future of work and worth

Share on:

The intelligence age will reshape our conception of “work” and human value in the same way the industrial revolution prompted a reevaluation of “strength” and physical labor. This shift demands new economic and social paradigms to ensure broad participation in the prosperity that AGI promises.

While the notion that physical strength was often seen as a key measure of usefulness before machines holds some truth, the reality is more complex. Before abundant mechanization, physical strength was indeed highly valued, especially in agricultural & manual labor contexts; however, the industrial revolution changed how labor and human value were perceived, shifting emphasis toward technical skills, mental acuity, and adaptability. Raw physical strength became less central to economic value.

We’re facing a similar shift with intelligence. For centuries, we’ve tied our identity to our ability to out-think problems. “Smart” became a proxy for “valuable.” But when AI agents can solve hard research problems, or browse the web and write legal briefs better than most humans, we’ll need a new way to think about human value. This transformation strikes at the heart of our economic system, challenging not just what work means, but how people access economic power and dignity.

The worry here is that we might cling too long to our old definitions of work and worth. Societies can get stuck in transitional phases, trying to preserve old status hierarchies even when they’ve lost their economic basis. Just as the industrial revolution required new social contracts and labor relations, the intelligence age demands fresh thinking about how people participate in economic life when traditional labor loses its leverage. Universal basic income could provide a foundation for economic security, while broader capital ownership through mechanisms like public benefit corporations or algorithmic commons could ensure AI’s benefits are widely shared. Worker-owned AI cooperatives could give labor a stake in the automation that displaces it. Digital public goods and open-source AI models could democratize access to intelligence tools. This is most likely a generation-defining debate.

The winners in the intelligence age won’t be those who compete with AI at its own game, but those who first figure out what game humans should be playing instead. This might mean reimagining ownership structures, like distributed autonomous organizations (DAOs) that automatically share returns from AI systems, or new forms of collective bargaining that secure data rights and algorithmic transparency. We could explore hybrid models where humans retain creative and strategic control while delegating implementation to AI systems. The challenge isn’t just technological – it’s about ensuring that the benefits of safe AGI flow to everyone, not just those who already control capital.

This transition could be challenging. We’ve spent generations telling ourselves that our job title is who we are. But necessity is a powerful force for cultural change. When AGI makes the old model of work redundant, we’ll adapt. We always do. The key will be ensuring that this adaptation includes new mechanisms for economic participation and dignity, rather than merely accepting a world where capital no longer needs labor in traditional ways.

Acknowledgements:

• Intelligence Age, Sam Altman
  
• Nirman Dave for reviewing a draft of this.