d simulated worlds that are visually perfect and then we start populating them with characters who are programmed to believe that they're real and not characters, we're going to realize that we're a simulation. There's no way around it. It's definitely coming. So the biggest shock humanity will ever experience will be the realization, uh oh, we're actually just made from some kind of code. And then we'll have some fun. But that's coming.

NBC News is reporting that AI does not seem to have made any real difference in the job market yet. However, they also report that companies are claiming that AI is the reason they're downsizing because it's so modern, so cool. I don't know about you, but I downsized 15,000 people because I implemented AI. What did you do today?

And for a CEO, it's like the ultimate brag. Oh yeah, I'm so far ahead of the curve. I've already downsized using AI. