When people ask me what artificial intelligence is going to do to jobs, they’re usually hoping for a clean answer: catastrophe or overhype, mass unemployment or business as usual. What I found after months of reporting is that the truth is harder to pin down—and that our difficulty predicting it may be the most important part of

https://web.archive.org/web/20260210152051/www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/03/ai-economy-labor-market-transformation/685731/

In 1869, a group of Massachusetts reformers persuaded the state to try a simple idea: counting.

The Second Industrial Revolution was belching its way through New England, teaching mill and factory owners a lesson most M.B.A. students now learn in their first semester: that efficiency gains tend to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is usually somebody else. The new machines weren’t just spinning cotton or shaping steel. They were operating at speeds that the human body—an elegant piece of engineering designed over millions of years for entirely different purposes—simply wasn’t built to match. The owners knew this, just as they knew that there’s a limit to how much misery people are willing to tolerate before they start setting fire to things.

Still, the machines pressed on.

  • Kairos@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 hours ago

    There are gobs of money to be made selling enterprise software, but dulling the impact of AI is also a useful feint. This is a technology that can digest a hundred reports before you’ve finished your coffee, draft and analyze documents faster than teams of paralegals, compose music indistinguishable from the genius of a pop star or a Juilliard grad, code—really code, not just copy-paste from Stack Overflow—with the precision of a top engineer. Tasks that once required skill, judgment, and years of training are now being executed, relentlessly and indifferently, by software that learns as it goes.

    Literally not true.

    It can’t “analyze” documents. There’s no thinking involved with these machines. It outputs the statistically most likely thing that looks like analysis.

    And it’s not even close as good as the top engineer. If it was there would be no engineers TODAY.

    • criss_cross@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 minutes ago

      This is why I get so frustrated when people demand I integrate this stuff into every workflow. It’s not thinking at all. It’s just regurgitating text based on input and hoping for the best.

    • forrgott@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      11 hours ago

      And let’s not forget the asinine claim about music composition. Yeah, this is a bullshit fluff piece to keep attention on AI.

      • XLE@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Could AI blow up the world tomorrow? Who knows! The future is unpredictable, so it’s basically a 50-50, right? /s

    • dparticiple@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      12 hours ago

      LodeMike, I’m curious about something. What’s the latest set of AI models and tools you’ve used personally? Have you used Opus 4.5 or 4.6, for instance?

      I am not disagreeing with the points you’ve made, but it’s been my experience that the increase in capabilities over the last six months has been so rapid that it’s hard to realistically evaluate what the current frontier models are capable of unless you’ve uused them meaningfully and with some frequency.

      I’d welcome your perspective.

      • Kairos@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        12 hours ago

        Opus like the audio codec?

        I use the GPT mini or similar models