to be honest, this version of the future looks both realistic and more positive than the no-work utopia (which would be both impossible and likely undesirable).
i definitely feel most excited for the artists and community builders. growing personalisation in taste and style will give more opportunity for more creators and will hopefully make the world a more interesting place.
Agree with you Kinga, and what does "no-work" really mean? Even if there is some universal basic income, our inherent drive for curiosity, creativity and connection will stay which will be what we will "work" on, whether it's art or research or building communities -- all the jobs mentioned here :)
i have a paper that was recently accepted for a conference that details how LLMs are fundamentally limited by degeneracy of natural language so it is unlikely that any such system will be able to handle complex problems without significantly enhancing contextual constraints:
so in my view the promises of universal problem solvers will fall short and much of the bubble will burst as ppl realize how much more time they have to spend getting them working reliably and how often they get in the way of actually doing the thing you want to through their hallucinations and missteps that always take you 1 step forward and 15 steps in other directions all at onc
Very reasonable, I err on the skeptical side for how holistically AI will overtake us in any given capacity, but definitely some strong solution unlocks and scale of impact, big companies to be built in the mean time …
This is such inspiring blog, resonate with your idea of the 'human layer' emerging around AI-driven work. Your insights on trades, research, community, and stewardship align closely with what I've been exploring in my newsletter, 'AI for Humanity,' where I've been reflecting on how placing humans, relationships, and meaning back at the center of our work is essential for navigating this shift consciously and meaningfully.
if we go back to the parallels to Galileo's time in the 15-16th century when (like the post AI era) capital was more concentrated and harder to reach and labor rife .. philosophers made 5x doctors, because philosophy taught the capital (=nobility) how to live more emotionally effective lives.
but AI is a pretty good philosopher (I wouldn't have made it thru 'Metaphysics of Morals' without ..) so a repeat might be more a confusing rhyme.
however if the other scarce commodity is purpose and meaning - then the religious micro-services arising from the balkanization of big brand religions (the Hindu Guru structure globalized and morphed pan religously) might be a fertile source of income.
good parallel — how many philosophers could society accommodate though? perhaps then it was more local, right now still broadcast power laws of online philosophers, do we go back to local?
daily morning Thich Nhat Hanh likely online at scale.
but I could imagine a 'Peloton group session for the mind' that is in-person and led by a flesh-and-blood philosopher, but your personal AI philosophers welcome to accompany you
@venu I feel we are moving to parallels with 15-16th century in many ways. Definitely the resurgence of philosophers but also the push to make human experience at the center through arts and sciences just like the Renaissance.
This really resonated—have been thinking along similar lines about how artistic experiences (rewarding for creators and consumers) and relational labor (especially cultivating/sustaining communities) will become increasingly vital.
And your point about how AI makes some things much easier, and some things much more complex, is so spot on. I’ve been trying out different ways of using AI in design and writing, and what I’ve generally noticed is that the difficulty curve is just SO wildly different. Fussy laborious things are suddenly solved. Things that are easy for me to do are profoundly difficult to prompt an LLM to understand. It’s not replacing human labor; it’s changing the shape of it.
All this makes makes the future feel very obscure, but I’m so curious what will happen next…I think the big difficulty with attaining a gentle utopia is whether people can be given a dignified living so that they can pursue artistically and relationally significant work.
Honored to hear your thoughts Celine — you captured one essence of my last two essays re: relational and community work and how that does or doesn’t overlap with pure creative / artistic work. The point on dignity and earning a living is so fraught with other forces to predict yet, but I think even in the short term, resilience involves greater effort on these dimensions
Many more thoughts re: AI introducing complexity vs resolving it…
Amazing essay Anu! Overwhelmed with ideas you have managed to generate in my head: here is my reply, a gut reaction - what to drugs like VIAGRA and OZEMPIC have in common..? Zoom out 'philosophically' as far as possible and think about the 2 dominant classes of consumers of those drugs, within 'a medium to long term' horizon;
Nicely done, very thoughtful piece. Your five jobs got me thinking about some of the relational/care work that is done today and how in some places it has be undervalued (both in wages and in perception). In a world where technology and machines are truly commoditized and the human aspects do become more important it will be interesting to see if they get valued collectively in a much higher way. In an ideal world (for me) A world where art/community/stewardship etc does get valued more appropriately could yield really promising outcomes.
