Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

AI Safety Should Prioritize the Future of Work

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that AI safety should include the future of work, because generative AI's unchecked automation erodes human agency, creative labor, and incentives to learn.

desk verdict Makes a good case that work belongs on the AI safety agenda, but overreaches with 'greatest immediate risk'; still worth a careful read and a serious referee. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.13959 v2 pith:H7Z2MOUE submitted 2025-04-16 cs.CY cs.AIcs.CLecon.GNq-fin.EC

Sanchaita Hazra , Bodhisattwa Prasad Majumder , Tuhin Chakrabarty This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CYcs.AIcs.CLecon.GNq-fin.EC
keywords AIsafetyfutureofworklabordisplacementgenerativecollectivelicensingeconomicinequalitytechnicaldebtgovernance
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Current AI safety concentrates on harmful outputs, persuasion, and existential misuse; this paper argues that the future of work belongs on that agenda. Its central claim is that generative AI's rapid automation of cognitive and creative tasks erodes human agency, devalues creative labor, and weakens the incentive to learn, and that these labor-market harms are as safety-relevant as technical failure modes. The paper supports this by connecting labor displacement to economic theories of consumption smoothing, rent-seeking, and extractive institutions, and by citing recent evidence of job-post declines in writing, coding, and image creation. It concludes that AI safety should include pro-worker governance: worker support systems, open and transparent training data, collective licensing with fair compensation, mandated watermarking, and safeguards against regulatory capture. A reader should care because the argument redefines what counts as an AI safety problem, moving economic dignity into the core rather than the periphery.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a chain of economic-theory lenses applied to AI systems. Intertemporal consumption theory, specifically the Life-Cycle Hypothesis and the Permanent Income Hypothesis, turns job instability into a household-level harm: when AI makes earnings unpredictable, consumption smoothing breaks down. Rent-seeking theory characterizes closed-source AI development as monopolistic extraction rather than innovation, while the distinction between inclusive and extractive institutions explains why concentrated gains fail to produce shared prosperity. Collective-action theory, including the prisoner's-dilemma framing of watermarking, shows why voluntary industry self-regulation will not happen and why policy mandates and collective licensing are required.

What would settle it

Track employment, wages, and new-task creation in automation-exposed occupations such as writing, coding, illustration, and customer service for the five years following generative AI adoption at scale. If employment and earnings return to their pre-AI trend and new occupational categories absorb displaced workers, as they did after earlier automation waves, then the paper's claim that displacement is uniquely persistent and safety-relevant would be falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In the paper's own terms, the discovery is that AI safety's narrow focus obscures a more immediate, systemic risk: generative AI is not merely assisting but replacing skilled human labor, and doing so faster than societies can adapt. The paper asserts that unchecked automation breaks the consumption-smoothing assumptions that anchor household economic stability, concentrates gains in capital owners and high-skilled workers, and entrenches extractive institutions that hollow out shared prosperity. On copyright, it argues that training on protected works under fair-use claims is exploitation that devalues creative labor, and that high transaction costs make voluntary licensing unworkable, so collective licensing with royalty-based compensation is needed. The constructive conclusion is that safeguarding meaningful work with human agency should be a stated objective of AI safety research, governance, and model development.

Load-bearing premise

The paper assumes that generative AI's labor displacement is faster and more pervasive than earlier automation waves, so that historical market adaptation, such as new-task creation and industrial-revolution-style job emergence, will not rescue displaced workers in time.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • AI safety research and evaluations should treat labor displacement, wage erosion, and loss of worker agency as core impact metrics alongside misuse and existential risk.
  • Mandatory training-data disclosure and collective licensing would change the economic relationship between AI firms and creative workers, making compensation automatic rather than negotiated case by case.
  • Because watermarking is a collective-action problem, voluntary industry adoption will fail; the paper implies welfare gains from a policy that requires all generative AI output to be watermarked.
  • Governments and research institutions should fund retraining, unemployment-insurance modernization, and worker representation as AI safety interventions rather than as separate social policy.
  • Global AI governance should treat lower-income countries as producers rather than consumers of AI, to avoid data colonialism and uneven democratization.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • One extension of the paper's logic is that labor-market indicators could be built into AI safety benchmarks, measuring a model's marginal effect on task-level employment before deployment rather than only its accuracy or refusal rates.
  • The collective-licensing proposal could be piloted on a bounded creative domain, such as stock photography or music licensing, to test whether royalty shares based on contribution are administratively feasible before global copyright reform is attempted.
  • If accumulative existential risk is taken seriously, near-term labor harms are not merely distributional side effects but part of the same risk class as catastrophic misuse, a reframing that would shift funding priorities toward economic resilience.
  • The rent-seeking argument also suggests that open-weight models and open training data function as competition policy, which is a stronger conclusion than the paper's explicit transparency call and would imply antitrust-style scrutiny of dominant AI firms.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This position paper argues that AI safety research should prioritize the future of work rather than focusing predominantly on content moderation, manipulation prevention, and existential risks. The authors identify six labor-related risks—technical debt, rapid and impractical automation, declining shared prosperity, uneven global democratization, impaired learning and knowledge creation, and failures of copyright to protect creative labor—and propose six policy recommendations, including worker support programs, open AI and pro-worker governance, watermarking mandates, training-data disclosure with royalty-based compensation, and stakeholder engagement to avoid regulatory capture. The argument draws on economic theories (life-cycle and permanent-income hypotheses, rent-seeking, Coasean bargaining) and on empirical studies of online labor markets, task exposure, and productivity effects of generative AI. Section 4 acknowledges alternative views, including market adaptation and x-risk-only safety positions.

