AI Must Augment, Not Replace Humans—or Workers Face a Bleak Future

In partnership with

Introducing the first AI-native CRM

Connect your email, and you’ll instantly get a CRM with enriched customer insights and a platform that grows with your business.

With AI at the core, Attio lets you:

• Prospect and route leads with research agents

• Get real-time insights during customer calls

• Build powerful automations for your complex workflows

Join industry leaders like Granola, Taskrabbit, Flatfile and more.

👉 Try Attio Pro for free

As artificial intelligence rapidly reshapes the global economy, a fundamental question is becoming impossible to ignore: will technology enhance human lives, or quietly render millions of workers obsolete? The debate came sharply into focus at the World Economic Forum in Davos, where tech leaders spoke enthusiastically about a future saturated with robots and automation—often without addressing the human cost.

Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, encapsulated this techno-optimism when he casually suggested that robots could one day watch over children. For many, this vision feels deeply unsettling. Children need empathy, emotional connection, and love—qualities that cannot be replicated by machines. Yet Musk’s remarks were emblematic of a wider trend: decisions about the direction of technological progress are increasingly shaped by a small group of immensely powerful individuals, predominantly men, whose incentives are closely tied to corporate profit rather than social wellbeing.

Davos itself highlighted this imbalance. Conversations were cordial, critical questions were often avoided, and uncomfortable realities were brushed aside. Issues such as the misuse of AI-generated content, surveillance technologies, and gendered harms received little attention. Meanwhile, vast sums continue to be poured into speculative tech ventures that promise transformation but deliver few tangible benefits to everyday people.

Amid this enthusiasm, global institutions are sounding alarms. International Monetary Fund managing director Kristalina Georgieva warned that the failure to regulate AI is one of the greatest challenges of our time. Artificial intelligence, she said, is transforming the world faster than societies and governments are prepared to manage. While futuristic childcare robots make headlines, the most immediate impact of AI will be felt in the labour market, where jobs are being transformed—or eliminated—at unprecedented speed.

The IMF has cautioned that a “tsunami” of job disruption is coming. In response, it urges governments to invest heavily in education and reskilling, strengthen competition policy to prevent excessive concentration of power, and reinforce welfare systems to protect displaced workers. Georgieva stressed that the stakes extend far beyond economics. Work provides dignity, purpose, and social stability. Undermining it without a safety net risks deep societal fractures.

Business leaders, too, appear conflicted. Surveys show that while companies outside the tech sector are eager to adopt AI, the promised gains have yet to materialise. A recent poll of UK chief executives found that although most see AI as a top investment priority, only a minority have achieved meaningful cost savings. As expectations rise and returns lag, pressure is building to cut costs elsewhere—most often by reducing payrolls.

Economist Erik Brynjolfsson of Stanford University has warned that this trend is already affecting young workers. His research indicates that AI-related job losses are occurring fastest in roles where technology replaces human labour rather than complements it. This distinction—between automation that replaces and AI that augments—is crucial.

Brynjolfsson argues that society has fallen into what he calls the “Turing Trap”: the mistaken belief that the ultimate goal of AI is to mimic human intelligence. When machines become substitutes for people, workers lose bargaining power and become dependent on those who control the technology. In contrast, when AI is designed to enhance human capabilities—by making workers more productive, creative, or effective—people retain leverage and can demand a fair share of the value created.

This idea has gained traction among some industry leaders. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella has spoken of AI as a tool that could empower doctors, teachers, and workers across the global south by freeing them from routine tasks and allowing them to focus on human-centered work. Yet even he has warned that technology risks losing its “social permission” if it fails to improve lives beyond corporate balance sheets.

Public acceptance of AI will be difficult to sustain if the technology consumes enormous amounts of energy, water, and capital while delivering insecurity, inequality, and social harm. For many people, AI is not an abstract innovation but the reason their career prospects are diminishing, their wages are stagnating, or their jobs are disappearing altogether.

This is why trade unions are demanding an urgent, honest conversation about how the gains from increased productivity should be shared. If AI truly makes work safer, easier, and more productive, workers will support it. But if it is used primarily to de-skill, dehumanise, and discard people, resistance is inevitable.

As Liz Shuler, president of the AFL-CIO, has bluntly stated: if technology leaves workers with no path forward, society should not be surprised by unrest. The future of AI will not be decided solely by code or capital—it will be shaped by choices about fairness, dignity, and human value. If AI is to have a future that society accepts, it must augment humanity, not replace it.