LLMs, which are not AGI, are already eliminating some human work.

Judged as of 2025. True if credible evidence from 2025 or earlier (company announcements attributing layoffs or hiring cuts to LLM tools, labour-market studies, documented cases of tasks like translation, copywriting or customer support being taken over by LLMs) shows that LLMs had replaced some paid human work, and LLMs were not generally accepted as AGI. Mostly true if the displacement evidence is real but mostly reduced hiring or task automation, not outright job elimination. Mixed if the evidence is ambiguous, with studies split on whether any measurable work had been eliminated. Mostly false if studies found no measurable displacement and the claim rests only on anecdotes or company statements. False if the evidence shows no human work had been eliminated by LLMs by 2025.

Set before the research began.

1. E1 Canaries in the Coal Mine? Six Facts about the Recent Employment Effects of Artificial Intelligence Erik Brynjolfsson, Bharat Chandar, Ruyu Chen (Stanford University; working paper) · 13 November 2025

   “Early-career workers (ages 22-25) in AI-exposed occupations experienced 16% relative employment declines, controlling for firm-level shocks, while employment for experienced workers remained stable.”

2. E2 Canaries in the Coal Mine? Six Facts about the Recent Employment Effects of Artificial Intelligence Erik Brynjolfsson, Bharat Chandar, Ruyu Chen (Stanford University; working paper) · 13 November 2025

   “Consequently firms may primarily shrink junior inflows rather than displace incumbents.”

3. E3 Meat back on the menu as Klarna rows back on AI Computing (computing.co.uk) · 13 May 2025

   “Our AI assistant now performs the work of 700 employees, reducing the average resolution time from 11 minutes to just two, while maintaining the same customer satisfaction scores as human agents,”

4. E4 Meat back on the menu as Klarna rows back on AI Computing (computing.co.uk) · 13 May 2025

   “Klarna, the Swedish buy-now-pay-later financial services company, is rowing back on AI and has started hiring people, once again, after discovering that AI chatbots could not match human-based customer service.”

A Stanford working paper found a 16% relative employment decline for workers aged 22-25 in AI-exposed occupations, controlling for firm-level shocks, while experienced workers' employment remained stable (E1). The authors suggest firms may mainly be hiring fewer junior workers rather than displacing current staff (E2). Klarna said its AI assistant performs the work of 700 employees (E3), but it later resumed hiring people because chatbots could not match human customer service (E4). The evidence supports real displacement that is mostly reduced hiring and task automation, which fits 'mostly true' under the criteria.