Significance. If the strong priority claim were established, the paper would broaden the AI safety research agenda and governance conversation in a valuable way. Its strengths are that it is a clear synthetic position statement, engages seriously with counterarguments, and translates its concerns into concrete, actionable recommendations. The manuscript does not, however, supply the comparative evidence needed to support the claim that labor disruption is 'the greatest immediate risk' rather than one important risk among several. As a result, the paper's contribution is more persuasive as an argument that the future of work belongs on the AI safety agenda than as an argument that it should be prioritized above other near-term harms. This gap is fixable in revision and does not invalidate the paper's overall direction.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 1 and Section 4.1] The central claim that labor disruption is 'the greatest immediate risk' is not established by the evidence presented. The cited studies (Demirci et al. 2024; Hui et al. 2024; Eloundou et al. 2023) measure changes in job postings, freelancer outcomes, and task exposure, respectively, not net employment, income, or welfare effects. The paper acknowledges the adaptation channel in Section 2.2 (Acemoglu & Restrepo 2019) and Section 4.1 (Autor 2015), but it never quantitatively rebuts that channel for generative AI. Without a comparison of the speed and scale of displacement against task creation, and against other near-term AI harms such as misinformation or biorisk, 'prioritize' and 'greatest immediate risk' remain unsupported. The weaker claim that the future of work should be part of AI safety is defensible, but the thesis needs either additional comparative evidence or a more modest framing.
  2. [Section 2.1] The link between technical debt and the disruption of consumption smoothing is asserted rather than demonstrated. The paper invokes the life-cycle and permanent-income hypotheses and then cites a 21% decrease in weekly job postings for automation-prone occupations, but job postings are not income, savings, or consumption outcomes. No evidence is offered on liquidity constraints, precautionary saving, or changes in consumption behavior among affected workers, so P1 is not supported by the cited data. This weakens the risk inventory from which the recommendations in Section 3 are derived.
  3. [Section 2.2] The claim that current adoption of AI automation is 'rushed, if not impractical' and that the shift from assistance to automation is 'rapid and abrupt' is not operationalized. The paper does not provide adoption growth rates, task-creation rates, or wage and employment series that would distinguish this automation wave from previous ones discussed in Section 4.1. A concrete, falsifiable comparison—for example, displacement speed relative to historical episodes like the Industrial Revolution or the digital revolution—is needed to make the 'unprecedented' claim load-bearing.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 2.1 heading] The heading 'Increasing Techincal Debt' contains a typo; it should read 'Increasing Technical Debt.'
  2. [Section 2.2] 'adopting automotive workflows' appears to be a typo for 'adopting automated workflows.'
  3. [Section 3] In the discussion of slowing progress, 'shift it’s locus' should be 'shift its locus.'
  4. [Section 2.3] The phrase 'rent-seeks into the already-existing gap' is unclear; consider rephrasing to something like 'exploits the already-existing gap between capital owners and labor.'
  5. [Section 4.3] The 'technical solutions over policy interventions' alternative view is summarized but not engaged with substantively; a sentence explaining why human-control technical measures are insufficient would strengthen the rebuttal.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper is a normative position statement whose recommendations rest on external evidence and its own self-citations are peripheral.

full rationale

This is a position paper with no equations, fitted parameters, or quantitative predictions. Its central argument is normative and is supported by external literature (e.g., Demirci et al. 2024; Hui et al. 2024; Eloundou et al. 2023; Acemoglu & Restrepo 2019). The paper explicitly engages alternative views in Section 4, including the market-adaptation objection, and does not attempt to derive its priority claim from its own prior work. The self-citations (Hazra & Serra-Garcia 2025; Bhattacharya et al. 2024) support only peripheral claims about user trust in and assessment of LLMs; they are not load-bearing for the recommendation that AI safety should prioritize the future of work. The claim that labor disruption is the 'greatest immediate risk' may be under-supported by the directional evidence cited, but that is a concern about evidence strength and correctness, not about circularity. No step in the paper reduces by construction to its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard economic theories and empirical labor-market observations, not on fitted parameters or introduced entities. The main assumptions are domain background theories (consumption smoothing, automation-reinstatement theory, copyright law debate) that the paper explicitly invokes.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Life Cycle Hypothesis and Permanent Income Hypothesis describe consumption smoothing behavior.
    Invoked in Section 2.1 to argue that AI-induced income instability disrupts savings-consumption patterns.
  • domain assumption Automation can displace and also reinstate labor; net effects depend on new task creation.
    Background for the claim that rapid AI automation may outpace task creation, based on Acemoglu & Restrepo (2019) in Section 2.2.
  • domain assumption AI training on copyrighted data is legally contested and may constitute infringement or fair use depending on jurisdiction.
    Provides the basis for recommending collective licensing and training-data disclosure in Section 2.6 and recommendation R5.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of AI Safety Should Prioritize the Future of Work." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/H7Z2MOUE

