Yang’s comments echo concerns raised by policymakers. In a recent podcast appearance, White House AI advisor David Sacks said AI executives are “scaring the bejeezus out of the public” with warnings about the technology’s potential impact.
Leaders including Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman have cautioned that advanced AI systems could displace large numbers of white collar jobs. Amodei has also said that he cannot rule out the possibility that Anthropic’s chatbot, Claude, could one day exhibit signs of consciousness.
Investors may reward such efficiency moves. However, in a recent report, the research firm Forrester pointed to a growing trend of “AI-washing,” where companies attribute layoffs to AI even when the cuts are primarily driven by financial pressures.
Forrester’s analysis suggests automation will have a “real but modest” impact on employment through 2030. The firm estimates AI could account for about 6% of total U.S. job losses—roughly 10.4 million roles—but said widespread AI-driven job replacement remains unlikely.
During the panel, Chowdhury questioned how often those claims reflect real productivity gains. “A lot of the benchmarks that have been built around productivity gains or replacing workers have atomized work down to individual tasks,” she said. “No one’s job is like that.”
In some cases, Chowdhury suggested, layoffs attributed to AI may instead reflect companies correcting pandemic-era hiring surges.
Beyond immediate layoffs, panelists also worried about how AI-driven shifts could affect younger workers entering the labor market.
Johnson noted that many young people already face a crisis of anxiety about their career prospects. “If we’re not careful,” he said, “an entire generation is not going to acquire the kinds of skills and experience that people usually acquire in their 20s.”
Despite those concerns, Hughes said the discussion should ultimately focus less on technological inevitability and more on policy choices.
