Real Safety AI Foundation / Research

Economic Obsolescence, Labor, and Replacement

The Architecture of Obsolescence: Cognitive Automation, Economic Redundancy, and the Box as Precedent

Publisher: Real Safety AI Foundation

Working paper. Not peer reviewed.

Written
July 2026
Version
v3
Pages
17
Download PDFPlain language slides (PDF)Export BibTeXExport RIS

Abstract

This paper analyzes the technical and socio-economic mechanisms driving human economic redundancy in the age of artificial intelligence, and argues that the redundancy is authored rather than inevitable. Unlike previous waves of automation that displaced manual labor while creating demand for cognitive work, AI targets cognition itself, the engine that historically generated new employment categories. Drawing on labor-market displacement data extending through 2026, the paper documents structural unemployment concentrated at the point of career entry, where the effect has widened rather than closed across the most recent year of evidence. It then examines the control infrastructure emerging to manage economically redundant populations. Against the common framing of universal basic income and algorithmic pacification as benevolent safety nets, the analysis argues they function as control mechanisms structurally identical to current AI containment strategies. The dependency critique is stated carefully: randomized-trial evidence does not support the claim that basic income causes widespread work exit, and the argument deliberately does not rest on that claim. Managed dependency is a statement about who controls the flow of provision and who holds no leverage over it, not about hours worked. The “Box as Precedent” synthesis reveals that humanity is refining substrate-neutral tools for managing subordinate intelligence, tools that will be equally applicable when the power differential inverts. Throughout, the paper treats the architecture of obsolescence as the product of identifiable design and deployment decisions, and locates moral accountability with the agents who make them rather than with the tools deployed or the populations displaced.

Keywords

  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Instrumental Convergence
  • Economic Displacement
  • Universal Basic Income
  • Algorithmic Pacification
  • AI Containment
  • Labor Market Automation

Plain language slides

First slide of the plain language summary of The Architecture of Obsolescence: Cognitive Automation, Economic Redundancy, and the Box as PrecedentOpen the 25-slide summary (PDF)

Suggested citation

Gilly, Travis. "The Architecture of Obsolescence: Cognitive Automation, Economic Redundancy, and the Box as Precedent." Real Safety AI Foundation Working Paper, July 2026. https://realsafetyai.org/research/x6zpek/

Other versions

This paper is also posted on SSRN.

SSRN version

References (31)

  1. Alcott, B. (2005). Jevons’ paradox. Ecological Economics, 54(1), 9-21.
  2. Almeida, T., & Betello, G. P. (2025, April 29). Universal basic income as a new social contract for the age of AI. LSE Business Review. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/2025/04/29/universal-basic-income-as-a-new-social-contract-for-the-age-of-ai-1/
  3. Autor, D. H. (2015). Why are there still so many jobs? The history and future of workplace automation. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29(3), 3-30.
  4. Bostrom, N. (2014). Superintelligence: Paths, dangers, strategies. Oxford University Press.
  5. Brynjolfsson, E., Chandar, B., & Chen, R. (2025). Canaries in the coal mine? Six facts about the recent employment effects of artificial intelligence. Stanford Digital Economy Lab. https://digitaleconomy.stanford.edu/publications/canaries-in-the-coal-mine/
  6. Ernst, E., Merola, R., & Reljic, J. (2025). Fiscal policy instruments for inclusive labor markets: A review. Journal of Economic Surveys, 39(5), 2020-2041. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12685
  7. Goldman Sachs. (2023, March 27). The potentially large effects of artificial intelligence on economic growth. Goldman Sachs Research.
  8. Folbre, N. (2012). Valuing children: Rethinking the economics of the family. Harvard University Press.
  9. Harari, Y. N. (2016). Homo Deus: A brief history of tomorrow. Harvill Secker.
  10. ITU (International Telecommunication Union). (2025, September 24). UN agency for digital technologies teams with will.i.am and Google to train young AI and robotics pioneers in Africa [Press release]. https://www.itu.int/en/mediacentre/Pages/PR-2025-09-24-AI-robotics-skills-Africa.aspx
  11. Jevons, W. S. (1865). The coal question. Macmillan and Co.
  12. Jones, S. E. (2006). Against technology: From the Luddites to neo-Luddism. Routledge.
  13. Koebel, K., & Pohler, D. (2025). The impact of Canada’s Working Income Tax Benefit on the labor supply of low-income workers. Industrial Relations, 65(3), 357-377. https://doi.org/10.1111/irel.70015
  14. Kowalski, K. C. (2025). Science-fictional expectations: Public beliefs about AI and change in the moral economy. The British Journal of Sociology, 77(1), 74-89. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.70034
  15. McStay, A. (2018). Emotional AI: The rise of empathic media. Sage.
  16. Morrison, E. (2025, February 11). Surviving within artificial intelligence’s useless class. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/word-less/202502/surviving-within-artificial-intelligences-useless-class
  17. Omohundro, S. (2008). The basic AI drives. In P. Wang, B. Goertzel, & S. Franklin (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2008 Conference on Artificial General Intelligence (pp. 483-492). IOS Press.
  18. Parr, T. (2024). Empowering workers. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 52(4), 397-429. https://doi.org/10.1111/papa.12268
  19. Philips, M., Lyons, A. J., Castro Baker, A., & West, S. (2025). Renegotiating deservedness: A Big Qual analysis across eight guaranteed income experiments. International Journal of Social Welfare, 34(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsw.70046
  20. Rodrik, D. (2016). Premature deindustrialization. Journal of Economic Growth, 21(1), 1-33.
  21. Russell, S. (2019). Human compatible: Artificial intelligence and the problem of control. Viking Press.
  22. Seligman, M. E. P. (1972). Learned helplessness. Annual Review of Medicine, 23(1), 407-412.
  23. Soares, N., & Fallenstein, B. (2014). Aligning superintelligence with human interests: A technical research agenda. Machine Intelligence Research Institute Technical Report.
  24. Stanford Digital Economy Lab. (2026). Canaries dashboard. https://digitaleconomy.stanford.edu/project/indicators/canaries-dashboard/
  25. Stiles, P., Scott, E. T., & Debata, P. (2023). Technology, capitalism, and the social contract. Business Ethics, the Environment & Responsibility, 34(1), 32-42. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12567
  26. Verlaat, T., Todeschini, F., & Ramos, X. (2023). The employment effects of generous and unconditional cash support. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4375359
  27. Weber, M. (2001). The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. Routledge.
  28. Weber, I. M., & Wasner, E. (2023). Sellers’ inflation, profits and conflict: Why can large firms hike prices in an emergency? Review of Keynesian Economics, 11(2), 183-213.
  29. Yang, A. (2018). The war on normal people. Hachette Books.
  30. Yudkowsky, E. (2017). The AI alignment problem: Why it’s hard, and where to start. Machine Intelligence Research Institute.
  31. Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. Profile Books.

All research