Ok so i need to discuss this jn detail with someone. Because this article has my brain juices flowing and is making me rethink everything on how i want to choose my next 20 years. (Currently 27). If the author can discuss with me, would be obliged.
Another thought provoking piece- really enjoyed reading it. I agree on on the "human-layer" but only for some trades. Others, e.g. therapy - some may prefer to open up to an AI bot with no human judgement. One thing I'm really taking from this is the importance of creating community "locally" - it's what I've been doing albeit it online - for the last few years - and what I'm doubling down on now. The online space will blow up globally, but I think AI can handle the online global market place better than human who will get overwhelmed and anxious (which is already happening). Therefore, websites and the online world, I believed, will be geared for AI. Ofcourse, apart from Substack :D
I liked your framing of stewardship and community-building as essential ‘human layers’ above the machine core. It resonate with my own experiences and reflections.
I’ve found that truly impactful innovation happens when rigid role definitions dissolve into adaptable, human-centered work.
In fact, this insight sparked my own journey into writing my blog ‘AI for Humanity,’ where I’ve been exploring how intentional slowing down, putting humans back at the center, and restoring genuine meaning into our work can guide us toward a more coherent and resilient future.
It’s encouraging to see others emphasizing a similar human-first perspective. I’m curious if you’ve found specific practices or cultural shifts that help organizations effectively adopt this more deliberate, meaningful approach?
A really thought-provoking one! I believe the trade-master and stewardship will converge eventually. As trades get more automated and agentified, humans will be responsible for more higher level decisions. A human who works with a legal AI today will soon have to steward an army of legal, paralegal, policy, psychology agents. Higher the implications of the decisions, higher the humanness needed for stewardship.
What always remains true is the inherent human drive for curiosity, creativity and connection. Art sits at the intersection of creativity and connection, research at the intersection of curiosity and creativity and community at the intersection of curiosity and connection. And finally entrepreneurship combines all three also paired with insatiable urge for creation!
to be honest, this version of the future looks both realistic and more positive than the no-work utopia (which would be both impossible and likely undesirable).
i definitely feel most excited for the artists and community builders. growing personalisation in taste and style will give more opportunity for more creators and will hopefully make the world a more interesting place.
a no-work society feels far more empty and chaotic however we imagine it, though interesting to ponder
Agree with you Kinga, and what does "no-work" really mean? Even if there is some universal basic income, our inherent drive for curiosity, creativity and connection will stay which will be what we will "work" on, whether it's art or research or building communities -- all the jobs mentioned here :)
i have a paper that was recently accepted for a conference that details how LLMs are fundamentally limited by degeneracy of natural language so it is unlikely that any such system will be able to handle complex problems without significantly enhancing contextual constraints:
https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.10077
so in my view the promises of universal problem solvers will fall short and much of the bubble will burst as ppl realize how much more time they have to spend getting them working reliably and how often they get in the way of actually doing the thing you want to through their hallucinations and missteps that always take you 1 step forward and 15 steps in other directions all at onc
Very reasonable, I err on the skeptical side for how holistically AI will overtake us in any given capacity, but definitely some strong solution unlocks and scale of impact, big companies to be built in the mean time …
This is such inspiring blog, resonate with your idea of the 'human layer' emerging around AI-driven work. Your insights on trades, research, community, and stewardship align closely with what I've been exploring in my newsletter, 'AI for Humanity,' where I've been reflecting on how placing humans, relationships, and meaning back at the center of our work is essential for navigating this shift consciously and meaningfully.
if we go back to the parallels to Galileo's time in the 15-16th century when (like the post AI era) capital was more concentrated and harder to reach and labor rife .. philosophers made 5x doctors, because philosophy taught the capital (=nobility) how to live more emotionally effective lives.
but AI is a pretty good philosopher (I wouldn't have made it thru 'Metaphysics of Morals' without ..) so a repeat might be more a confusing rhyme.
however if the other scarce commodity is purpose and meaning - then the religious micro-services arising from the balkanization of big brand religions (the Hindu Guru structure globalized and morphed pan religously) might be a fertile source of income.
good parallel — how many philosophers could society accommodate though? perhaps then it was more local, right now still broadcast power laws of online philosophers, do we go back to local?
daily morning Thich Nhat Hanh likely online at scale.
but I could imagine a 'Peloton group session for the mind' that is in-person and led by a flesh-and-blood philosopher, but your personal AI philosophers welcome to accompany you
yep could see this
@venu I feel we are moving to parallels with 15-16th century in many ways. Definitely the resurgence of philosophers but also the push to make human experience at the center through arts and sciences just like the Renaissance.
