AI progress fuels fears with job paths unclear

Recently, the CEO of Microsoft AI, Mustafa Suleyman, made a bold prediction about artificial intelligence. Discussing the capabilities of AI, he said, "I think we will have human level performance on most if not all professional tasks. Most of those tasks will be automated within the next 12-18 months." Yet, Microsoft, an AI supplier, highlights the positive impact its use has on learning and work.

A similarly confusing message comes from other tech companies. A top engineer at Anthropic has reported that AI now writes 100% of his coding and frees him from tedious work he previously did.

At the same time, an Anthropic report on AI's impact on labor mentions a Stanford Digital Economy Lab finding that workers who are ages 22-25 in roles where AI is especially useful have seen about a 14% drop in employment.

But the report has a huge asterisk: It questions whether the change is due to the advent of AI!

And let's not forget Google. By following a link at the bottom of some Google pages, you will find that Google touts the ability of AI to "help solve society's biggest challenges and improve lives."

It stresses the positives of artificial intelligence, such as connecting Mississippi farms and school cafeterias that deliver fresh produce to children's lunch trays, and faster tracking of wildfire and flood risks to keep people safe. Yet the repeated use of the word "responsible" in Google's characterization of its AI initiatives shows an awareness of dangers to be avoided.

Still, all the companies named here discuss AI adoption as a path to economic success for businesses that embrace it.

But let's go back to Suleyman's statement. If almost all professional tasks can and will be done by AI, how will those now doing those tasks make a living? How will our new college graduates, whom many believe will be most affected, learn their jobs if entry level professional functions do not require human workers?

And one question that few promoters of AI tackle: If a sizable portion of the workforce is phased out, who will have the income to buy the products or use the services AI can so efficiently produce? Economists, we need some answers.

Kathleen Conway, Massapequa