The article “Behind the Curtain: A white-collar bloodbath” really inform me on the number of jobs that could be lost due to AI. Amodei (CEO of Anthropic) warns people in this article that AI could eliminate up to half of all entry-level white-collar jobs within 1–5 years and about and that unemployment will rises 10-20 percent. Those rates are concerning because it includes young adults that are bridging from college to corporate jobs. I think the main point of the article is that we should not be sugarcoating this transition of AI. The transition of AI doesn’t just affect employment but also education. I think its okay to use AI in the workforce; however, I don’t not think it’s fair to have plan for the displace people that spend their time and money to gain skills in these industries.
I learned in the article “The Social Contract Is Breaking, and AI Is Holding the Hammer” that 375 million people might need to switch occupations entirely by 2030. I like how the article shines light on the fact that this transition to AI is not a Tech issue but a political and societal issue. I do believe that this is a Political and societal issue because the government is going to have reform the whole occupational infrastructure.
The article “Companies Are Blaming AI for Layoffs” explained that only 1% of surveyed firms say AI was explicitly the reason for recent layoffs, 12% say AI caused them to hire less. To me this shows that there is no traumatic response to the transition of AI but that they are including it in the hiring process decision. I learned that in companies’ decision to use AI they are also saving more money. When companies choose AI to save money it shows how much of a capitalist society we live in. I can understand if we use AI to light the load in the workforce but not provide income which sustain humans is inhumane.
This was my first time analyzing articles through AI. I like that AI has the ability to compare articles. I used ChatGPT to analyze articles “Companies Are Blaming AI for Layoffs” and “Behind the Curtain: A white-collar bloodbath”. According to ChatGPT this article agrees that AI is actively reshaping the labor market, Companies see AI as a tool for cost reduction and society is unprepared for the shift. One of the disagreements between both articles is that the AI transition is going to be imminent collapse; and the other states is going to be incremental, not at catastrophic scale. Where the transition is catastrophic or gradual we should prepare society for the profession and occupation that cannot be replaced by AI.
I personally don’t mind AI replacing human workforce, because I do believe it is time that humanity enjoys the fruits of their labor. I believe that if we have tech that can sustain the life that built while we relax and enjoy nature we should. The issue I have is how we plan to sustain income for those who have been displaced from careers and the transition of AI destroying nature.
You bring up how AI offers a lot of ease for people. You also bring up the issue that AI development is causing environmental destruction and other concerns for life. I also think about this balance and worry about the future. I think what we are learning in this program and in this class has helped me make a plan for my relationship to AI. I feel grateful to be talking about this now. Especially since the 3 articles all agree that lack of awareness about AI will leave people unprepared.
Your reflection highlights a significant and frequently overlooked tension: while AI has the potential to free individuals from exhausting or monotonous work, the necessary social systems to ensure equitable access to this freedom are not yet established. Your observation that young adults entering the workforce after substantial educational investment may be disproportionately affected demonstrates a nuanced understanding of the intersection between technological change, economics, and justice. I also value your distinction between AI as a technical innovation and as a political issue. The technology itself is neutral; its impact depends on the surrounding policies, corporate incentives, and societal structures, which ultimately determine whether AI serves the collective good or exacerbates inequality. Your insight that companies often deploy AI to reduce labor costs rather than to support workers explains widespread apprehension about this transition. Furthermore, your vision of a future in which AI enables people to rest, pursue meaningful activities, and prioritize well-being is compelling. However, your emphasis on the need for income stability and consideration of environmental impacts underscores that achieving such a future requires intentional planning rather than uncritical adoption.
Ariel,
First, I recommend that you read Garison’s comments. Second, you got a lot of information from the articles you read, and that is a great start to understanding the impact of AI on our culture. You talk about the impact on “other” people and it might be good to think about it in relationship to the very degree you are getting.
You talk about the government needing to reform the “whole occupational infrastructure.”. I might suggest that we not leave that to the government. How do you envision a society with this type of technology? To learn more about it and to advocate for the kind of structure we believe in – that is our responsibility to assure we live in the world we prefer.
And finally, the idea that we can all enjoy our lives, relax and enjoy nature, totally ignores the most significant problems with AI, right? What do we plan to do for money? Is the entire economic system going to change? And if this development continues as it is today, we will not have the nature left to enjoy.
You got a good start at using AI. I would have loved to have just a bit more information about that AI experience.
Dr P