Jensen Huang just drew a line through the entire global workforce.
One sentence. No ambiguity.
Huang: “If your job is the task, then you’re very highly going to be disrupted.”
Not might be. Not eventually. Very highly going to be.
That single distinction between a job and a task is the most important career diagnosis anyone will hear this decade.
If you show up every day to execute a repeatable process, you are the process.
And the machine runs processes better than you. Faster. Cheaper. Without breaks. Without errors. Without a salary negotiation.
The moment your role can be written as a checklist, the checklist gets automated. And your desk gets cleared.
That is not a warning about the future. That is a description of what is already underway.
But Huang did not stop at the diagnosis. He handed you the prescription in the same breath.
Huang: “If your job’s purpose includes you certain tasks, then it is vital that you go learn how to use AI to automate those tasks.”
Your job includes tasks. But your job is not the tasks.
Your job is the judgment around them. The decisions. The context. The instinct for why the work matters and what to do when everything breaks.
That stays human. Everything else gets handed to the machine.
And the person who hands it over first does not lose their job. They become more valuable than everyone still doing it by hand. Because they just converted every hour they used to spend on execution into hours spent thinking.
The accountant who automates data entry does not get replaced. They become the strategist who used to be buried in spreadsheets.
The marketer who automates reporting does not get fired. They become the creative who used to be trapped building dashboards.
The person who refuses to automate anything becomes the most expensive way to do the cheapest work.
Huang: “It is the case that the technology will dislocate and will eliminate many tasks. And because it will automate it.”
No softening. No hopeful footnote.
Dislocation is coming. Tasks will be eliminated. That part is settled.
The only open question is which side of that line you are standing on. The side that lost the tasks. Or the side that gave them away on purpose and kept the work that actually matters.
One side gets disrupted. The other side gets dangerous.
The gap between those two outcomes is not talent. Not credentials. Not experience. It is whether you learned to use the machine before the machine learned to replace you.
That window is still open. It is closing faster than most people are willing to believe.
And it does not reopen.
Chinese oil major Cnooc and Cosco, the country’s biggest marine transport line, have been blacklisted by the US government for alleged links with the PLA https://t.co/YUBFnvb4of
Probably one of the better calls to listen to if you consider investing in $OET/$ECO. @Aristidis gives some insight on how they are able to outperform peers by 50%. The analyst are trying to figure out the secret sauce 😉 https://t.co/lqgenL4HUf
@aksjefokus Ja, det høres ut som slik jeg husker det. Hvis det stemmer, så er jo potensielle nedsiden til Mercuria stor om ratene skal ta helt av. Så derfor jeg stusser på om de ikke har sikret seg rundt det på en måte. Man kan jo evt vurdere å spørre IR i HUNT
@aksjefokus Jeg har som sagt ikke satt meg helt inn i detaljene, og tror kanskje det er en part mellom DHT og Hunter Group, men tror Hunter har DHT Puma og på flåtelisten til DHT står den med profit share https://t.co/WGkA699uc6 (men jeg kan ta feil!)
@aksjefokus Ja, du har rett i giring, men de deler jo også en del av profitt med DHT og skulle ratene bli dårlige(re) enn man forventet sitter fremdeles de som eier stålet og håver inn (før evt ratene går under 20k). Men jeg har som sagt ille regnet alt for mye på HUNT. Et lite lodd kanskje
@aksjefokus Avtalene er vel ikke direkte med DHT, men via et mellommledd. Synes avtalene virker litt merkelige og likte bedre «forrige» HUNT. Ikke brukt alt for mye tid på de, men virker jo bedre å investere rett i DHT, FRO og OET som eier stålet selv 😅