Article
Will AI take my job?
On the sixth of June 2024, I was at the afterparty of the ZirconTech Summit, a gathering of Slovak e-commerce leaders, just outside Bratislava. I asked one of the attendees what he thought would be the biggest change in e-commerce over the next decade.
That person was Martin Volek, one of the first Google-certified trainers in Slovakia and a regular guest on Slovak business programmes.
He said: "Your profession will cease to exist. Don't let it weigh on you. But it will happen."
I went quiet. I do not remember what I said next. The conversation carried on. But I kept that sentence.
Martin saw a few things more clearly that evening than I did.
Two fears about AI: losing your job, or falling behind
What I see today is fear.
At Mixit, where I work as Head of Performance, and at events like that summit, I mostly run into two kinds of fear. Usually they come packaged with jokes. The kind of joking where you can hear the fear underneath.
The first is the fear of losing your job. People hear that AI will replace knowledge work, the things we do on a computer.
The second fear is felt, paradoxically, by those who are ahead with AI. They fear falling behind. Something important is slipping past them. A new model, a method someone came up with last week. They spend evenings and weekends trying to keep pace.
You cannot keep up with AI, and you do not need to
The fear of falling behind on AI has one simple source. The amount of AI content being published is more than anyone can read. A better summariser will not solve it. Even if some agent scraped and summarised everything, that summary still would not fit inside a normal life with work, sleep, and the time needed to actually apply anything.
Hours spent watching AI videos do not make you better at your job. What counts is whether you watch the thing that moves your work forward, and whether you apply it.
My own consumption of AI news is now nearly zero. Thirty minutes a day at most. What I have instead is access to people in Slovakia and Czechia whose businesses are built on applying AI and who know what actually works. I will learn more from five sentences with one of them than from ten YouTube videos.
I have stopped watching most AI influencers. They talk about short-term viral trends, not about how to actually apply things that make sense.
What changed over twenty-two months
My job title has not changed since the ZirconTech summit. But what I do during the day is ninety percent different.
In June 2024 I spent hours every week on manual data work. In April 2026 I do none of that. What I do is give feedback to agents when they make a bad call. My work has shifted up one level. I no longer do spreadsheet work by hand. I work with the reasoning of the system that works with the data.
It changed gradually and fairly quickly at the same time.
What delegating judgement to AI looks like
I have delegated more of my thinking than I ever thought possible. This is what Martin saw more clearly than I did. For example, when we are considering deploying a new intelligent feature on our company website, the model does the research, weighs the options (tools, costs, time, trade-offs), and puts them in a table, from which it picks the best option. I read the table and check whether the logic holds. The final call is still mine or someone from leadership. But the weighing and comparing is no longer mine.
In certain cases it has gone further.
Join the Library
Full access to my thoughts, personal stories, findings, and what I learn from the people I meet.
Join the Library · €29.99 per yearGet the full article by email and feel free to reply if you want to discuss it further.
Summary
Common questions on this article's topic
Is my job safe from AI?
What jobs can AI not replace?
Will AI replace marketers?
How do I keep up with AI?
How do I stay relevant in the age of AI?
Is AI going to take my job?
Related articles
Employees have the best AI models available at work, the connectors are hooked up, and colleagues already use them. And they still do not. AI adoption fails even when the tools are already there. It is not about time or AI skills. It is the inertia of old thinking.

I have Heidegger and my notebook beside me. I am asking where all of this is heading, where artificial intelligence is taking us.
Sixteen of twenty-seven sources did not check out. They did not exist, led to dead links, or claimed something that was not in them. The report came from one of the largest consulting firms in the world. It was meant to be about cybersecurity. They pulled it.
More articles
The same task, two models. Fable 5 against Opus 4.8. On paper Fable is the better model, with a larger context and stronger specs. And still it lost. Opus handled the task with a single round of checking for 721,000 tokens, while Fable needed nine rounds and burnt through 2.78 million tokens. The difference was not in the model, but in how I set the task. And I know it, because I measured it.
A few weeks ago I installed a small local AI model on my laptop that watches a live camera feed. I turned the webcam on in the dark, and in near total darkness it recognised me and the objects in the room. That such things exist, I have known for a long time. What opened my eyes was the accessibility. I installed it in one prompt, free, and it runs entirely on my machine, sending data nowhere.

I once wrote about building my own privacy-friendly analytics tool. It had bot detection from the first version, yet it was not enough. Direct visits took a strangely high share of my traffic. When someone claims that 20% of their visits are bots and 80% are humans, I used to think the same. Today I would say the opposite ratio is closer to the truth. This is how I got there.
Seventy per cent. That is where the first AI output begins, even when you give it the full company context and the best examples from the past. We are talking about the kind of output that cannot be defined programmatically. It is more complex. Often it is creative work. On one repeated type of output I reached eighty per cent within a week. Every further percentage point is harder than the one before.
For a long time we treated the internet as the main road. The place where work and relationships happen. Yet most of what we see on it today is, or soon will be, AI-generated: text, images, profiles and comments. The internet is turning into an online game full of bots, where you cannot be sure that a human is on the other side of anything. So I ask: was the online world the main road, or only a temporary detour that part of us will return from, back offline?
A few days ago I interviewed a senior marketer. An experienced man, years of practice. I asked him about AI. He said he barely uses it. He had one bad experience with the output and decided he was too senior for it to add value when it is not perfect. I know the other side too: professionals who automate everything that can be automated.
Europe does not have the capacity to face a full-scale, mass drone war of the kind we see in Ukraine. Three dependencies weaken it: China supplies the physical material for defence systems, the United States supplies capabilities Europe does not have, and twenty-seven states cannot agree how fast, or who pays. Rearmament plans exist, but they are being carried out slowly.
AI produces the graphic, the newsletter and the product page faster than a person. What is left for the one who used to do it is the judgement, knowing whether the output is good. But most people have worse judgement than AI. And whoever cannot judge quality cannot delegate either. How do you tell whether yours is the judgement a company relies on, or the kind it can replace?
In April, in the first part of this series, I wrote about an AI prediction system I had started building on my own machine. At the time the software was a few hours old and the prediction record was empty. The record since then has shown one thing: the system does not yet understand the market it is being asked to forecast. It can pull macro context, book value, earnings. But it cannot put those together into something that helps it understand the price.

Four days in Catalonia. No computer, no AI, almost no social media. I bought this notebook so that I could write down what I would think about, and what I would come across and learn on the trip.

