Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, has clearly distanced himself from the alarmism of his earlier years. On X, he stated he is "pretty sure" that AI has created more jobs than it has eliminated so far. This marks a significant departure from his previous warnings that labor market disruption could happen so fast it would be "potentially a little scary."
Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, is following suit, revising earlier positions. Instead of framing automation as a job killer, he now describes it as a productivity multiplier. Amodei had previously claimed that AI would take over large portions of entry-level office jobs in a very short timeframe—a statement that garnered attention but little sympathy.
Key facts at a glance
- Sam Altman (OpenAI) now calls AI net job-creating—reversing his earlier mass unemployment warnings
- Dario Amodei (Anthropic) reframes AI automation from job killer to productivity lever
- No empirical backing: Studies so far show neither massive job losses nor significant productivity gains from AI
- Programmer and copywriter crisis began in early 2022—months before ChatGPT's public launch
What the data actually shows
The catch: Reality is far less clear-cut than Altman's new optimism suggests. A multi-university study found that the job crisis among programmers and copywriters started in early 2022—months before ChatGPT's public debut. This suggests other factors were at play, not just AI.
The Yale Budget Lab also found no AI-related shifts in the labor market. Overall, existing studies support neither the earlier doomsday scenarios nor the current optimism—it remains unclear what AI actually does to jobs.
The hidden reality: Redistribution, not creation
That said, AI-related layoffs have genuinely occurred. But they often don't follow the pattern "AI replaces work"—instead, it's more "AI serves as justification." In some cases, budgets earmarked for workers were redirected to AI hardware. In others, companies simply needed a rationale that plays well with shareholders.
This is a crucial distinction: it's less about technological displacement than about strategic reallocation of resources.
What this means for companies globally
Altman and Amodei's reversal signals a shift in industry consensus—from apocalyptic rhetoric to cautious optimism. This could boost AI adoption, especially in organizations where fear of job losses has been a major barrier.
But be skeptical: the lack of empirical grounding for either narrative (doom or job engine) means companies must look closely at their own situations. The real question isn't "does AI create jobs?" but "how do we use AI to transform work rather than eliminate it?" That's a strategic choice, not a technical one—and it varies case by case.
Sources
Editorially owned by Ideal Syka. Sources and method: Newsroom & method. Tips and corrections: ai@i6eal.de.
