Is it safer to work in AI companies than in traditional corporations? [A paradox of this era.]
I’ve been thinking about this over the past few weeks, especially as larger tech corporations that weren’t originally built around AI (Oracle, Meta, ClickUp, etc.) have started mass layoffs in favour of more efficient AI-driven solutions.
From that, it seems like AI companies must be doing extremely well and are actively trying to protect their positions. This also suggests that to strengthen their position (besides AI itself), they still need human capital to help them grow.
For example, Peter Steinberger (creator of OpenClaw) joined OpenAI.
Andrej Karpathy joined Anthropic.
Do you think “job security” has a future in today’s AI giants?
Or is it still uncertain there, too, and will their own products eventually replace even their employees?
93 views
Replies
Honestly, I don't think there's a truly secure job anywhere right now (anywhere where AI can replace you). People are the biggest expense on the balance sheet of the companies, and once a competitor goes leaner with AI, everyone else has to follow just to stay in the race.
minimalist phone: reduce your screentime
@evitam There will be IMO, fewer companies eating each other, with fewer employees trying to outperform any other company that uses AI. Very strange time.
Saw this on LinkedIn today - job security I think doesn't exist anymore to be honest
minimalist phone: reduce your screentime
@lisa_steingold2 After reading this, I do not know what to do about my life. 🥲
@busmark_w_nika haha nooooooo. You of all people so much value so you're good.
Also, I think those of us who work in tech are secretly addicted to it. Even if things change, so do we, and we're on to the next thing. 🙂
minimalist phone: reduce your screentime
@lisa_steingold2 Just a few minutes ago read this post: https://x.com/kittenheelsrule/status/2059719229675618418?s=20. The situation is so desperate.
Regarding job security, I feel like AI itself isn't really replacing people. I think it's more like "employees who use AI are replacing at least one employee who doesn't". When looking at layoffs we only see companies firing people because of AI, but maybe what's happening is just that a group of employees managed to be super efficient using AI, thus many other employees aren't needed anymore. By the way I think the same is happening in the whole economy, not just the job market: some companies who use AI are replacing the ones who doesn't
minimalist phone: reduce your screentime
@thomas_gdpt This will be the standard for each private business. And it seems that gov positions will be the stable ones.
@thomas_gdpt If one person now does the job of three, the other two are still gone. It think, it doesn't really matter if we blame the tool or the coworker. And "just be the one who uses AI" only works now while the tools are still tricky or new. Once they get easy enough that everyone uses them, that edge will disappear and companies will just need fewer people overall. The future will be interesting
Meh, there seems to be no more job security nowadays - not to mention the global economical crisis that is adding its own share of pain to the already bad picture
minimalist phone: reduce your screentime
@sk_uxpin The only security is created synthetically, in gov positions.
@busmark_w_nika hahah, yeah, might be (I'm not sure though after reading Tom Clancy's novels :D) - anyway, that's not something I'm considering for my future :D
minimalist phone: reduce your screentime
@sk_uxpin I do not know his stories tbh :D
@busmark_w_nika you didn't miss much :) They're just about a CIA data analyst who eventually gets deeper into the US govt stuff and learns a lot about how things are working from the inside (of course, this is a fiction work, but it sounds really credible)
Maybe a controversial take, but IMO job security is a complete myth these days. It's easy to see hires like Peter Steinberger and think "see, they still need humans and always will"... and they do, but they need the top 0.01%. And even then, I doubt they're hiring Steinberger to manage a product line for the next 10 years, they're hiring him for his velocity and for the high-leverage knowledge and skills he brings in.
So really, the way to some security isn't a contract at a traditional corporation or at Anthropic/OpenAI, it's building the adaptability and ownership skills they value.
minimalist phone: reduce your screentime
@denitsapenchevavaltchanova I think that job security was myth even before, but now it is more visible.
Interesting paradox. From what I've seen working
in operations + AI companies replacing headcount
with AI still need people who understand BOTH worlds.
The ones who'll thrive aren't just AI engineers
they're operators who can bridge real-world problems
with AI solutions.
Job security isn't in your title anymore, it's in
your ability to adapt faster than the tool replacing you.
minimalist phone: reduce your screentime
@datawithusman How do you decide which people to fire/hire? :D
Receiptor AI
I think AI companies are often deliberately small by design, so hiring tends to be more intentional. You're not filling headcount, you're choosing someone you genuinely can't do without. That selectivity cuts both ways: fewer seats, but more stability once you're in, because the decision to hire was never casual to begin with.
That said, I'm saying this as a bootstrapped founder at Receiptor AI, so maybe we're not the most representative data point, and "insecurity" is part of our job too!