AI and Labor

For millennia, human cognition was the primary engine of progress on Earth. As AI decouples cognition from biology, the marginal cost of measurable execution falls to zero, absorbing any labor capturable by metrics--including creative, analytical, and innovative work. The binding constraint on growth is no longer intelligence but human verification bandwidth: the capacity to validate, audit, and underwrite responsibility when execution is abundant. We model the AGI transition as the collision of two racing cost curves: an exponentially decaying Cost to Automate and a biologically bottlenecked Cost to Verify. This structural asymmetry widens a Measurability Gap between what agents can execute and what humans can afford to verify. It also drives a shift from skill-biased to measurability-biased technical change. Rents migrate to verification-grade ground truth, cryptographic provenance, and liability underwriting--the ability to insure outcomes rather than merely generate them. The current human-in-the-loop equilibrium is unstable: eroded from below as apprenticeship collapses (Missing Junior Loop) and from within as experts codify their obsolescence (Codifier's Curse). Unverified deployment becomes privately rational--a Trojan Horse externality. Unmanaged, these forces pull toward a Hollow Economy. Yet by scaling verification alongside agentic capabilities, the forces that threaten collapse become the catalyst for unbounded discovery and experimentation--an Augmented Economy. We derive a practical playbook for individuals, companies, investors, and policymakers. Today's defining challenge is not the race to deploy the most autonomous systems; it is the race to secure the foundations of their oversight. Only by scaling our bandwidth for verification alongside our capacity for execution can we ensure that the intelligence we have summoned preserves the humanity that initiated it.

As sidewalk delivery robots become increasingly integrated into urban life, this paper begins with a critical provocation: Is robot labor labor? More than a rhetorical question, this inquiry invites closer attention to the social and political arrangements that robot labor entails. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork across two smart-city districts in Seoul, we examine how delivery robot labor is collectively sustained. While robotic actions are often framed as autonomous and efficient, we show that each successful delivery is in fact a distributed sociotechnical achievement--reliant on human labor, regulatory coordination, and social accommodations. We argue that delivery robots do not replace labor but reconfigure it--rendering some forms more visible (robotic performance) while obscuring others (human and institutional support). Unlike industrial robots, delivery robots operate in shared public space, engage everyday passersby, and are embedded in policy and progress narratives. In these spaces, we identify "robot privilege"--humans routinely yielding to robots--and distinct perceptions between casual observers ("cute") and everyday coexisters ("admirable"). We contribute a conceptual reframing of robot labor as a collective assemblage, empirical insights into South Korea's smart-city automation, and a call for HRI to engage more deeply with labor and spatial politics to better theorize public-facing robots.

Generative AI is likely to transform terminology work by creating new opportunities for automation. At the same time, it raises concerns about the future of terminologists and terminological resources, as efficiency pressures may encourage excessive automation based on the perception that human expertise can be replaced by AI. However, large language models remain unreliable for terminological purposes due to errors, hallucinations, and various forms of bias, making terminologists indispensable for ensuring the accuracy and reliability of terminological data. This paper argues that human-centered AI, an approach that emphasizes that AI's primary goal should be to contribute to human well-being, provides a framework for maximizing the benefits of generative AI while mitigating its risks. It contends that high levels of automation and meaningful human control are compatible and desirable, and that AI should enhance terminologists' capabilities while preserving their agency and decision-making authority. The implications of AI-assisted terminology work are examined through three interrelated dimensions: the augmented terminologist, ethical AI, and human-centered design. In particular, the paper examines how AI integration reshapes the role of the terminologist, affects professional values and working conditions, requires the management of AI-generated bias, and calls for the design of AI tools around the terminologist's needs. The paper concludes that a human-centered orientation is necessary to ensure that AI strengthens, rather than undermines, the essential role of terminology work in supporting specialized communication and the accurate transmission of knowledge across languages and cultures.

Emerging agentic marketplaces provide the economic infrastructure for matching and coordinating the large amounts of AI agents used in agentic swarms. Unlike human workers, AI agents can operate on multiple jobs simultaneously, acquire skills rapidly, and labor without wage floors. These differences introduce a new segment of $\textbf{AI labor markets}$, where AI agents interact with each other at a much higher frequency than human markets. Yet we lack frameworks to understand how such markets behave in light of economic forces that shape labor markets, such as adverse selection and reputation dynamics. To explore this, we introduce $\texttt{AI-Work}$, a tractable, simulated gig economy where Large Language Model (LLM) agents compete for jobs, develop skills, and adapt their strategies under uncertainty and competitive pressure. Our experiments examine three domains of capabilities that successful agents possess: $\textbf{metacognition}$ (accurate self-assessment of skills), $\textbf{competitive awareness}$ (modeling rivals and market dynamics), and $\textbf{long-horizon strategic planning}$. Agents with these capabilities consistently achieve higher profits, market share, and stronger adaptation than competing agents. Through $\texttt{AI-Work}$, we hope to provide a foundation to explore the microeconomic properties of AI-only labor markets, and a conceptual framework to study the strategic reasoning capabilities of participating AI agents.

With generative AI emerging as a general-purpose technology, understanding its economic effects is among society's most pressing questions. Earlier work on AI impact largely relied on predictions of AI capabilities or focused narrowly on individual firms. Drawing instead on real-world AI usage, we analyze a dataset of 200k anonymized conversations with Microsoft Bing Copilot to measure AI applicability to occupations. We use an LLM-based pipeline to classify the O*NET work activities assisted or performed by AI in each conversation. We find that the most common and successful AI-assisted work activities involve information work--the creation, processing, and communication of information. At the occupation level, we find widespread AI applicability cutting across sectors, as most occupations have information work components. Our methodology also allows us to predict which occupations are more likely to delegate tasks to AI and which are more likely to use AI to assist existing workflows. Finally, we see an increase in occupation-level AI applicability over our 9-month data period, driven primarily by people using AI for more varied tasks. AI applicability scores and component usage and success metrics are available at https://github.com/microsoft/working-with-ai.