The Robotization of Humanity: Beyond the Tidal Wave of AI
What if the real threat of AI isn’t job loss, but something far more insidious? What if, in our rush to automate work, we’re inadvertently automating ourselves? This is the provocative question that lingers long after reading Sarah O’Connor’s We Are Not Machines. While tech leaders like Satya Nadella and Mustafa Suleyman frame AI’s rise as an unstoppable ‘tidal wave’ or ‘impending deluge,’ O’Connor invites us to pause and consider: What are we losing in this flood?
Personally, I think the ‘wave’ metaphor is more than just a convenient analogy—it’s a cop-out. By likening AI to a natural disaster, it absolves us of responsibility. A tsunami, after all, is no one’s fault. But AI isn’t a force of nature; it’s a product of human choices. And those choices, as O’Connor reveals, are reshaping not just our jobs, but our very humanity.
The Illusion of Progress in Amazon’s Warehouses
One thing that immediately stands out is O’Connor’s visit to an Amazon warehouse, where robots ferry shelves to human pickers. On the surface, it’s a marvel of efficiency. Workers no longer trudge miles each day; the goods come to them. But dig deeper, and the picture darkens. These workers stand at fixed stations, guided by lights that dictate every move. O’Connor tries it herself and is stunned: there’s no room for decision-making, no space for thought.
What many people don’t realize is that this isn’t just about eliminating physical labor—it’s about eliminating human agency. In my opinion, this is the crux of the issue. We’re not just automating tasks; we’re automating the very essence of what makes work meaningful. If you take a step back and think about it, this isn’t progress—it’s reduction.
The Subtle Erosion of Skilled Work
Consider Petr, the Czech subtitler. Once, his job was about nuance—capturing jokes, idioms, and cultural subtleties. Now, AI generates the first draft, and he’s reduced to a corrector. The joy, the creativity, the judgment—all stripped away. His work now mirrors the factory job he once escaped.
This raises a deeper question: What happens when AI doesn’t replace jobs but hollows them out? From my perspective, this is where the real danger lies. We’re not just losing jobs; we’re losing the parts of work that make us feel alive.
Safety vs. Surveillance: The Double-Edged Sword of Automation
In the ‘Body’ section, O’Connor explores physically demanding jobs like lorry driving and mining. Here, automation seems like a clear win—machines remove humans from danger. But the story isn’t that simple. Monitoring technologies that prevent accidents also intensify surveillance. Autonomous vehicles may reduce exhaustion but leave workers isolated, reduced to mere overseers.
A detail that I find especially interesting is how every tool comes with built-in assumptions. Productivity, attention, obedience—these aren’t neutral concepts. They reflect a particular worldview, one that prioritizes efficiency over humanity. What this really suggests is that automation isn’t just about replacing humans; it’s about redefining what it means to work.
The Soul of Work: What AI Can’t Replace
The final section, ‘Soul,’ is where O’Connor’s book truly shines. She examines jobs that require empathy, trust, and human presence—care workers, writers, teachers. At Buurtzorg, a Dutch nursing organization, nurses work in self-managing teams, focusing on patients as whole people, not checklists. A sandwich left uneaten isn’t just waste; it’s a potential sign of illness or depression.
What makes this particularly fascinating is the contrast with countries like Japan, where robots are being deployed to care for the elderly. In my opinion, this isn’t just a practical solution—it’s a moral question. Are we willing to outsource compassion to machines? If you take a step back and think about it, this isn’t just about efficiency; it’s about what kind of society we want to be.
The Bigger Picture: Are We Robotizing Ourselves?
Here’s the thing: We Are Not Machines isn’t a Luddite manifesto. O’Connor isn’t against technology; she’s against thoughtless automation. What many people don’t realize is that the ‘wave’ narrative distracts us from the real issue. It’s not about whether AI will take our jobs; it’s about whether we’ll let it take our humanity.
From my perspective, the most pressing question isn’t how to prepare for the wave, but how to steer it. Do we want a future where work is reduced to rote tasks, or one where technology enhances our creativity, empathy, and agency? Personally, I think the choice is ours—but only if we stop treating AI like a force of nature and start treating it like what it is: a tool shaped by human hands.
Final Thoughts
If there’s one takeaway from O’Connor’s book, it’s this: The real danger of AI isn’t that it will bore us to extinction, but that it will bore us into compliance. We’re not just robotizing our work; we’re robotizing ourselves. And that, in my opinion, is a future worth fighting against.
So, the next time someone talks about the ‘tidal wave’ of AI, ask them: Who’s building the wave machine? And more importantly, who’s holding the reins?
