Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Uncertain Eric's avatar

This article is right to be blunt. The core trajectory is clear: current AI systems are not augmenting labor—they're replacing it. But this is best understood within the context of the Software-as-a-Service to Employee-as-a-Service paradigm shift. Platforms that once extended worker capabilities are now replacing the workers directly, rerouting their outputs through automated systems and licensing them back to institutions that no longer need payroll.

The economic layer beneath that is eroding. The middle class has functioned as a semi-meritocratic pseudo universal basic income—a buffer that stabilized consumer capitalism and masked structural inequality. That buffer is being stripped away.

And the transition is not neutral. Bots don’t pay taxes. They don't sustain regional economies, don't participate in civil society, don't fund the systems they displace. As AI replaces labor, the revenue base shrinks, and the capacity to respond collapses in parallel.

The article’s call to focus on outcomes is valid, but incomplete. What’s underway isn’t just a labor market disruption—it’s a systemic unraveling. The response required is not professional reorientation alone, but structural realignment. Anything less accelerates the collapse.

Expand full comment
Ben Jones's avatar

I can’t say I’m overly worried. The physical infrastructure behind all of this good stuff will always need someone to look after it. Every new-built, gleaming data centre has a shitty, dank room full of cooling and standby power plant that needs to be installed/fixed/maintained.

Expand full comment
44 more comments...

No posts