AI was supposed to kill engineering jobs, but new data suggests they’re the most resilient

Said McCrory at the time: “There’s at least no larger material difference in unemployment rates” between workers who use Claude for the “most central task of their job in automated ways” — like technical writers, data entry clerks, and software engineers — and workers in jobs less exposed to AI that require “physical interaction and dexterity with the real world.” 

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang went further still, outright rejecting the theory that AI will replace engineers. “Somebody said that AI is going to destroy all of the software engineering jobs,” Huang said in an interview at the Stanford Graduate School of Business in April. He then argued the opposite is true. Now that all engineers at Nvidia are using agentic AI, “software engineers are busier than ever,” he said.

Huang added that while agents are writing code near instantaneously, they are constantly pushing engineers to generate “the next idea.”

For now at least, it seems that armed with AI, engineering has become a classic example of the Jevons paradox — the idea that greater efficiency doesn’t reduce demand for a resource; it increases it, because the work expands to fill the new capacity. As Bantock said of engineering talent in this moment: “They’re suddenly a lot more productive, and there’s endless work for them to do.”