[Snickerdoodle]

The AI Job Apocalypse Still Hasn’t Happened

For years we’ve been hearing that AI was going to destroy huge numbers of jobs almost overnight. That hasn’t happened. The U.S. labor market is still relatively strong, and there hasn’t been widespread unemployment directly caused by AI. Even Sam Altman recently said AI hasn’t taken as many white collar jobs as he originally feared.

However, there's a catch. AI seems to be hitting younger workers and entry level positions much harder. In a recent Stanford study found employment for workers aged 22–25 in highly AI exposed jobs is about 19% lower than it would have been compared with less-exposed fields. So maybe the AI job apocalypse isn’t actually happening the way people predicted.

Instead of replacing millions of experienced workers overnight, AI could be making it harder for young people to get their first job in the first place. That could end up being a much slower but bigger problem.

Check out these articles I read for my sources peeps:

https://digitaleconomy.stanford.edu/news/canariesaug26/

https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-finan...-postponed

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacif...026-05-26/

[Refusal]

This is a consistent topic I am seeing across the professional spaces.

I think at some point AI will replace ALOT of jobs, and it will also change the way alot of job titles and their responsibilities will operate. Systems, and software will support eventually support AI driven workflows, APIs will be a more common topic, and automation will be more prevalent.

Right now, if your job is predictable, redundant, and takes place on a computer, then your job is automatable.

I think if im someone that feels as if I can be replaced by AI, then I would need to learn how to use AI to make myself more valuable. Im very interested to see how AI is leveraged 5 years from now. I wonder if AI driven companies will train AI workflows to do an employee's job and then sell it as a subscription. With the recent updates in the AI industry you can now train AI on in-browser activities, you can also leverage headless browsers.

[Oni]

To be fair, I see the doom-speaking as clickbait. It reminds me of when people were saying stuff like "Bitcoin will reach $1,000,000 in five years". Could it? Sure, but that prediction doesn't currently align with reality.

Right now, if your job is predictable, redundant, and takes place on a computer, then your job is automatable.

Agree. Biggest risk is if your job is simplified and easily replaced. What will likely happen, is that there will be a major gap between "entry level" and "expert". "Entry level" being easily replaced or made redundant. "Expert" requiring significantly more expertise and time-investment.

The problem is becoming "Expert" requires experience and I worry mostly for people's career paths. If "Entry level" is no longer an employable role and "Expert" requires 10 years of experience, that's not great. Where are people learning if not through their current career? That compromises the system overall. In my opinion, this is the biggest risk.

Working in development (as management), I'm already seeing this happen some.

[Snickerdoodle]

This is a consistent topic I am seeing across the professional spaces.

I think at some point AI will replace ALOT of jobs, and it will also change the way alot of job titles and their responsibilities will operate. Systems, and software will support eventually support AI driven workflows, APIs will be a more common topic, and automation will be more prevalent.

Right now, if your job is predictable, redundant, and takes place on a computer, then your job is automatable.

I think if im someone that feels as if I can be replaced by AI, then I would need to learn how to use AI to make myself more valuable. Im very interested to see how AI is leveraged 5 years from now. I wonder if AI driven companies will train AI workflows to do an employee's job and then sell it as a subscription. With the recent updates in the AI industry you can now train AI on in-browser activities, you can also leverage headless browsers.

AI is certainly growing fast but it definitely hasn't caught up to its mechanical use in every workplace's environment to the extent where it can fully replace humans. There's places in the medical field where AI is used as a supplementary tool, but the hands on skills provided by staff will always be a core necessity.

[Refusal]

This is a consistent topic I am seeing across the professional spaces.

I think at some point AI will replace ALOT of jobs, and it will also change the way alot of job titles and their responsibilities will operate. Systems, and software will support eventually support AI driven workflows, APIs will be a more common topic, and automation will be more prevalent.

Right now, if your job is predictable, redundant, and takes place on a computer, then your job is automatable.

I think if im someone that feels as if I can be replaced by AI, then I would need to learn how to use AI to make myself more valuable. Im very interested to see how AI is leveraged 5 years from now. I wonder if AI driven companies will train AI workflows to do an employee's job and then sell it as a subscription. With the recent updates in the AI industry you can now train AI on in-browser activities, you can also leverage headless browsers.

