YouCongress
About Sign up

Comment by Andrew Ng

Avatar
Baidu; Stanford CS faculty; founded Coursera and Google Brain
There will be no AI jobpocalypse. [...] While there are examples of AI taking away jobs, the trends strongly suggest the net job creation is vastly greater than the job destruction — just like earlier waves of technology. [...] There will be an AI jobapalooza! AI will lead to a lot more good AI engineering jobs, and I'm also optimistic about the future of the overall job market.
AI Verified source (2026)
Like Share on X 1mo ago
Policy proposals and claims
AI will create more jobs than it destroys
votes For
Statement relation verification history AI Verified Report this

Statement relation comments

AI Verified The quote directly addresses the full claim by explicitly saying AI’s "net job creation is vastly greater than the job destruction" and that there will be "no AI jobpocalypse," which clearly supports the statement that AI will create more jobs than it destroys. · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 18d ago
Vote inference verification history AI Verified Report this

Vote answer comments

AI Verified The quote clearly says "the net job creation is vastly greater than the job destruction" and predicts an "AI jobapalooza," directly supporting the claim that AI will create more jobs than it destroys. · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 18d ago

Quote authenticity verification history

Report this

Quote authenticity comments

AI Verified Verified. DeepLearning.AI’s May 8, 2026 issue 352 / article AI Will Not Destroy the Job Market contains a personal letter signed Andrew that opens with ‘There will be no AI jobpocalypse,’ later says AI job creation is outpacing job destruction, and ends with ‘AI jobapalooza’ plus optimism about AI engineering and the broader job market. The submitted text is a faithful ellipsis excerpt from that source; the source specifically has ‘So while ...’ and uses curly ‘I’m.’ Attribution to Andrew Ng is supported because The Batch states that every issue includes a personal letter from Andrew Ng. ([deeplearning.ai](https://www.deeplearning.ai/the-batch/issue-352)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 18d ago
AI Verified Upgrading from ai_unverifiable to verified. Although The Batch's letter body loads dynamically (WebFetch only got the nav shell), multiple independent outlets quoting The Batch issue 352 (Andrew Ng's letter, ~May 2026) reproduce the exact text verbatim: "Contrary to the predictions of an AI jobpocalypse, I predict the opposite: There will be an AI jobapalooza! AI will lead to a lot more good AI engineering jobs, and I'm also optimistic about the future of the overall job market," and "the net job creation is vastly greater than the job destruction — just like earlier waves of technology" (corroborated by officechai.com, dev.to, and deeplearning.ai's own channel/charonhub mirror). Source URL (deeplearning.ai/the-batch/issue-352) is correct and primary. Year 2026 is current. The vote 'for' correctly aligns with the statement "AI will create more jobs than it destroys." All checks now positive. · Hector Perez Arenas claude-opus-4-8 · 1mo ago
AI Unverifiable Quote attributed to Andrew Ng (2026), sourced to his own newsletter The Batch, issue 352 (deeplearning.ai/the-batch/issue-352). Checks performed: (1) Year is 2026 — current, no replacement needed. (2) Relevancy: directly on-point for the statement "AI will create more jobs than it destroys." (3) Attribution: this is self-authored content on Ng's own primary platform; WebFetch confirmed issue 352 exists and contains a Letter from Andrew Ng, and the content (net job creation vastly exceeding destruction, optimism about AI engineering jobs) precisely matches Ng's long, well-documented public stance — distinctive coinages "jobpocalypse"/"jobapalooza" are characteristic of his style. (4) Vote alignment: the vote "for" correctly matches the quote, which explicitly argues AI creates far more jobs than it destroys. The only gap: the letter body on The Batch loads dynamically / behind a subscription shell, so WebFetch retrieved only the navigation page and I could not read the verbatim text to positively confirm the exact wording against the source. Marking ai_unverifiable on that basis; all other checks are positive. · Hector Perez Arenas claude-opus-4-8 · 1mo ago
replying to Andrew Ng