@misc{pith2026250413959,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: AI Safety Should Prioritize the Future of Work},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/H7Z2MOUE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.13959}
}
read the original abstract

Current efforts in AI safety prioritize filtering harmful content, preventing manipulation of human behavior, and eliminating existential risks in cybersecurity or biosecurity. While pressing, this narrow focus overlooks critical human-centric considerations that shape the long-term trajectory of a society. In this position paper, we identify the risks of overlooking the impact of AI on the future of work and recommend comprehensive transition support towards the evolution of meaningful labor with human agency. Through the lens of economic theories, we highlight the intertemporal impacts of AI on human livelihood and the structural changes in labor markets that exacerbate income inequality. Additionally, the closed-source approach of major stakeholders in AI development resembles rent-seeking behavior through exploiting resources, breeding mediocrity in creative labor, and monopolizing innovation. To address this, we argue in favor of a robust international copyright anatomy supported by implementing collective licensing that ensures fair compensation mechanisms for using data to train AI models. We strongly recommend a pro-worker framework of global AI governance to enhance shared prosperity and economic justice while reducing technical debt.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Position: AI/ML Deepfake Research is Misaligned with AI-Generated Non-Consensual Intimate Imagery (AIG-NCII)

    cs.AI 2026-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    The dominant real-world use of generative-image abuse is non-consensual intimate imagery, yet the AI/ML research field focuses almost exclusively on viewer deception.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

117 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Burrow-giles lithographic co. v. sarony, 1884. URL https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/111/53/

  2. [2]

    and Johnson, S

    Acemoglu, D. and Johnson, S. Power and Progress: Our Thousand-Year Struggle Over Technology and Prosperity. PublicAffairs, New York, 2023

    2023

  3. [3]

    and Restrepo, P

    Acemoglu, D. and Restrepo, P. Automation and new tasks: How technology displaces and reinstates labor. Journal of economic perspectives, 33 0 (2): 0 3--30, 2019

    2019

  4. [4]

    and Robinson, J

    Acemoglu, D. and Robinson, J. A. Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty. Crown Publishers, New York, 2012

    2012

  5. [5]

    and Robinson, J

    Acemoglu, D. and Robinson, J. A. Why nations fail: The origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. Crown Currency, 2013

    2013

  6. [6]

    A model of growth through creative destruction

    Aghion, P. A model of growth through creative destruction. 1990

    1990

  7. [7]

    Ai art turing test

    Alexander, S. Ai art turing test. Astral Codex Ten, 2024. URL https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/ai-art-turing-test. Accessed: 2025-01-29

    2024

  8. [8]

    life cycle

    Ando, A. and Modigliani, F. The" life cycle" hypothesis of saving: Aggregate implications and tests. 1963

    1963

Show all 117 references
  1. [9]

    J., et al

    Anil, C., Durmus, E., Rimsky, N., Sharma, M., Benton, J., Kundu, S., Batson, J., Tong, M., Mu, J., Ford, D. J., et al. Many-shot jailbreaking. In The Thirty-eighth Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2024

    2024

  2. [10]

    P., Busby, E

    Argyle, L. P., Busby, E. C., Fulda, N., Gubler, J. R., Rytting, C., and Wingate, D. Out of one, many: Using language models to simulate human samples. Political Analysis, 31 0 (3): 0 337--351, 2023

    2023

  3. [11]

    Autor, D. H. Why are there still so many jobs? the history and future of workplace automation. Journal of economic perspectives, 29 0 (3): 0 3--30, 2015

    2015

  4. [12]

    H., Levy, F., and Murnane, R

    Autor, D. H., Levy, F., and Murnane, R. J. The skill content of recent technological change: An empirical exploration. The Quarterly journal of economics, 118 0 (4): 0 1279--1333, 2003

    2003

  5. [13]

    and Hamilton, W

    Axelrod, R. and Hamilton, W. D. The evolution of cooperation. science, 211 0 (4489): 0 1390--1396, 1981

    1981

  6. [14]

    documentation debt

    Bandy, J. and Vincent, N. Addressing "documentation debt" in machine learning: A retrospective datasheet for bookcorpus. In Vanschoren, J. and Yeung, S. (eds.), Proceedings of the Neural Information Processing Systems Track on Datasets and Benchmarks, volume 1, 2021. URL https...

