Call centre trainer Natheera Berdien says she fears AI could eventually replace workers across industries as systems become capable of performing more tasks. That worry lands where the pressure always does: on people who sell their labor and have to watch powerful institutions automate the ground out from under them.
Who Pays for the Machine
Berdien said seeing demonstrations of increasingly advanced AI has made her question how far the technology could ultimately go. She’s not alone. As artificial intelligence rapidly advances, concerns over its potential impact are growing in South Africa and around the world, with some members of the public worried about jobs, safety and the technology’s ability to operate beyond human control. That’s the basic arrangement here: decisions made at the top, uncertainty dumped downward.
Model Ben Kalambo also expressed concerns, arguing that AI could limit employment opportunities and give technology greater influence over people’s lives. He warned that society could face serious problems if AI continues developing without sufficient safeguards. The language is polite, but the stakes are blunt. If AI keeps expanding without real limits, the people most exposed won’t be the executives or the engineers. It’ll be everyone expected to adapt, absorb the risk, and call it progress.
The People at the Bottom See It First
The public concerns come as technology leaders remain divided over how AI should be regulated. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has supported US regulation and international cooperation, while Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang has rejected calls for slowing AI development. That split says plenty. One side wants rules, the other wants speed, and ordinary people are left to live with whatever the machine economy spits out.
The article’s central tension is plain enough. Workers and the public are talking about jobs, safety, and control. The people with the most power are arguing over how much restraint, if any, they should place on themselves. That’s not a democratic safeguard. It’s a fight inside the apparatus over how fast to move while everyone else waits to see what gets broken.
Safeguards on the Clock
Experts have also warned that the opportunity to establish effective safeguards could be narrowing as AI development accelerates and political attention turns towards upcoming US elections. There it is again: the familiar ritual of reform drifting into electoral theater. The clock runs, the technology advances, and the political class turns its attention toward elections instead of the people already facing the consequences.
The warning about narrowing safeguards matters because it shows how quickly control can slip away once profit and competition set the pace. AI development accelerates, political attention shifts, and the chance to impose real limits gets smaller. Meanwhile, the public is asked to trust that regulation will arrive in time, even as the most powerful players disagree on whether slowing down is even on the table.
Berdien’s fear, Kalambo’s warning, and the experts’ caution all point to the same imbalance. The people doing the work, living with the consequences, and trying to imagine what comes next have the least say in how the technology is built and deployed. The bosses of the system call it innovation. Everyone else has to hope the safeguards show up before the damage does.