AI and the Future of Expertise: Empowering Workers in the Age of Automation
How Artificial Intelligence Could Reshape the Labor Market and Restore the Middle Class
Reading David Autor’s recent essay in NOEMA got me thinking deeply about the future of work in the age of artificial intelligence. While many are understandably anxious about the impact of AI on jobs, Autor makes a compelling case that “AI will change the labor market, but not in the way Musk and Hinton believe. Instead, it will reshape the value and nature of human expertise.” This framing resonated with me and I believe it deserves further exploration.
Autor’s starting point is that despite the fears of tech luminaries like Elon Musk about AI leading to mass unemployment, the demographic reality is that most rich countries are actually facing the opposite problem. As he notes, “Due to plummeting birth rates and a cratering labor force, a comparable labor shortage is unfolding across the industrialized world (including in China).” In other words, we are more likely to run out of workers before we run out of jobs. This means that the key question is not whether there will be enough work, but rather what kind of work will be most valuable.

This brings us to Autor’s central insight about expertise. As he explains, “Expertise is the primary source of labor’s value in the U.S. and other industrialized countries. Jobs that require little training or certification, such as restaurant servers, janitors, manual laborers and (even) childcare workers, are typically found at the bottom of the wage ladder.” Expertise commands a premium in the market when it is both necessary for a task and in scarce supply.
The challenge is that the computer era undermined and devalued many forms of “mass expertise” in routine, rule-based work while concentrating rewards among a small set of highly educated professionals. “By making information and calculation cheap and abundant, computerization catalyzed an unprecedented concentration of decision-making power, and accompanying resources, among elite experts.”
But here is where the story gets interesting. Autor argues that AI could invert this dynamic by enabling a much wider set of workers to take on elements of higher-stakes decision making that are currently monopolized by elite professionals. The reason, he explains, is that “artificial intelligence can weave information and rules with acquired experience to support decision-making, [so] it can enable a larger set of workers equipped with necessary foundational training to perform higher-stakes decision-making tasks currently arrogated to elite experts, such as doctors, lawyers, software engineers and college professors.”
I find this to be a powerful and hopeful argument. If AI can be responsibly deployed to augment the capabilities of workers with more basic certifications and training, it could help rebuild the hollowed out middle of the labor market. As Autor puts it, “AI is a tool, like a calculator or a chainsaw, and tools generally aren’t substitutes for expertise but rather levers for its application.”
Imagine, for example, if well-trained nurses could use AI guidance to diagnose and treat routine medical conditions, or if paralegals could leverage AI to draft standard legal documents. “By providing decision support in the form of real-time guidance and guardrails, AI could enable a larger set of workers possessing complementary knowledge to perform some of the higher-stakes decision-making tasks currently arrogated to elite experts like doctors, lawyers, coders and educators. This would improve the quality of jobs for workers without college degrees, moderate earnings inequality, and — akin to what the Industrial Revolution did for consumer goods — lower the cost of key services such as healthcare, education and legal expertise.”
Of course, this is not a given and we will have to be proactive in steering AI in this direction. We need robust training and support structures to ensure that workers can effectively and safely use these AI tools. We need strong governance frameworks and accountability measures to protect against misuse and bias. And we need to grapple with complex questions about liability, credentialing and the evolving roles of traditional professions.
But these are challenges worth taking on. The alternative is to allow AI to continue to concentrate knowledge work in an ever-smaller sliver of elite experts while consigning the majority to low-wage, low-skill jobs. By empowering more workers to leverage their own expertise in new ways, AI could be the key to building a future of work that is not only more productive, but more balanced and equitable. As Autor puts it, “AI offers vast tools for augmenting workers and enhancing work. We must master those tools and make them work for us.”
I couldn’t agree more. The age of AI will be defined not by the technology itself, but by the choices we make in how to harness it. Let us choose to make it an age of shared prosperity and human potential.
Recent Blog Posts
Six ideas from the Musk-Dwarkesh podcast I can’t stop thinking about
I spent three days with this podcast. Listened on a walk, in the car, at my desk with a notepad. Three hours is a lot to ask of anyone, especially when half of it is Musk riffing on turbine blade casting and lunar mass drivers. But there are five or six ideas buried in here that I keep turning over. The conversation features Dwarkesh Patel and Stripe co-founder John Collison pressing Musk on orbital data centers, humanoid robots, China, AI alignment, and DOGE. It came days after SpaceX and xAI officially merged, a $1.25 trillion combination that sounds insane until you hear...
Feb 8, 2026The machines bought Super Bowl airtime and we rank them
Twenty-three percent of Super Bowl LX commercials featured artificial intelligence. Fifteen spots out of sixty-six. By the end of the first quarter, fans on X were already exhausted. The crypto-bro era of 2022 has found its successor. This one has better PR. But unlike the parade of indistinguishable blockchain pitches from years past, the AI ads told us something. They revealed, in thirty-second bursts, which companies understand what they're building and which are still figuring out how to explain it to 120 million people eating guacamole. The results split cleanly. One company made art. One made a promise it probably can't...
Feb 3, 2026The Developer Productivity Paradox
Here's what nobody's telling you about AI coding assistants: they work. And that's exactly what should worry you. Two studies published this month punch a hole in the "AI makes developers 10x faster" story. The data pointssomewhere darker: AI coding tools deliver speed while eroding the skills developers need to use that speed well. The Numbers Don't Lie (But They Do Surprise) Anthropic ran a randomized controlled trial, published January 29, 2026. They put 52 professional developers througha new programming library. Half used AI assistants. Half coded by hand. The results weren't close. Developers using AI scored 17% lower on...