This really resonated—have been thinking along similar lines about how artistic experiences (rewarding for creators and consumers) and relational labor (especially cultivating/sustaining communities) will become increasingly vital.
And your point about how AI makes some things much easier, and some things much more complex, is so spot on. I’ve been trying out different ways of using AI in design and writing, and what I’ve generally noticed is that the difficulty curve is just SO wildly different. Fussy laborious things are suddenly solved. Things that are easy for me to do are profoundly difficult to prompt an LLM to understand. It’s not replacing human labor; it’s changing the shape of it.
All this makes makes the future feel very obscure, but I’m so curious what will happen next…I think the big difficulty with attaining a gentle utopia is whether people can be given a dignified living so that they can pursue artistically and relationally significant work.
Honored to hear your thoughts Celine — you captured one essence of my last two essays re: relational and community work and how that does or doesn’t overlap with pure creative / artistic work. The point on dignity and earning a living is so fraught with other forces to predict yet, but I think even in the short term, resilience involves greater effort on these dimensions
Many more thoughts re: AI introducing complexity vs resolving it…
"entertainmeaning— the alchemy of entertaining and meaningful."
fka art, sigh
sigh indeed
Amazing essay Anu! Overwhelmed with ideas you have managed to generate in my head: here is my reply, a gut reaction - what to drugs like VIAGRA and OZEMPIC have in common..? Zoom out 'philosophically' as far as possible and think about the 2 dominant classes of consumers of those drugs, within 'a medium to long term' horizon;
~ciao
'the sisterhood is wide and varied'
i've been pondering on community and audience building for a while... this felt like some form of validation...
thanks for sharing... big fan here...
ah great — thanks for reading!
Nicely done, very thoughtful piece. Your five jobs got me thinking about some of the relational/care work that is done today and how in some places it has be undervalued (both in wages and in perception). In a world where technology and machines are truly commoditized and the human aspects do become more important it will be interesting to see if they get valued collectively in a much higher way. In an ideal world (for me) A world where art/community/stewardship etc does get valued more appropriately could yield really promising outcomes.
Ok so i need to discuss this jn detail with someone. Because this article has my brain juices flowing and is making me rethink everything on how i want to choose my next 20 years. (Currently 27). If the author can discuss with me, would be obliged.
Another thought provoking piece- really enjoyed reading it. I agree on on the "human-layer" but only for some trades. Others, e.g. therapy - some may prefer to open up to an AI bot with no human judgement. One thing I'm really taking from this is the importance of creating community "locally" - it's what I've been doing albeit it online - for the last few years - and what I'm doubling down on now. The online space will blow up globally, but I think AI can handle the online global market place better than human who will get overwhelmed and anxious (which is already happening). Therefore, websites and the online world, I believed, will be geared for AI. Ofcourse, apart from Substack :D
I liked your framing of stewardship and community-building as essential ‘human layers’ above the machine core. It resonate with my own experiences and reflections.
I’ve found that truly impactful innovation happens when rigid role definitions dissolve into adaptable, human-centered work.
In fact, this insight sparked my own journey into writing my blog ‘AI for Humanity,’ where I’ve been exploring how intentional slowing down, putting humans back at the center, and restoring genuine meaning into our work can guide us toward a more coherent and resilient future.
It’s encouraging to see others emphasizing a similar human-first perspective. I’m curious if you’ve found specific practices or cultural shifts that help organizations effectively adopt this more deliberate, meaningful approach?
A really thought-provoking one! I believe the trade-master and stewardship will converge eventually. As trades get more automated and agentified, humans will be responsible for more higher level decisions. A human who works with a legal AI today will soon have to steward an army of legal, paralegal, policy, psychology agents. Higher the implications of the decisions, higher the humanness needed for stewardship.
What always remains true is the inherent human drive for curiosity, creativity and connection. Art sits at the intersection of creativity and connection, research at the intersection of curiosity and creativity and community at the intersection of curiosity and connection. And finally entrepreneurship combines all three also paired with insatiable urge for creation!
V interesting and encouraging. Anu, what are your thoughts about how food and farming fit the future scenarios?