People keep asking: "Will my job disappear because of AI?"
That question is wrong.
AI doesn't replace jobs. It replaces tasks.
And by "Deals," I don't mean sales transactions—I mean
commitments with consequences: the decisions someone
must sign their name to, the risks someone must accept,
the accountability someone must carry when things break.
This distinction matters more than most discussions realize.
The Mistake: Treating Jobs as Atomic Units
Most “AI will replace X” arguments treat jobs as indivisible objects. But real work is a bundle of different activities. To understand the future, we must decompose the bundle:
- Execution & Repetition — Writing code, boilerplate, and migrations.
- Pattern Matching — Identifying a bug from a stack trace or log file.
- Responsibility & Ownership — Deciding when to deploy and taking the heat when things break.
AI is expanding into execution and pattern matching at an exponential rate. It is NOT expanding into ownership.
The "2:00 AM" Litmus Test
Imagine it’s 2:00 AM. A critical production service is down.
An AI agent (Phase 4: Agentization) can:
- Detect the anomaly in the logs.
- Trace the root cause to a specific commit.
- Generate a fix and run the tests.
- Propose a Pull Request.
But does the AI merge that PR into main?
If it does, and the fix accidentally wipes the production database, who is held accountable?
The AI doesn't get fired. The AI doesn't face the CTO. The AI doesn't lose sleep over the company's reputation.
The AI can propose. Only a human can commit.
The person who clicks "Merge" is the one making the "Deal." You are agreeing that this outcome is acceptable. You are accepting the risk. You are providing the human signature that turns a "task" into a "commitment."
Why “Deals” Matter
When I say "Humans Do Deals," I don’t mean sales. I mean the high-stakes agreements that keep a business alive:
- Risk Acceptance: Deciding that "Done" is better than "Perfect" for this release.
- Ambiguity Resolution: Aligning messy stakeholder needs with technical reality.
- Accountability: Being the "single neck to wring" when things go wrong.
| Likely to be Automated (Tasks) | Never Automated (Deals) |
|---|---|
| Writing Unit Tests | Deciding what level of risk is acceptable |
| Refactoring Legacy Code | Choosing the strategic direction of the tech stack |
| Identifying Security Vulnerabilities | Deciding to ship with a known minor bug |
| Generating Documentation | Ensuring the team is aligned on the mission |
The Boundary That Doesn’t Move
AI will continue to expand its capability, autonomy, and environment access. It will move from "helping you type" to "executing workflows."
But it will not move into Moral, Legal, or Strategic responsibility. The AI is the engine; you are the driver. The engine does the work of moving the car (Task), but the driver is responsible for where the car goes—and what happens if it hits something (Deal). That boundary is not a technical one; it's a social and legal one. It doesn't move.
The Real Future of Work
We are not losing work. We are losing repetition.
And we are gaining ownership.
If you think AI replaces professions, you will panic. If you realize AI replaces tasks, you can adapt.
The most valuable engineers of the next decade won't be the ones who type the fastest or memorize the most APIs. They will be the ones who can audit AI-generated work—and still have the courage to sign their own name under it.
In Part 2, I will break down the practical shift: How to stop being a "Coder" and start being a "Validator."
Top comments (0)