Katherine D’Amato of Project Counsel Media says that America is heading toward the infinite workweek. And (of course), AI is to blame.

As she discusses in this article (Thank you AI! America is heading toward the infinite workweek., available here), D’Amato discusses that one of the most unexpected consequences of AI may not be mass unemployment, but rather the creation of an “infinite workweek” in which employees are expected to constantly supervise, manage, and interact with AI agents. While AI has been widely promoted as a productivity tool that automates routine tasks and frees workers for higher-value activities, she suggests that the reality is proving far more complicated.

Referencing an article from Lila Shroff of The Atlantic, D’Amato’s article discusses how AI-powered agents often require significant human oversight. Developers who rely on coding agents report that although their productivity has increased dramatically, so has their mental exhaustion. One example is programmer and blogger Steve Yegge, who found himself overwhelmed by managing multiple AI systems and described his role as that of an “AI babysitter.”

Why? Because AI agents aren’t fully autonomous – yet. They frequently ask follow-up questions, require permissions, and need constant monitoring to ensure they stay on task. Rather than reducing workloads, these systems can create a new layer of cognitive burden. Managing multiple AI agents simultaneously can feel like juggling numerous competing tasks at once, leading to distraction, stress, and diminished focus.

Yegge is not alone. As Shroff notes, plenty of people are seemingly starting to feel like depleted AI babysitters. When Boston Consulting Group recently surveyed roughly 1,500 workers across several roles at major American companies, the firm found that many workers were experiencing “mental fatigue from excessive use or oversight of AI tools beyond one’s cognitive capacity.” Respondents described a “buzzing” and “fog”-like feeling, sometimes accompanied by headaches, slower decision making, and trouble focusing.

It goes on. Shroff notes: “In my own experiments with AI agents, I’ve experienced some of this brain fog myself. To get in the mindset of an overstimulated developer while working on this story, I asked Claude Code to deploy a team of agents to supplement my research. I already had done my reporting, but I figured the bot might be able to surface more information.” While the bot promised that the research would be easy, Claude Code began asking for all kinds of permissions to take actions on her behalf.

Shroff states that for all the justified concern over the potential for AI to automate work, the rise of AI babysitting points to how AI technology is already changing jobs. Rather than predicting a straightforward “white-collar apocalypse,” she cites MIT economist David Autor, who believes AI is more likely to transform jobs than eliminate them entirely.

Guess what? AI may not deliver the leisure and workload reductions many expected. As I noted back in September 2024, if anything, you’re busier than ever because you’re expected to do WAY more than ever. Technology hasn’t made your lives easier; it has just enabled you to get more done with the time you have – which has stretched more into traditional personal time.

America is heading toward the infinite workweek – like it always has, just faster than ever. Job security could be both a blessing and a curse.

So, what do you think? Are you working as hard as ever – even with AI? Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Image created using GPT-4’s Image Creator Powered by DALL-E, using the term “robot lawyer riding an exercise bike while looking at a small mobile device with one hand and juggling two tennis balls with the other hand”.

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by my employer, my partners or my clients. eDiscovery Today is made available solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Today should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.