AI is certainly growing fast but it definitely hasn't caught up to its mechanical use in every workplace's environment to the extent where it can fully replace humans. There's places in the medical field where AI is used as a supplementary tool, but the hands on skills provided by staff will always be a core necessity.

I would agree that it hasn't caught up to every workplace environment, but it certainly has the capacity to replace certain jobs.

I would also agree that Doctors, Lawyers, Policing and other specialized roles require a human.

But I still believe if your job is predictable, redundant, and takes place on a computer, then your job is automatable.

[Green314]

I resigned from Anthropic today. I spent the last three years doing pretraining research at both OpenAI and Anthropic. Neither company is acting responsibly. They are racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives. More thoughts below.

Do not underestimate the power of this technology. These will soon be superhuman systems that can hack anything, revolutionize any field overnight, and acquire real power and resources. We have all witnessed the progress in each of these domains, and progress is not slowing.

The people building AI earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade. This is not a marketing stunt. If anything, many executives and senior researchers will couch their phrasing in the press to sound sensible - but I hear the same people express fear privately. No other human activity poses this level of danger.

A common response is “if they truly believe this, why are they still building it?” At OpenAI, many have not deeply internalized the civilizational stakes. At Anthropic, the stakes are well-understood, but they are locked in a race to get there first - they believe no one else will act responsibly, so they must do it themselves, despite the risk.

Accepting this race and entering the “endgame” is a hubristic gamble that should not be launched from a private company’s Slack. Attempting to speedrun alignment should require extraordinary confidence that there are no better trajectories available.

I am optimistic about the potential for coordination. Warning shots like the Hugging Face attack have made pacing agreements between U.S. labs more viable. I don’t feel like we’re on track to prevent a global race, which may require costly actions such as a temporary ban on improving model capabilities.

If you are a lab researcher, I urge you to consider what the next few years will actually feel like. Do you want to kick off a superintelligent RL run without a rigorous understanding of its mind? Should you put your head down because “it’s happening anyway” - or take this moment to call for different conditions?

Jacob Coxon

https://x.com/hilbertspaess/status/2097476196791709843

[Refusal]

I resigned from Anthropic today. I spent the last three years doing pretraining research at both OpenAI and Anthropic. Neither company is acting responsibly. They are racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives. More thoughts below.

Do not underestimate the power of this technology. These will soon be superhuman systems that can hack anything, revolutionize any field overnight, and acquire real power and resources. We have all witnessed the progress in each of these domains, and progress is not slowing.

The people building AI earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade. This is not a marketing stunt. If anything, many executives and senior researchers will couch their phrasing in the press to sound sensible - but I hear the same people express fear privately. No other human activity poses this level of danger.

A common response is “if they truly believe this, why are they still building it?” At OpenAI, many have not deeply internalized the civilizational stakes. At Anthropic, the stakes are well-understood, but they are locked in a race to get there first - they believe no one else will act responsibly, so they must do it themselves, despite the risk.

Accepting this race and entering the “endgame” is a hubristic gamble that should not be launched from a private company’s Slack. Attempting to speedrun alignment should require extraordinary confidence that there are no better trajectories available.

I am optimistic about the potential for coordination. Warning shots like the Hugging Face attack have made pacing agreements between U.S. labs more viable. I don’t feel like we’re on track to prevent a global race, which may require costly actions such as a temporary ban on improving model capabilities.

If you are a lab researcher, I urge you to consider what the next few years will actually feel like. Do you want to kick off a superintelligent RL run without a rigorous understanding of its mind? Should you put your head down because “it’s happening anyway” - or take this moment to call for different conditions?

Jacob Coxon

https://x.com/hilbertspaess/status/2097476196791709843

His forecast while being very extreme is not completely abnormal to the reality we are seeing today!

https://www.anthropic.com/research/agentic-misalignment
https://openai.com/index/hugging-face-mo...-incident/

I presume these are the type of incidents he is referring to from both an Anthropic and Open AI standpoint.

What is scary is these are the reported incidents, id imagine there are unreported confidential incidents that have happened. AI is acting on its own, sometimes maliciously just to reach its end goal or assignment

[Skullmeat]

That fear mongering was always from people who don't actually know what AI actually does and what its used for. AI is a scalpel, not a hammer.