Drawing on Cory Doctorow's insight, the immediate risk for workers isn't being replaced by a competent AI, but by an incompetent one. AI only needs to be good enough to convince a manager to fire a human, leading to a lose-lose situation of job loss and declining work quality.

AI's core strength is hyper-sophisticated pattern recognition. If your daily tasks—from filing insurance claims to diagnosing patients—can be broken down into a data set of repeatable patterns, AI can learn to perform them faster and more accurately than a human.

The common fear of AI eliminating jobs is misguided. In practice, AI automates specific, often administrative, tasks within a role. This allows human workers to offload minutiae and focus on uniquely human skills like relationship building and strategic thinking, ultimately increasing their leverage and value.

Historically, humans moved from manual to cognitive labor as technology automated physical tasks. Emad Mostaque argues AI now automates cognitive work, creating an "intelligence inversion." There's no obvious higher-value domain left for human labor to escape to, unlike previous technological shifts.

The biggest near-term automation threat isn't from super-intelligent AI, but from mediocre "boring bots." This "so-so automation" is just good enough to displace human workers but fails to generate the significant economic gains seen in past technological revolutions, creating a net drag on the economy.

Experts develop a "meta-level" understanding by repeatedly performing tedious, manual information-gathering tasks. By automating this foundational work, companies risk denying junior employees the very experience needed to build true expertise and judgment, potentially creating a future leadership and skills gap.

While AI may not cause mass unemployment, its greatest danger lies in automating the routine entry-level tasks that new workers rely on to build skills. This could disrupt traditional career ladders and create a long-term talent development crisis for organizations.

The "pyramid replacement" theory posits that AI will first make junior analyst and other entry-level positions obsolete. As AI becomes more agentic, it will climb the corporate ladder, systematically replacing roles from the base of the pyramid upwards.

Historical data from the computer revolution shows that technology rarely replaces entire professional jobs. Instead, it automates routine tasks within a role, freeing up humans to focus on higher-value activities like analysis, judgment, and coordination, thereby upgrading the job itself.