그리고 기타 법적 절차에서 클라이언트를 대리하고, 법적 문서를 작성하거나, 클라이언트가 법적 거래에 대해 관리하거나 조언을 제공합니다. 특정 영역에 전문화되거나 법의 여러 분야에서 폭넓게 실무를 수행할 수 있습니다.

SOC Code: 23-1011.00

자원

새로운 커리어를 시작하려고 생각하거나 직장을 바꾸려는 계획이 있다면, 우리가 만든 편리한 채용 검색 도구를 사용해보세요. 이 도구를 통해 완벽한 새로운 역할을 찾을 수 있을지도 모릅니다.

당신의 지역에서 일자리를 검색하세요

댓글

Leave a comment

Dariuosh (매우 가능성이 높음) 30 days ago
Given that artificial intelligence has been used in some countries to advocate in divorce cases, it is expected that this profession will disappear in the next 20 years
0 4 Reply
Sean (매우 가능성이 높음) 2 months ago
It's already happening. I'm an intern at a BigLaw company and all of our procedural and contractual people are already using AI and kinda concerned about it. The only part that won't be automated is litigation, but most cases are settled out of court so...
1 5 Reply
Marty (기회 없음) 2 months ago
Not only does AI struggle to instantiate legal reasoning in reality, but on principle, it is a terrible idea to offload interpretation and reasoning to computers when it is about abstract concepts that govern the practical lives of human beings.
4 1 Reply
Mannara (매우 가능성이 높음) 2 months ago
If the rules become easily categorized also connected, and we can simplify the situations, and the goal is not to find verity and justice, but just simply "rights" and economic goals, we can cut out the people to judge and AI can do it.
1 4 Reply
Marty 2 months ago
Nah, we don't want computers interpreting and arguing laws that govern human beings. Never. They can help with the tedium though.
5 2 Reply
Meriem Makri (기회 없음) 3 months ago
New regulations are introduced daily, so the machines need to be updated regularly. Justice is not a field that can be easily automated because the profile of each individual seeking justice varies greatly, as do the ways in which the law is applied (such as mitigating circumstances, etc.).
5 1 Reply
Person (적당한) 3 months ago
when analising details it can easily make a story, who cares how it is phrased if everyone agrees it makes sense
0 0 Reply
John (기회 없음) 3 months ago
It requires nuanced opinion-formation and decision-making skills that cannot be replicated by a program. Not to mention, depending on the field, it may involve gut instinct and other talents which only humans have.
3 1 Reply
Jude Jordan 4 months ago
Lawyers will not be replaced by AI for a while because, regardless of how capable AI actually is in technical, ethical, and reasoning aspects, the people who will write into law and decide whether or not AI should be able to serve as lawyers, are themselves lawyers. The giant law industry as it is, will never allow for AI to legally serve as lawyers in the foreseeable future.
8 1 Reply
Bigmonkey123 (낮은) 4 months ago
I think the puplic won’t really want a robot defending them
6 1 Reply
J 4 months ago
I worked in the job, and robots are nicer than many humans. And even professional receptionists.

They'll do less errors, and don't require sleep. No more receptionist that is away. Longer opening hours.

Why do you say robots have no empathy, you fillthy racist? They have it. Robots would probably beat you up.
1 12 Reply
'fillthy' racist, apparently 4 months ago
Robots have programmed empathy. They don't actually feel it, because it is a robot (could you guess?).
Not that I'd expect someone who doesn't even know the definition of 'racist' and just flings the word around however would know what empathy is...
And besides, you never even addressed what they said. They didn't even bring up empathy, as their point was about people not wanting a robot to defend them. You've brought up a completely nonsensical rebuttal to an argument that doesn't exist.
5 1 Reply
jim jim (적당한) 4 months ago
AI will know and understand the law better than any human could.
5 10 Reply
J (기회 없음) 4 months ago
Being a lawyer requires understanding emotion, being able to improvise, and thinking out of the box.

These are the tasks that robots won't be able to fulfill for at least a decade from now.
6 1 Reply
J (기회 없음) 4 months ago
Being a lawyer requires understanding emotion, being able to improvise, and thinking out of the box.

These are the tasks that robots won't be able to fulfill for at least a decade from now.
3 0 Reply
AIPredictor (낮은) 4 months ago
It is a low chance that a lawyer's job would be replaced by robots because of the fact that AI lacks the fundamental arguing skills and the "human" perspective into the side of things. An example of this would be if a lawyer is defending a client by saying the statement, "What would you do in this situation" and working your way up to it was the best decision they could have made. Also the robot lawyers would have to base their arguments off of data, which would mean their own lawyer would turn against them if having more proof for the other side
4 1 Reply
ez (낮은) 4 months ago
this job requires skills like persuasion, originality, social perceptiveness, and more, which make it hard to automate.
4 0 Reply
Daddy Dirtbag (기회 없음) 5 months ago
Robots would be way less convincing
4 0 Reply
James (낮은) 5 months ago
Lawyers are one of few occupations that require persuasivness to be good at your job. An AI cannot immitate human persuasivness unless it is made to be socially and mentally aware. This is a very unlikely scenario as it would come with big risk factors.
2 1 Reply
Niran (기회 없음) 5 months ago
Persuading a robot is impossible, or persuading as a robot.
2 1 Reply
shyla acharya (기회 없음) 5 months ago
No, I do not believe that lawyers would atleast in the next 20 years have any such automation risk, reason being that this occupation requires multiple human centric skills, which are inherent to human beings. While certain aspects of this profession can be polished through automated assistance but full automation seems imposible as of now.
2 1 Reply
jesiah! (낮은) 5 months ago
the job requires way too much complicated thinking for ai to completely over take it
2 1 Reply
Jorge Ruiz (매우 가능성이 높음) 6 months ago
Most of the time, you contact a lawyer for small cases, when you need quick and effective legal advice. For these cases, a trained AI system will be just fine.
1 0 Reply
a 5 months ago
no way. honestly it would take time to develop technology to that level, especially with the quick thinking and if something doesn't go their way or what they were programmed.
2 1 Reply

이 직업에 대한 답글을 남겨주세요.

이 사이트는 reCAPTCHA와 Google 개인정보처리방침서비스 이용약관에 의해 보호됩니다.