It is not the End of the World (yet)

What do John Lennon and Miley Cyrus have in common? Not much. But they both espoused some advice on perceiving the end, and paths to resilience. Lennon was the more proactive positive with

"Everything will be okay in the end. If it's not okay, it's not the end,"

Thus, if there remains doubt, adversity, or angst, there remains work to be done. That is a positive message. Miley is a little more denialist with the refrain:

"Let's pretend it's not the end of the world, ... Let's pretend, it's not the end, end, end." End of the World (Miley Cyrus, Columbia, 2025)

How do we know what the end looks like? How are we to know we have reached it? Will we realize it in the moment, or will we distractedly wander past but then recognize somehow in retrospect? There is a growing consensus that the world of work is going to change dramatically. How rapidly this occurs may remain a matter of discussion.

In a Fortune article, Vinod Khosla recently predicted that Artificial (AI) Intelligence will "automate() 80% of high-value jobs by 2030." That is one of the more accelerated pace predictions that has made the news; note the lack of definition for "high-value." That is a mere 5 years hence. In the construct of a career arc, 5 years is a mere moment. In that moment, the vast majority of "high-value" work could evaporate.

That paragraph brought Kansas to mind, the band not the state. In Dust in the Wind, they noted 

"Only for a moment and the moment's gone

All my dreams

Pass before my eyes with curiosity

Dust in the Wind" (Kirshner 1977).

That brings yet another perspective to the "end" perhaps.

The 2030 mark is not Mr. Khosla's prediction of the end, but certainly the beginning of it (props to Winston Churchill for that inspiration, though not a direct quote). Mr. Khosla contends that AI will be integrated into the majority of jobs in that 5 years, with "almost every job is being reinvented, every material thing is being reinvented differently with AI as a driver.”

Some will read that prediction with glass half empty perspective (focus on loss). They will see immediate destruction and perhaps chaos and personal loss. Others may read it as a glass half full and see AI as a tool that will be used by the vast majority of workers, enhancing, enabling, and empowering, but not (yet) replacing them.

Mr. Khosla then drops the other shoe, predicting that, in 15 years, 

"by 2040, 'the need to work will go away. People will work on things because they want to, not because they need to pay their mortgage.'"

The choice of whether to work is conveyed there in a permissive tone that suggests an empowered individual with choices. The broader economic impacts of that vision are likely understated, perhaps grossly so. The breadth of analysis that topic deserves will require a subsequent post. 

For today, merely note that this is not the first suggestion of universal socialism in the technology revolution. See Universal Income - A Reality Coming? (November 2016); Strong Back Days are History (February 2017); Let them Eat Brioche? (September 2018); Universal Income Again (March 2019); And now, here's something we hope you'll really like (March 2022); and Long Term Solutions (June 2022). Yes, I have really been focused on these changes for the last decade. A lost of prior AI and robotic posts is here.

Barchart recently reported on similar predictions of "Dario Amodei of Anthropic." He predicts that

"up to 50% of entry-level white-collar jobs could disappear due to AI within the next five years."

That may or may not be more dire than Khosla's view of AI impacting jobs, and perhaps they are saying the same thing in from different perspectives (the integration into some positions leading to elimination of some volume of others - efficiency of one diminishing demand for others). Does this "white-collar" correlate to "high value?" That seems doubtful. 

The CEO of Ford also recently predicted AI "will halve the number of white-collar jobs in the U.S." That is  bit more severe than the "50% of entry-level white-collar jobs" of Mr. Amodei. Thus, all these predictions seem to be subtly distinct. Nonetheless, all seem to coalesce around job loss in the management field.

As a corollary, it is notable that NBC News noted in 2024 a trend of Generation Z toward trades and trade school rather than college. This signals that the younger generations recognized the writing on the wall months ago and are shifting focus. That is likely rational due to the demands for skilled trade workers. However, the 50% reduction in white collar does not mean talented manager hopefuls do not have a path there also. 

