Alena Presley
Cassidy, John. “Can A.I. Be Pro-Worker?” The New Yorker, 20 Oct. 2025, https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-financial-page/can-ai-be-pro-worker.
Summary: John Cassidy dives into some really interesting research from three MIT economists who argue that AI doesn’t have to result in everyone losing their jobs. He talks about the difference between “so-so automation,” think of those frustrating automated customer service bots that don’t actually help, and AI that actually makes workers better at what they do, or their job easier.
The main takeaway is that how AI affects our future isn’t just “happening” to us. It’s a choice made by companies and policy makers. To make it “pro-worker,” we have to focus on using the tech to help people perform more complex tasks and give workers a real seat at the table.
Why I liked it: I really appreciated how this article pushes back against the idea that we’re just passive observers of the “AI revolution.” It’s easy to feel a bit anxious about how automation will change the professional world, but Cassidy’s focus on augmentation, using tech to amplify or partner with human skill, feels much more like a positive thing.
As someone who spends a lot of time thinking about how to design instructions and guides that help people move and work more intuitively, I loved the idea of AI being a “force multiplier” for human expertise rather than just a way to cut costs by replacing us. It made me feel a lot more optimistic about where we’re headed if we can get the policy side right.
John Cassidy is also someone who I have gravitated towards when it comes to the news around AI. He seems to have a relatively optimistic, yet realistic outlook on Ai and it’s progress as a whole.
Leave a Reply