Ep 775 Thread July 23, 2026 1:06 w/ Fern

2079979321607745905

A new paper finds AI isn't killing jobs — it's actually growing headcount at firms using it heavily, but only past a meaningful spending threshold.

Read the source → Plain-text transcript →

Embed this episode

Paste this on any site — the player is a self-contained iframe with no cookies or trackers.

<iframe src="https://sandrise.io/exploring-next/embed/775"
  width="100%" height="180" style="max-width:640px;border:0;border-radius:12px;overflow:hidden"
  title="Exploring Next — Episode 775 audio player"
  loading="lazy" allow="autoplay" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin"></iframe>

Embed & API docs →

Script Sonnet 4.6 Voice Rime Arcana

Transcript

Fern AI was supposed to gut the job market. So why hasn't it?

Fern A new paper has a pretty clear answer: most companies aren't really using AI. Like, at all.

Fern The researchers split firms into adoption tiers. Bottom two-thirds — low spend per employee — saw zero hiring change. Flat. Same as firms using no AI.

Fern But the top tier… those firms grew headcount by 10% over two years.

Fern The threshold that matters is roughly $30 per employee per month on AI tooling. Below that, nothing moves.

Fern So the aggregate looks calm because the heavy users are still a small slice. The signal is real — it's just concentrated.

Fern Search for Ara Kharazian's paper — he posted the thread on X July 22nd. The methodology on how they defined adoption tiers is worth reading.

Fern The tsunami metaphor people are using is apt. Quiet water doesn't mean nothing's coming.