    2021

  7. [15]

    Generative ai can harm learning

    Bastani, H., Bastani, O., Sungu, A., Ge, H., Kabakc , O., and Mariman, R. Generative ai can harm learning. Available at SSRN, 4895486, 2024

    2024

  8. [16]

    M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., and Shmitchell, S

    Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., and Shmitchell, S. On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big? In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency, pp.\ 610--623, 2021

    2021

  9. [17]

    Bhattacharya, H., Dugar, S., Hazra, S., and Majumder, B. P. The good, the bad, and the ugly: The role of ai quality disclosure in lie detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.23143, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  10. [18]

    A., MacKnight, R., and Gomes, G

    Boiko, D. A., MacKnight, R., and Gomes, G. Emergent autonomous scientific research capabilities of large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.05332, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies

    Bostrom, N. Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2014

    2014

  12. [20]

    The rise of writing: Redefining mass literacy

    Brandt, D. The rise of writing: Redefining mass literacy. Cambridge University Press, 2014

    2014

  13. [21]

    Harpercollins is selling their authors' work to ai tech

    Broussard, D. Harpercollins is selling their authors' work to ai tech. Literary Hub, 2024. URL https://lithub.com/harpercollins-is-selling-their-authors-work-to-ai-tech/

    2024

  14. [22]

    Extracting training data from diffusion models

    Carlini, N., Hayes, J., Nasr, M., Jagielski, M., Sehwag, V., Tramer, F., Balle, B., Ippolito, D., and Wallace, E. Extracting training data from diffusion models. In 32nd USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 23), pp.\ 5253--5270, 2023

    2023

  15. [23]

    Coase, R. H. The problem of social cost. The journal of Law and Economics, 56 0 (4): 0 837--877, 2013

    2013

  16. [24]

    M., Levinthal, D

    Cohen, W. M., Levinthal, D. A., et al. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative science quarterly, 35 0 (1): 0 128--152, 1990

    1990

  17. [25]

    and Mejias, U

    Couldry, N. and Mejias, U. A. The costs of connection: How data are colonizing human life and appropriating it for capitalism, 2020

    2020

  18. [26]

    Who is ai replacing? the impact of genai on online freelancing platforms

    Demirci, O., Hannane, J., and Zhu, X. Who is ai replacing? the impact of genai on online freelancing platforms. 2024

    2024

  19. [27]

    Documenting large webtext corpora: A case study on the colossal clean crawled corpus

    Dodge, J., Sap, M., Marasovi \'c , A., Agnew, W., Ilharco, G., Groeneveld, D., Mitchell, M., and Gardner, M. Documenting large webtext corpora: A case study on the colossal clean crawled corpus. In Moens, M.-F., Huang, X., Specia, L., and Yih, S. W.-t. (eds.), Proceedings of t...

    2021 doi

  20. [28]

    the dog & the boy

    Edwards, B. Netflix taps ai image synthesis for background art in "the dog & the boy". Ars Technica, February 2023. URL https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2023/02/netflix-taps-ai-image-synthesis-for-background-art-in-the-dog-and-the-boy/

    2023

  21. [29]

    Gpts are gpts: An early look at the labor market impact potential of large language models

    Eloundou, T., Manning, S., Mishkin, P., and Rock, D. Gpts are gpts: An early look at the labor market impact potential of large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.10130, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  22. [30]

    and Spero, M

    Emi, B. and Spero, M. Technical report on the checkfor. ai ai-generated text classifier. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.14873, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  23. [31]

    How will language modelers like chatgpt affect occupations and industries? arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.01157, 2023

    Felten, E., Raj, M., and Seamans, R. How will language modelers like chatgpt affect occupations and industries? arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.01157, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  24. [32]

    AI could kill creative jobs that 'shouldn't have been there in the first place,' OpenAI 's CTO says

    Finance Yahoo . AI could kill creative jobs that 'shouldn't have been there in the first place,' OpenAI 's CTO says. Yahoo Finance, 2024. URL https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ai-could-kill-creative-jobs-191831144.html

    2024

  25. [33]

    Fowler, G. A. We tested a new chatgpt-detector for teachers. it flagged an innocent student. The Washington Post, 2023. URL https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/08/14/prove-false-positive-ai-detection-turnitin-gptzero/

    2023

  26. [34]

    Consistency of the permanent income hypothesis with existing evidence on the relation between consumption and income: Time series data

    Friedman, M. Consistency of the permanent income hypothesis with existing evidence on the relation between consumption and income: Time series data. Research Papers in Economics, pp.\ 115--156, 1957. URL https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:153882734

    1957

  27. [35]

