Ex-Google Exec Says "The Idea That AI Will Create New Jobs Is 100% Crap"

Skepticism about “AI will create jobs”

• Many argue the slogan sounds like generic political sales talk (“protect kids / create jobs”) rather than a serious claim, and note fear-based messaging in the linked video.
• Several see a looming demand problem: firms cut headcount; laid‑off workers buy less; money circulates mainly among AI vendors and big customers, shrinking the consumer base.

Historical automation vs this AI wave

• One camp: past tech (tractors, dump trucks, industrialization, agricultural advances) massively reduced labor in one sector but freed people to do other, often better‑paid, work; overall employment remained robust.
• Counter‑camp: that story hides winners/losers (Detroit, Ruhrgebiet, offshoring) and ignores today’s bifurcated incomes and precarious, low‑rights jobs.
• A key worry: earlier waves automated physical tasks and created intellectual/service work; if AI can handle most intellectual work, what’s left for average humans to transition into?

What jobs might appear or change?

• Concrete suggestions: more trades (plumbers, carpenters, electricians), testers/QA for AI‑generated “slop,” AI content verification teams, data‑center and infra roles (power, chips, construction, security), AI consulting/SaaS, delivery gigs.
• Critics say this is mostly job reallocation and some is “bad” job creation (cleaning up AI messes), not net new opportunity.
• Some expect expansion of face‑to‑face human services (care, therapy, social/experiential work) because authentic interaction can’t be perfectly replicated.

Economic theories and “this time is different”

• Pro‑market view: for ~250 years tech killed jobs but unemployment rates stayed stable; unemployed people are a resource and markets reliably find new uses.
• Skeptics push back: economists’ track record is poor, and “past performance is no guarantee of future results,” especially if AI+robots can both think and act at or above median human ability.
• Dystopian strand: either super‑effective AI triggers a consumer‑demand death spiral under current profit incentives, or AI underdelivers after huge capital misallocation—both ending badly without structural change (e.g., UBI or new welfare metrics beyond GDP).

Views on the ex‑Google executive and AI hype

• Multiple commenters question his credibility and motives, noting he runs an AI startup (emma.love) and making fun of claims like needing “350 developers” for that app.
• His prior public statements (AGI by 2026, LLMs as “conscious,” AI‑run utopia in 15 years) are widely characterized as delusional or marketing, not grounded analysis.