Adding AI to the spectacle feels existentially daunting because it moves us even further from the work we do, and its value. I don’t build the pitch that wins the client; I write the query that tells the AI to write it, and then I check the work afterward. I don’t gather the materials and write the industry newsletter; my agent does it. Before, that work might’ve felt cheap and unsatisfying, deep down, but it was still ours. Now AI is being forced on organizations in ways that call the value of the entire enterprise of Workism itself into question.

This is a new wrinkle.

And this is where things get particularly interesting. I don’t think Debord imagined something so seismically paradigm-shifting that it could abstract work to an extent that it would shake the working class, or, in the case of Knowledge Workers, enough to rupture a spectacle like Workism. But with the introduction of AI, it is as if, over the past 30 years, we have been slowly taking steps away from the direct experience of life and work, and AI risks pushing us far enough that the illusion becomes entirely visible.

I didn't get into software development to babysit an idiot robot that does my job badly.

I agree with the author — this is a major inflection point.

A contrived example: digging a hole then filling that hole. Completely pointless. But we've gone from digging it with our bare hands, to using a shovel, to using construction equipment and finally to watching an autonomous system do it. And we're flirting with removing any supervision.

While it was pointless at every step, a person was involved and was kept busy. Even if the purpose was stupid, it was there. Now it isn't. There's no one being kept busy, no purpose at all, and no one is being employed.

Americans in particular derive their personal identity from their profession. What happens when it's gone? When the idea of work itself is gone?