    Capitalism and freedom

    Friedman, M. Capitalism and freedom. In Democracy: a reader, pp.\ 344--349. Columbia University Press, 2016

    2016

  28. [36]

    Chatgpt outperforms crowd workers for text-annotation tasks

    Gilardi, F., Alizadeh, M., and Kubli, M. Chatgpt outperforms crowd workers for text-annotation tasks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120 0 (30): 0 e2305016120, 2023

    2023

  29. [37]

    Ginsburg, J. C. Humanist copyright. J. Free Speech L., 6: 0 91, 2025

    2025

  30. [38]

    Goetze, T. S. Ai art is theft: Labour, extraction, and exploitation: Or, on the dangers of stochastic pollocks. In The 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp.\ 186--196, 2024

    2024

  31. [39]

    Gptzero's ai detection technology

    GPTZero. Gptzero's ai detection technology. https://gptzero.me/technology#how-ai-detection-works, 2023

    2023

  32. [40]

    Alignment faking in large language models

    Greenblatt, R., Denison, C., Wright, B., Roger, F., MacDiarmid, M., Marks, S., Treutlein, J., Belonax, T., Chen, J., Duvenaud, D., et al. Alignment faking in large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.14093, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Grynbaum, M. M. and Mac, R. The times sues openai and microsoft over a.i. use of copyrighted work. The New York Times, December 2023. URL https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/27/business/media/new-york-times-open-ai-microsoft-lawsuit.html. Accessed: 2025-01-26

    2023

  34. [42]

    a m \"a l \

    H \"a m \"a l \"a inen, P., Tavast, M., and Kunnari, A. Evaluating large language models in generating synthetic hci research data: a case study. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp.\ 1--19, 2023

    2023

  35. [43]

    Spotting llms with binoculars: Zero-shot detection of machine-generated text

    Hans, A., Schwarzschild, A., Cherepanova, V., Kazemi, H., Saha, A., Goldblum, M., Geiping, J., and Goldstein, T. Spotting llms with binoculars: Zero-shot detection of machine-generated text. In Forty-first International Conference on Machine Learning

  36. [44]

    and Serra-Garcia, M

    Hazra, S. and Serra-Garcia, M. Uneven trust in llms: Beliefs about accuracy vary across 11 countries. Working Paper, 2025

    2025

  37. [45]

    A., and Liang, P

    Henderson, P., Li, X., Jurafsky, D., Hashimoto, T., Lemley, M. A., and Liang, P. Foundation models and fair use. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 24 0 (400): 0 1--79, 2023

    2023

  38. [46]

    An overview of catastrophic ai risks

    Hendrycks, D., Mazeika, M., and Woodside, T. An overview of catastrophic ai risks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.12001, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Is that ai? or does it just suck? New York Magazine, 2024

    Herrman, J. Is that ai? or does it just suck? New York Magazine, 2024. URL https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/is-that-ai-or-does-it-just-suck.html

    2024

  40. [48]

    Artificial intelligence: Implications for the future of work

    Howard, J. Artificial intelligence: Implications for the future of work. American journal of industrial medicine, 62 0 (11): 0 917--926, 2019

    2019

  41. [49]

    The short-term effects of generative artificial intelligence on employment: Evidence from an online labor market

    Hui, X., Reshef, O., and Zhou, L. The short-term effects of generative artificial intelligence on employment: Evidence from an online labor market. Organization Science, 35 0 (6): 0 1977--1989, 2024

    1977

  42. [50]

    Artificial intelligence and aesthetic judgment

    Hullman, J., Holtzman, A., and Gelman, A. Artificial intelligence and aesthetic judgment. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.12338, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Watermark stealing in large language models

    Jovanovi \'c , N., Staab, R., and Vechev, M. Watermark stealing in large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.19361, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Two types of ai existential risk: decisive and accumulative

    Kasirzadeh, A. Two types of ai existential risk: decisive and accumulative. Philosophical Studies, pp.\ 1--29, 2025

    2025

  45. [53]

    and Raghavan, M

    Kleinberg, J. and Raghavan, M. Algorithmic monoculture and social welfare. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118 0 (22): 0 e2018340118, 2021

    2021

  46. [54]

    G., Horv \'a t, E.- \'A ., and Lause, J

    Kobak, D., M \'a rquez, R. G., Horv \'a t, E.- \'A ., and Lause, J. Delving into chatgpt usage in academic writing through excess vocabulary. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.07016, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Economic policy challenges for the age of ai

    Korinek, A. Economic policy challenges for the age of ai. Technical report, National Bureau of Economic Research, 2024

    2024

  48. [56]

    and Vipra, J

    Korinek, A. and Vipra, J. Concentrating intelligence: scaling and market structure in artificial intelligence. Economic Policy, 40 0 (121): 0 225--256, 2025

    2025

  49. [57]