The same Barchart article notes that Chat GPT founder Sam Altman does not agree completely with the Amodei predictions. He sees a more measured impact of AI, but concedes that "change in the labor market is inevitable during any technological revolution." And a revolution is most certainly where we are.

Some might argue that the world of jobs is already dead. They would say we already distractedly wandered past that moment, and are now finally recognizing it in retrospect. That might explain our shock, awe, and confusion. That would not be disrespectful of our powers of observation, but realization that in the day-to-day we often have little time to reflect on the big-picture challenges of our lives.

Mr. Khosla is not discouraging for the workers alone. That is a micro point. However, he points to the demise of market giants like Toys "R" Us (1957-2018) and Sears (1892-2018), and notes their failure to evolve and adapt to the digital world. Those standbys of yesterdays commerce are memories quickly fading. Many of today's consumers (Generation Z, 1997-2012) never made a purchase at either of these giants of yesteryear. I have spoken to some who don't even recognize those iconic names.

Mr. Khosla contends that the coming revolution will similarly overrun and destroy much of the "Fortune 500 companies." He sees this as a product of new companies, innovation, and competition for which today's economic establishment is not prepared and with which it will not be nimble enough to compete. He foresees this in health care, robotics, energy creation, and more.

Mr. Khosla contends that "Entrepreneurs (will) invent the future they want.” He sees these small, agile, entities as bursting onto the marketplace with innovation and disruption. He contends that entrepreneurs innovate, while "experts are terrible at predicting the future; they extrapolate the past." The existing paradigms, the "experts," will miss the boat in his opinion and be overrun by the new and innovative.

There are some worthy primary points in these predictions.

First, they are opinions. Those are free for everyone, and each of us has our own. They are impacted by inherent predispositions - our beliefs, nature, and nurture impact what we believe and why. The quoted experts are undoubtedly innovators, but that does not mean they are prescient or infallible.

Second, change is here. Whether you choose to accept that or leverage that is your decision. Nonetheless, change is coming whether you want it to or not. In this, I have previously compared AI to the Grinch stopping Christmas. That is fallacious and naive - at best. Change is coming.

Third, the change will begin with tech providing assistance. New tech always makes work easier. This was true for farmers/tractors, clerks/computers, managers/software, and more. Each iteration of revolution has brought multiplier strength to existing workers, and then has eliminated jobs. I watched it with robotics at General Motors in the 1970s, listening in disbelief to the critics of that age. 

Fourth, you have choices to make. You may eschew the tech, avoid the tools, and stay the course. That is a choice. As you do, you will find yourself increasingly at a comparative disadvantage to those who chose to learn, adapt, and leverage. You can absolutely survive without engaging and implementing AI, but for how long is a valid question. You will become obsolete, but you may choose when. 

Fifth, the impacts will occur around you in both micro and macro effect. Your life will change. Period. If you think you can limp into your Golden Years without adjusting to AI, you are wrong. Perhaps in your job, in the micro, you could get away with it. But, AI is going to change your world in a macro sense. What you buy, how you buy, how you consume or not, is going to change as are many of the names you do business with.

Sixth, of universal impact and interest, the effects of AI will not democratize in an egalitarian and free-love path. There will be competition, winners, and losers. This will include nations, coalitions, companies, investors, individuals, and more. Wealth will be made and lost in this transition. Some will be unavoidable, and more will be through oversight and distraction. 

I have repeatedly suggested that your time for study, adaptation, and growth is short. Despite that, each day is a new chance. The world is changing before your eyes, and with incredible speed. The implications are immediate, pervasive, and pernicious. You are making changes.

Remember Rush intoned, some years ago

"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice" Freewill (Mercury 1980). 

Choice, in a moment. You decide - "You must choose, but choose wisely," Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (Paramount 1989). There is still work to do, so the end is not here. Despite your angst and trepidation, "Let's pretend it's not the end of the world."