How AI may quietly dismantle the feedback loop that turns inexperienced people into competent ones, and why my work matters to me.
Developer's Honest Assessment of AI at Work Rattles the Official Narrative
A veteran programmer was praised after sharing his brutally honest thoughts about AI's impact on work and productivity.
Letting AI Do Your Work Erodes Your Confidence, According to a New Study
Those who actively question the technology, however, feel more confident.
Researchers Studied What Happens When Workplaces Seriously Embrace AI, and the Results May Make You Nervous
Introducing AI in the workplace can create a vicious cycle that leaves employees overburdened and burned out.
Should you use AI for a task? Here’s a simple way to decide | Bruce Schneier
Sometimes, what matters isn’t your output but what you put into the process. Think of it like work v the gym
Arvind Narayanan (@aisnakeoil)
There’s a big, under-appreciated reason why people may have very different experiences and opinions about using AI for work — are they using it for tasks they’re already an expert at, or tasks they can’t do themselves? The former leads to a growth cycle and the latter leads to a dependence spiral. When I use AI to do something I’m an expert at, like coding, I treat it as a tool. I can build quickly, maintaining an understanding of the code, knowing that if necessary, I can fix the code myself. It feels empowering. It frees up my time to think about the complex, judgment-oriented parts of software engineering that I can’t or won’t delegate to AI. That means my own skills improve rapidly, and I get to climb the ladder of complexity and develop higher-level skills, much more so than when I write the code myself. I feel in control. I can lock in and achieve a flow state — when AI is working, I’m reviewing, building understanding, and planning the next steps. I never get the feeling that the tool is about to replace me. This is the growth cycle. (Of course, the growth cycle is not automatic. I still need to exercise agency to use AI responsibly. But it’s the same challenge with any productivity-enhancing technology, and those who’ve navigated such transitions before are well-equipped to navigate it with AI as well.) On the other hand, if I use it for tasks I don’t understand and haven’t learned to perform myself, I have no choice but to treat it as a superintelligence. If something breaks, the best I can do is ask AI to fix it and hope for the best. I generally can’t evaluate the quality of the output myself. The only way to find out if it's any good is if and when the work is ultimately reviewed by an actual expert. The experience is confusing, unsettling and disempowering. And forget about flow state. By over-relying on AI, I risk losing whatever skill I had at the task in the first place, even if it boosts productivity in the short term. This is the dependence spiral. It’s no wonder that entry-level workers and students preparing to enter the workforce find themselves in a bind. To compete with the AI-enabled productivity of more seasoned workers, they must adopt AI themselves, but doing so risks the dependence spiral. I have some thoughts on solutions that I will share in later posts, but I think having a clear diagnosis of the problem is a useful first step.
Appearing Productive in The Workplace — No One's Happy
AI can produce work that looks expert without being expert. The failure arrives in two shapes, and both are reshaping the workplace.
Appearing Productive in The Workplace — No One's Happy
AI can produce work that looks expert without being expert. The failure arrives in two shapes, and both are reshaping the workplace.
My Thoughts on AI, Part 1: Fears, Opinions, and Mental Journey
My own personal thoughts and opinions on AI effects and usage, and how those have evolved over time
Cory Doctorow: The people who tell you ‘AI is changing everything’ are lying
It has become impossible to tell managers mesmerised by artificial intelligence that the tools are not, in fact, helpful. So employees just play along with the fiction to keep their jobs, writes our tech columnist
AI-Generated “Workslop” Is Destroying Productivity
Despite a surge in generative AI use across workplaces, most companies are seeing little measurable ROI. One possible reason is because AI tools are being used to produce “workslop”—content that appears polished but lacks real substance, offloading cognitive labor onto coworkers. Research from BetterUp Labs and Stanford found that 41% of workers have encountered such AI-generated output, costing nearly two hours of rework per instance and creating downstream productivity, trust, and collaboration issues. Leaders need to consider how they may be encouraging indiscriminate organizational mandates and offering too little guidance on quality standards. To counteract workslop, leaders should model purposeful AI use, establish clear norms, and encourage a “pilot mindset” that combines high agency with optimism—promoting AI as a collaborative tool, not a shortcut.
AI coding wisdom from the people who would know
Essays and threads from experienced developers who've gone deep on AI-assisted coding.
For the love of God, stop calling your AI a co-worker | TechCrunch
A growing number of startups are anthropomorphizing AI to build trust fast -- and soften its threat to human jobs.
10 things I learned from burning myself out with AI coding agents
Opinion: As software power tools, AI agents may make people busier than ever before.
How AI Impacts Skill Formation
AI assistance produces significant productivity gains across professional domains, particularly for novice workers. Yet how this assistance affects the development of skills required to effectively supervise AI remains unclear. Novice workers who rely heavily on AI to complete unfamiliar tasks may compromise their own skill acquisition in the process. We conduct randomized experiments to study how developers gained mastery of a new asynchronous programming library with and without the assistance of AI. We find that AI use impairs conceptual understanding, code reading, and debugging abilities, without delivering significant efficiency gains on average. Participants who fully delegated coding tasks showed some productivity improvements, but at the cost of learning the library. We identify six distinct AI interaction patterns, three of which involve cognitive engagement and preserve learning outcomes even when participants receive AI assistance. Our findings suggest that AI-enhanced productivity is not a shortcut to competence and AI assistance should be carefully adopted into workflows to preserve skill formation -- particularly in safety-critical domains.
How AI Impacts Skill Formation
AI assistance produces significant productivity gains across professional domains, particularly for novice workers. Yet how this assistance affects the development of skills required to effectively supervise AI remains unclear. Novice workers who rely heavily on AI to complete unfamiliar tasks may compromise their own skill acquisition in the process. We conduct randomized experiments to study how developers gained mastery of a new asynchronous programming library with and without the assistance of AI. We find that AI use impairs conceptual understanding, code reading, and debugging abilities, without delivering significant efficiency gains on average. Participants who fully delegated coding tasks showed some productivity improvements, but at the cost of learning the library. We identify six distinct AI interaction patterns, three of which involve cognitive engagement and preserve learning outcomes even when participants receive AI assistance. Our findings suggest that AI-enhanced productivity is not a shortcut to competence and AI assistance should be carefully adopted into workflows to preserve skill formation -- particularly in safety-critical domains.