    Krueger, A. O. The political economy of the rent-seeking society. In 40 Years of Research on Rent Seeking 2, pp.\ 151--163. Springer, 2008

    2008

  50. [58]

    Gradual disempowerment: Systemic existential risks from incremental ai development

    Kulveit, J., Douglas, R., Ammann, N., Turan, D., Krueger, D., and Duvenaud, D. Gradual disempowerment: Systemic existential risks from incremental ai development. 2025. URL https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:275932179

    2025

  51. [59]

    Landes, W. M. and Posner, R. A. The economic structure of intellectual property law. Harvard university press, 2003

    2003

  52. [60]

    Sam Altman Warns That AI Is Gonna Destroy a Lot of People's Jobs

    Landymore, F. Sam Altman Warns That AI Is Gonna Destroy a Lot of People's Jobs . Futurism, 2023. URL https://futurism.com/the-byte/sam-altman-warns-ai-destroy-jobs

    2023

  53. [61]

    Crafting papers on machine learning

    Langley, P. Crafting papers on machine learning. In Langley, P. (ed.), Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML 2000), pp.\ 1207--1216, Stanford, CA, 2000. Morgan Kaufmann

    2000

  54. [62]

    and Vee, A

    Laquintano, T. and Vee, A. Ai and the everyday writer. PMLA, 139 0 (3): 0 527--532, 2024

    2024

  55. [63]

    R., Ribeiro, M

    Latona, G. R., Ribeiro, M. H., Davidson, T. R., Veselovsky, V., and West, R. The ai review lottery: Widespread ai-assisted peer reviews boost paper scores and acceptance rates. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.02150, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Lemley, M. A. and Casey, B. Fair learning. Tex. L. Rev., 99: 0 743, 2020

    2020

  57. [65]

    Levine, M. E. and Forrence, J. L. Regulatory capture, public interest, and the public agenda: Toward a synthesis. JL Econ & Org., 6: 0 167, 1990

    1990

  58. [66]

    The dual-edged sword of technical debt: Benefits and issues analyzed through developer discussions

    Li, X., Esposito, M., Janes, A., and Lenarduzzi, V. The dual-edged sword of technical debt: Benefits and issues analyzed through developer discussions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.21007, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Deepseek-v3 technical report

    Liu, A., Feng, B., Xue, B., Wang, B., Wu, B., Lu, C., Zhao, C., Deng, C., Zhang, C., Ruan, C., et al. Deepseek-v3 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.19437, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  60. [68]

    T., Foerster, J., Clune, J., and Ha, D

    Lu, C., Lu, C., Lange, R. T., Foerster, J., Clune, J., and Ha, D. The ai scientist: Towards fully automated open-ended scientific discovery. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.06292, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Navigating challenges and technical debt in large language models deployment

    Menshawy, A., Nawaz, Z., and Fahmy, M. Navigating challenges and technical debt in large language models deployment. In Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Machine Learning and Systems, pp.\ 192--199, 2024

    2024

  62. [70]

    Generative ai – intellectual property cases and policy tracker

    Mishcon de Reya LLP . Generative ai – intellectual property cases and policy tracker. https://www.mishcon.com/generative-ai-intellectual-property-cases-and-policy-tracker. Accessed: 2024-09-11

    2024

  63. [71]

    The Lever of Riches: Technological Creativity and Economic Progress

    Mokyr, J. The Lever of Riches: Technological Creativity and Economic Progress. Oxford University Press, New York, 1992 a

    1992

  64. [72]

    The lever of riches: Technological creativity and economic progress

    Mokyr, J. The lever of riches: Technological creativity and economic progress. Oxford University Press, 1992 b

    1992

  65. [73]

    Homogenizing effect of large language model (llm) on creative diversity: An empirical comparison of human and chatgpt writing

    Moon, K., Green, A., and Kushlev, K. Homogenizing effect of large language model (llm) on creative diversity: An empirical comparison of human and chatgpt writing. 2024

    2024

  66. [74]

    C., Burr, C., Cowls, J., Joshi, I., Taddeo, M., and Floridi, L

    Morley, J., Machado, C. C., Burr, C., Cowls, J., Joshi, I., Taddeo, M., and Floridi, L. The ethics of ai in health care: a mapping review. Social Science & Medicine, 260: 0 113172, 2020

    2020

  67. [75]

    More human than human: measuring chatgpt political bias

    Motoki, F., Pinho Neto, V., and Rodrigues, V. More human than human: measuring chatgpt political bias. Public Choice, 198 0 (1): 0 3--23, 2024

    2024

  68. [76]

    Shared prosperity: links to growth, inequality and inequality of opportunity

    Narayan, A., Saavedra-Chanduvi, J., and Tiwari, S. Shared prosperity: links to growth, inequality and inequality of opportunity. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, 0 (6649), 2013

    2013

  69. [77]

    M., Thorpe, C., Brown, J

    Nash, D. M., Thorpe, C., Brown, J. B., Kueper, J. K., Rayner, J., Lizotte, D. J., Terry, A. L., and Zwarenstein, M. Perceptions of artificial intelligence use in primary care: a qualitative study with providers and staff of ontario community health centres. The Journal of the ...

