31 Comments
User's avatar
Rocky's avatar

Excellent Darious! With all the Doom and Gloom out there, it is refreshing to feel the Human Touch still Matters! Let's Protect what Matters!!! Keep the Fire Burning Young Man! Love It!!!

Darius Foroux's avatar

Thanks for reading!

Tom Spark's avatar

Love this. The edge right now is simple: pick one workflow in your job, cut the time in half with AI, and show the cost or revenue impact in numbers.

Stephanie Watson-Snodgrass's avatar

Thank you! Was just speaking with my in-laws about this over the weekend. I'll be sending them your article. :)

Darius Foroux's avatar

Thanks, Stephanie!

Sanjay Kotecha's avatar

Great article!

Darius Foroux's avatar

Thanks for reading, Sanjay.

Tony Swift's avatar

This is a smell of reality 😄

Monique Wright's avatar

Build. Stability is the death of fear. Good article.

Grace and Growth's avatar

This is a great article. I work in tech and this anxiety is covering the whole industry right now. We have been through this before- and we will get through it again

Elayaraja's avatar

It was really nice article giving the perspective of what is really happening around AI world. Your inputs are really valuable. Keep doing it !

Darius Foroux's avatar

Appreciate the feedback!

Andrea Cammarato-VanBenschoten's avatar

What is most terrifying for me is that I'm over 50 and completely fear being eliminated before I can adapt. I've already transitioned once from print to web. I've expanded to teaching and writing. I don't know how many "adapt or die" changes I have left in me. And who is seriously going to want an employee over 50 in a new field? So for me, yes, it is terrifying.

Darius Foroux's avatar

I understand. Stay optimistic. Pessimism will only hurt us.

Sammi Honeyfoot's avatar

I thought your article proposed a reasonable and thoughtful perspective. For me, it was a reminder of life's ever-changing complexity and nuance, and "answers" usually lie somewhere in between extremes. In other words, a dash of temperance if veering into catastrophic thinking. - Geri

Darius Foroux's avatar

That’s exactly why I was going for. Thanks for reading, Geri.

Jay's avatar

Well Writing, this smell something reality

Gunjan's avatar

Great piece, I was just reading some doomsday articles over the weekend; this is a nice counterpoint to that. I’m hoping that AI companies are indeed aware of the disruptive power they hold, and they indeed take into account the chaos that mass unemployment would have.. I think I’m most afraid of the societal damage which could lead to mass unrest..

Darius Foroux's avatar

Agreed. Ultimately, I believe we will figure it out as a species. It’s just scary because we’re stepping into the unknown. Thanks for reading.

jody's avatar

Well, isn't this timely. On the heels of just reading Andrew Yang's latest article about the very doom you describe, your piece appears. Is it ok to exhale? In a year or two's time I guess we'll know.

Darius Foroux's avatar

Glad it’s helpful, Jody!

Gunjan's avatar

Reading the Article “The Adolescence of technology” by Dario Amodei… https://www.darioamodei.com/essay/the-adolescence-of-technology?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Tochi Anita's avatar

To stop doom scrolling, that part hit really hard. I'm still coming into adulthood, and I can't help but agree more with you. I've got to learn more about AI and be productive. Thanks for the article.

Darius Foroux's avatar

Glad to hear that!

Georgina's avatar

"CEOs don't want the economy to collapse because they need people to spend so they can continue to make an income..."

But the majority of consumer spending right now is driven by the top 10% earners. The average person just doesn't have the money to spend because their employers are squeezing them. Also, the real moneymaker of these AI companies - both the big ones and the startups - are enterprise business accounts. They make money when big corporations purchase their AI into their organization, displacing more workers. And many of these corporations earn from business-to-business clients. So it's a cycle of companies spending on other companies to make money... Which makes sense when you look at the fact that nearly half of consumer spending is done by the top 10% earners. Because it's the company execs and investors who make all the money from these things - not their employees who are threatened to be replaced. (

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/top-10-earners-drive-nearly-191500198.html)

Thing is, majority of CEOs won't care if the average person couldn't buy anything because their companies will still make money, which means the ceos will continue to make money. And if the companies actually stop making money? These ceos can simply jump ship and retreat back into their mansions because their net worths are above the roof after all their earnings from investing in AI! (Of course, the paycheck to paycheck folks who can't afford to invest will be the ones who'll get all the stick and none of the carrot).

xAI's data centers (aptly called "Colossus") are polluting the environment and making their surrounding neighborhoods unliveable - and for what? (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/feb/13/elon-musk-xai-pollution-naacp). So companies can personalize their ads better with AI to sell their b2b wares more effectively?

So I don't think these CEOs or AI business folks have any real incentive to even slightly avoid the human cost their layoffs are doing.

I really want to believe your article, Darius. Please show me what I'm missing.

Darius Foroux's avatar

Well, if you live through a real recession you know what I’m talking about. 2008/2009 was NOT pretty. No one wants a repeat. No one wants anarchy.

Also, that stuff about the top 10% has always been true. 80/20 rule applies since the dawn of civilization.

Thanks for reading.

Georgina's avatar

Thank you for responding.

I have lived through 2008/9. Anyone in their late 30s have. And I think we should look at WHY that recession happened in the first place. You have a book about finance. You know the history behind it. Before 2008, there was also the S&L crisis. Not as big as 2008, but it was a precursor. On both occasions, the pattern was identical: deregulation enabled reckless behavior at the top, the system failed to prevent it, and working people paid the price.

That's the parallel I'm drawing with AI. The people making the decisions and the money have every incentive to move fast and no reason to absorb the human cost. The people who say "it'll work out, no one wants a collapse" are saying essentially what banking executives said in 2006.

On the 80/20 rule: top earners weren't always the top consumer spenders. They previously accounted for only 36% of consumer spending. And middle income purchasing power grew rapidly in 1947-1973 because of higher employment and higher wages.

Filip Zywica's avatar

Same here - I am all for the positive notion of this text but I am with Georgina here.

And whilst I don't think we're necessarily nearing an extinction event I don't think I put all that much trust into the system protecting itself. - Systems protect capital first, not employment levels. And the system "guardians" will less so prevent damage but rather intervene once the damage threatens them - not before.

Darius Foroux's avatar

Filip, with all due respect, mate. There are no sides here. If you start picking sides, there will only be losers.