“AI won’t take your jobs, but humans using AI will.”
“AI is not about replacing humans; it’s about letting humans focus on higher-order work that matters.”
These are all euphemisms for AI will take your job. It’s just wrapped differently so nobody panics. It’s comfy to not address the elephant in the room right away after all.
Here’s the thing: there’s always a hierarchy in the work we do. What was “higher-order” work 50 years ago is “inefficient” work today. The same will happen in an AI augmented — empowering for some, for sure — world. There will always be work people won’t want to do. That’s just logically human.
And why do we keep saying AI will help humans focus on “work that matters”? Who decides what matters? If your work supposedly doesn’t matter today, you’re the one who’ll be gone. Poof! Then one might say: “if they start using AI, they’ll grow and thrive.” Sure! But the market can only absorb so much (talent) supply at once.
Okay, maybe I’ll be optimistic. 3-10 years down the line, all this AI augmentation might open new avenues via scientific and technological progress. But what about the interim? Everyone’s jumping on the AI upskilling band. Will the market be able to utilise them? And if everyone is on an upskilling trajectory, everybody is doing more on their own. Why would they spend money hiring another human? Another is the key word FYI.
I’m sure all of you know this already. We’re just clinging to that string of optimism, thinking, “Hopefully I’ll be fine.”
——
PS: If this crux doesn’t resonate, it’d be wise to reflect on how your workflows changed over the last couple of years. And then, extrapolate :)
“AI is not about replacing humans; it’s about letting humans focus on higher-order work that matters.”
These are all euphemisms for AI will take your job. It’s just wrapped differently so nobody panics. It’s comfy to not address the elephant in the room right away after all.
Here’s the thing: there’s always a hierarchy in the work we do. What was “higher-order” work 50 years ago is “inefficient” work today. The same will happen in an AI augmented — empowering for some, for sure — world. There will always be work people won’t want to do. That’s just logically human.
And why do we keep saying AI will help humans focus on “work that matters”? Who decides what matters? If your work supposedly doesn’t matter today, you’re the one who’ll be gone. Poof! Then one might say: “if they start using AI, they’ll grow and thrive.” Sure! But the market can only absorb so much (talent) supply at once.
Okay, maybe I’ll be optimistic. 3-10 years down the line, all this AI augmentation might open new avenues via scientific and technological progress. But what about the interim? Everyone’s jumping on the AI upskilling band. Will the market be able to utilise them? And if everyone is on an upskilling trajectory, everybody is doing more on their own. Why would they spend money hiring another human? Another is the key word FYI.
I’m sure all of you know this already. We’re just clinging to that string of optimism, thinking, “Hopefully I’ll be fine.”
——
PS: If this crux doesn’t resonate, it’d be wise to reflect on how your workflows changed over the last couple of years. And then, extrapolate :)
Best,
Ronit
Ronit