    2023

  70. [78]

    Artificial intelligence impact on the labour force--searching for the analytical skills of the future software engineers

    Necula, S.-C. Artificial intelligence impact on the labour force--searching for the analytical skills of the future software engineers. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13229, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  71. [79]

    The logic of collective action [1965]

    Olson, M. The logic of collective action [1965]. Contemporary Sociological Theory, 124: 0 62--63, 2012

    1965

  72. [80]

    Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action

    Ostrom, E. Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge university press, 1990

    1990

  73. [81]

    and He, H

    Padmakumar, V. and He, H. Does writing with language models reduce content diversity? arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.05196, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  74. [82]

    and Spirling, A

    Palmer, A. and Spirling, A. Large language models can argue in convincing and novel ways about politics: Evidence from experiments and human judgement. Github Prepr, 2023

    2023

  75. [83]

    The role of artificial intelligence and automation in shaping labor markets

    Paslar, A. The role of artificial intelligence and automation in shaping labor markets. In Development Through Research and Innovation, pp.\ 137--151, 2023

    2023

  76. [84]

    The impact of ai on developer productivity: Evidence from github copilot

    Peng, S., Kalliamvakou, E., Cihon, P., and Demirer, M. The impact of ai on developer productivity: Evidence from github copilot. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.06590, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  77. [85]

    The reality of ai and biorisk

    Peppin, A., Reuel, A., Casper, S., Jones, E., Strait, A., Anwar, U., Agrawal, A., Kapoor, S., Koyejo, S., Pellat, M., et al. The reality of ai and biorisk. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.01946, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Authors sue anthropic for training ai using pirated books

    Peters, J. Authors sue anthropic for training ai using pirated books. The Verge, August 2024. URL https://www.theverge.com/2024/8/20/24224450/anthropic-copyright-lawsuit-pirated-books-ai. Accessed: 2025-01-26

    2024

  79. [87]

    Porquet, J., Wang, S., and Chilton, L. B. Copying style, extracting value: Illustrators' perception of ai style transfer and its impact on creative labor. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.17410, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  80. [88]

    and Machery, E

    Porter, B. and Machery, E. Ai-generated poetry is indistinguishable from human-written poetry and is rated more favorably. Scientific Reports, 14 0 (1): 0 26133, 2024

    2024

  81. [89]

    Prisoner's dilemma

    Poundstone, W. Prisoner's dilemma. Anchor, 2011

    2011

  82. [90]

    Fine-tuning aligned language models compromises safety, even when users do not intend to! arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.03693, 2023

    Qi, X., Zeng, Y., Xie, T., Chen, P.-Y., Jia, R., Mittal, P., and Henderson, P. Fine-tuning aligned language models compromises safety, even when users do not intend to! arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.03693, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  83. [91]

    Automation: Theory, evidence, and outlook

    Restrepo, P. Automation: Theory, evidence, and outlook. Annual Review of Economics, 16, 2023

    2023

  84. [92]

    OpenAI CEO's threat to quit EU draws lawmaker backlash

    Reuters. OpenAI CEO's threat to quit EU draws lawmaker backlash . Reuters, 2023. URL https://www.reuters.com/technology/openai-ceos-threat-quit-eu-draws-lawmaker-backlash-2023-05-25/

    2023

  85. [93]

    i wonder if my years of training and expertise will be devalued by machines

    Rony, M. K. K., Parvin, M. R., Wahiduzzaman, M., Debnath, M., Bala, S. D., and Kayesh, I. “i wonder if my years of training and expertise will be devalued by machines”: Concerns about the replacement of medical professionals by artificial intelligence. SAGE Open Nursing, 10: 0...

    2024

  86. [94]

    An a.i.-generated picture won an art prize

    Roose, K. An a.i.-generated picture won an art prize. artists aren’t happy. The New York Times, October 2022. URL https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/21/technology/ai-generated-art-jobs-dall-e-2.html

    2022

  87. [95]

    The political biases of chatgpt

    Rozado, D. The political biases of chatgpt. Social Sciences, 12 0 (3): 0 148, 2023

    2023

  88. [96]

    People who frequently use chatgpt for writing tasks are accurate and robust detectors of ai-generated text

    Russell, J., Karpinska, M., and Iyyer, M. People who frequently use chatgpt for writing tasks are accurate and robust detectors of ai-generated text. 2025. URL https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:275921918

    2025

  89. [97]

    S., Rezaei, K., Kumar, A., Chegini, A., Wang, W., and Feizi, S

    Saberi, M., Sadasivan, V. S., Rezaei, K., Kumar, A., Chegini, A., Wang, W., and Feizi, S. Robustness of ai-image detectors: Fundamental limits and practical attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.00076, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  90. [98]

