We added six professions to automatable.me this week that had never been assessed before: Health Data Scientist, Instructional Designer, IT Strategy Manager, Police Officer, Startup, and Tennis Coach. That's a 1.4% bump to our total profession count in a single week—and it raises a question worth sitting with: what's driving people to check *these* roles?
The list is wonderfully dissonant. You'd expect tech roles (IT Strategy Manager, Data Scientist). But Tennis Coach and Police Officer suggest something less obvious: people are curious about whether AI can touch work that feels fundamentally human—coaching bodies, enforcing law, teaching. That's not a marker of danger or inevitability. It's people doing exactly what they should: stress-testing their own understanding of where AI actually fits. Our effective exposure score this period was 29%—one point above average—which suggests these newly mapped roles aren't uniformly more or less automatable than the baseline. They're just different.
A word on the data: we're still early. Only 19 real assessments this week from a growing base of 183 total. Most of our profile library is still synthetic seed data. But that thinness is honest. It means we can't claim to know much about Health Data Scientist workflows yet—only that someone wanted to understand one. What we can say: the geographic and sectoral spread is genuinely mixed, not concentrated in tech or finance.
If your role isn't on automatable.me yet, that gap might say something useful. Are you not finding it because it's too niche? Because you haven't thought to ask? Or because it feels too human-dependent to even worry about?