The divergence in public opinion regarding artificial intelligence likely stems from its varied applications and the specific versions being used. To different observers, AI is either the most capable colleague, an upgraded search engine, or a significantly overvalued gimmick. Moreover, consensus seems elusive. Tech executives who champion AI have long proclaimed that the technology will fundamentally transform work and spark a new industrial revolution. Skeptics, however, view this as marketing hype, with some researchers and departing executives issuing warnings about AI safety concerns. The past week may have highlighted this divide more than ever, as an article by an AI company CEO and investor went viral, claiming AI will replace all computer-based jobs. But a simpler explanation for such polarized views might exist: People are using the single term "AI" to describe vastly different types of the technology and methods of use. Matt Murphy, a partner at Menlo Ventures who has led investments in AI firms like Anthropic, stated: "There is a massive disparity in people's exposure to and depth of use with this technology, and it's happening very rapidly."

Free AI vs. Paid AI Individuals who only use free AI for basic tasks like creating shopping lists or planning trips are likely seeing just one facet of the technology. A Menlo Ventures report from last June estimated that only 3% of AI users are paid subscribers, though Murphy told CNN he expects this ratio to change quickly. Paid subscribers, however, gain access to another key capability: Intelligent agents that can perform tasks on your behalf, rather than just chat-based response generators, often with fewer usage restrictions. For instance, Anthropic's Claude Cowork agent is only available on the $20-per-month Pro plan and higher tiers. A similar situation exists with OpenAI's Codex programming agent. It is this category of AI that fuels concerns about job displacement—including the controversial viewpoint presented in the viral article by investor and Otherside AI CEO Matt Shumer. Shumer wrote: "I would tell the AI: 'I want to build this app. Here are its features, here is the general look and feel. Handle the user flow, the design, everything.' And it did. It wrote tens of thousands of lines of code." He also claimed the AI could test the app and make decisions involving aesthetics and judgment. From this, he speculated that if AI can write code at this level, it could begin to iterate and improve itself. (In 2024, AI researchers accused Shumer of exaggerating his company's AI model capabilities. He apologized at the time, telling CNN it was the "biggest mistake" of his career and a lesson learned.) Some experts expressed skepticism about the scenario Shumer described, questioning if it is achievable even with paid versions, especially as he did not specify the exact model used or the type of app developed. Shumer told CNN he primarily used OpenAI's GPT-5.3 Codex tool to develop a moderately complex app for testing. But Carnegie Mellon Professor Emily Djeu, who teaches courses on AI business applications, argues that free AI does not showcase the technology's full capabilities. She said judging AI's potential based solely on free services is "incomplete and misleading." Oren Etzioni, a University of Washington professor emeritus and former CEO of the Allen Institute for AI, compared the difference between free and paid AI to that between an enthusiastic but inexperienced intern and a seasoned, efficient one. Free versions excel at summarization and content generation, but for deep research or complex document drafting, users typically need a paid subscription. He noted that while free AI can "give surprisingly good advice" and "conduct fairly sophisticated conversations," you would never rely on it as you would a lawyer or even a legal assistant. However, AI companies are gradually incorporating more advanced features into their free tiers. James Landay, co-director of the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered AI, cited this as one reason he believes the gap between free and paid AI is not vast. A prime example: Anthropic released its new Sonnet 4.6 model on Tuesday, stating its performance would approach that of the higher-tier Opus model, which is only available in paid plans.

Ongoing Tensions Between AI and the Workplace AI applications from various providers are increasingly integrated into daily digital life—from text and image generation tools to research and assistance features. In early February, software stocks fell significantly after AI company Anthropic released tools tailored for vertical industries like legal and financial analysis. This release, combined with Shumer's article, amplified market concerns that AI could eventually automate knowledge work on a large scale, similar to how it is beginning to streamline software engineering. Concurrently, skepticism is growing about whether AI can truly deliver on these grand promises—often made by tech executives with a commercial stake in AI's success. Several studies have tempered expectations regarding AI's actual capabilities and adoption speed. Researchers from the Center for AI Safety and Scale AI found last year that top AI models produced incorrect results when performing tasks like processing data visualizations and writing game code. Model Evaluation and Threat Research, an AI model testing organization, found in July that developers actually spent 19% more time when using AI to write code (though the study was based on tools available in early 2025). Landay also suggested the viral article overstated AI's role in software development. He described AI as a useful tool for programmers to increase speed, but noted it remains prone to errors and does not write its own code. While experts generally agree AI will transform many industries, its performance in programming should not be seen as a direct indicator of its competence in other professions. "(Programming) is a logical structure very suitable for a machine to test code and verify if it works," he said. "But many people's jobs are not structured that way."