What's this about?
Mollick, commenting on a boom in a particular category of work: not exactly the type of jobs you want to see boom as a result of AI, but a good example of how what work is in demand may shift rapidly as AI capabilities change.
Why is the shape of the shift more interesting than the size?
Because the public argument is about how many jobs, and the observable reality is about which ones — and the which is far less predictable. Demand does not simply fall; it moves, often into categories that exist because of the new failure modes rather than despite them. Reviewing generated work, verifying citations, triaging automated findings, cleaning up after agents: none of these are jobs anyone wanted created, and all of them are growing. Levie's "great time to be in security" is the same observation with a positive framing.
Why is it worth noticing?
- "Not the type of jobs you want to see boom" is doing the work in that sentence, and he does not soften it.
- It is the labour-market counterpart to the lawyer's memo and the vendor-incentive problem in this digest.
- Rapid shifts in demand are harder to adapt to than gradual decline, even when total employment holds.