Business Finance Media Technology Policy Wealth Insights Interviews

Art Art Fairs Art Market Art Reviews Auctions Galleries Museums Interviews

Lifestyle Nightlife & Dining Style Travel Interviews

Power Index Nightlife & Dining Art A.I. PR

About About Observer Advertise With Us Reprints

The Stanford Economist Studying A.I.’s Jobs Impact Is ‘Mindfully Optimistic’

The Stanford economist argues A.I. rewards those who actively use it to create value, not those who fear or ignore it.

Earlier this month, a student walked into Erik Brynjolfsson’s office hours with a blunt fear: that she might never find a job in the A.I. era. She worried her generation could be left behind entirely. Brynjolfsson, a Stanford economist who studies technology and labor, doesn’t share that outlook. He calls himself “mindfully” optimistic.

Sign Up For Our Daily Newsletter

Thank you for signing up!

By clicking submit, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge we may use your information to send you emails, product samples, and promotions on this website and other properties. You can opt out anytime.

“I told her that, in many ways, this is a great time to be alive,” Brynjolfsson told Observer. “People who are using the tools are going to be able to seize the opportunity—and people who don’t use the tools are going to have a lot harder time keeping up.”

The tension between new technologies’ disruption and opportunity sits at the center of his work. Brynjolfsson leads the Stanford Digital Economy Lab and is a senior fellow at the Institute for Human-Centered AI, led by pioneer A.I. researcher Fei-Fei Li. He has spent decades studying how technology reshapes jobs.

His recent research suggests A.I. is already reducing opportunities for early-career workers. Even so, he remains an advocate for hands-on experimentation. He’s particularly enthusiastic about “vibe-coding,” for example, where users generate code with natural language prompts. Brynjolfsson said he often vibe-codes himself late into the night. “This technology is not just for a small, elite group of people who have to be highly trained anymore,” he said.

For Brynjolfsson, the real risk isn’t A.I. itself, but how people respond to it. Both blind optimism and outright fear, he argues, can lead to passivity. “That’s the worst thing we could do.”

Observer spoke with Brynjolfsson about how individuals can adapt, stay competitive, and make the most of A.I.’s rapid rise.  The following conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

How did you first become interested in the intersection........

© Observer