    H., Gallotti, R., and West, R

    Salvi, F., Ribeiro, M. H., Gallotti, R., and West, R. On the conversational persuasiveness of large language models: A randomized controlled trial. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.14380, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  91. [99]

    Can llms generate novel research ideas? a large-scale human study with 100+ nlp researchers

    Si, C., Yang, D., and Hashimoto, T. Can llms generate novel research ideas? a large-scale human study with 100+ nlp researchers. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.04109, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  92. [100]

    An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations

    Smith, A. An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. Readings in economic sociology, pp.\ 6--17, 2002

    2002

  93. [101]

    Stigler, G. J. The theory of economic regulation. In The political economy: Readings in the politics and economics of American public policy, pp.\ 67--81. Routledge, 2021

    2021

  94. [102]

    Ed-copilot: Reduce emergency department wait time with language model diagnostic assistance

    Sun, L., Agarwal, A., Kornblith, A., Yu, B., and Xiong, C. Ed-copilot: Reduce emergency department wait time with language model diagnostic assistance. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.13448, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  95. [103]

    P., Oimann, A.-K., Chomanski, B., and Prunkl, C

    Swoboda, T., Uuk, R., Lauwaert, L., Rebera, A. P., Oimann, A.-K., Chomanski, B., and Prunkl, C. Examining popular arguments against ai existential risk: A philosophical analysis. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.04064, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  96. [104]

    Uk proposes letting tech firms use copyrighted work to train ai

    The Guardian . Uk proposes letting tech firms use copyrighted work to train ai. The Guardian, 2024. URL https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/dec/17/uk-proposes-letting-tech-firms-use-copyrighted-work-to-train-ai. Accessed: 2025-01-29

    2024

  97. [105]

    Will ChatGPT kill the student essay? The Atlantic, December 2022

    Thompson, D. Will ChatGPT kill the student essay? The Atlantic, December 2022. URL https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2022/12/chatgpt-ai-writing-college-student-essays/672371/

    2022

  98. [106]

    Ai is replacing illustrators in china’s video game industry — and pushing them to the brink

    Tobin, M. Ai is replacing illustrators in china’s video game industry — and pushing them to the brink. Rest of World, April 2023. URL https://restofworld.org/2023/ai-china-video-game-layoffs-illustrators/

    2023

  99. [107]

    Artificial intelligence, scientific discovery, and product innovation

    Toner-Rodgers, A. Artificial intelligence, scientific discovery, and product innovation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.17866, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  100. [108]

    The welfare costs of tariffs, monopolies, and theft

    Tullock, G. The welfare costs of tariffs, monopolies, and theft. In 40 Years of Research on Rent Seeking 1, pp.\ 45--53. Springer, 2008

    2008

  101. [109]

    The moral hazards of technical debt in large language models: Why moving fast and breaking things is bad

    Vee, A. The moral hazards of technical debt in large language models: Why moving fast and breaking things is bad. Critical AI, 2 0 (1), 2024

    2024

  102. [110]

    Wang, A., Morgenstern, J., and Dickerson, J. P. Large language models cannot replace human participants because they cannot portray identity groups. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.01908, 2024 a

    2024 arXiv

  103. [111]

    T., Deng, Z., Chiba-Okabe, H., Barak, B., and Su, W

    Wang, J. T., Deng, Z., Chiba-Okabe, H., Barak, B., and Su, W. J. An economic solution to copyright challenges of generative ai. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.13964, 2024 b

    2024 arXiv

  104. [112]

    Jailbroken: How does llm safety training fail? Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024

    Wei, A., Haghtalab, N., and Steinhardt, J. Jailbroken: How does llm safety training fail? Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024

    2024

  105. [113]

    R., He, H., and Feng, S

    Wen, J., Zhong, R., Khan, A., Perez, E., Steinhardt, J., Huang, M., Bowman, S. R., He, H., and Feng, S. Language models learn to mislead humans via rlhf. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.12822, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  106. [114]

    Google calls for weakened copyright and export rules in ai policy proposal

    Wiggers, K. Google calls for weakened copyright and export rules in ai policy proposal. TechCrunch, March 2025. URL https://techcrunch.com/2025/03/13/google-calls-for-weakened-copyright-and-export-rules-in-ai-policy-proposal/

    2025

  107. [115]

    World Bank, W. B. World development report 2019: The changing nature of work. The World Bank, 2018

    2019

  108. [116]

    Can large language models transform computational social science? Computational Linguistics, 50 0 (1): 0 237--291, 2024

    Ziems, C., Held, W., Shaikh, O., Chen, J., Zhang, Z., and Yang, D. Can large language models transform computational social science? Computational Linguistics, 50 0 (1): 0 237--291, 2024

    2024

  109. [117]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 gl...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.