If any of you happen to be Jeopardy! fans, then you'll know that computers are capable of answering questions posed in natural language, and come up with answers faster and more accurately than any mere human could do it.
And I've noticed that the people who invest in this type of technology always seem to dispel concern that advances in technology would replace any existing workers, saying it simply would "support" existing staff in order to perform their duties more efficiently.
Yet, the people who market these technologies always seem to highlight the advantages of replacing "less efficient" and "more costly" human workers as a selling point.
So, who do you believe? Are you drinking their Kool-Aid, or are you able to think for yourself?
Given time, I can't see any reason why these two technologies couldn't be incorporated to provide the advisory services traditionally provided by a pharmacist, and replace us. And considering the costs of pharmacists' salaries and benefits, this type of technology would pay for itself very quickly.
Source: AVA the Virtual Assistant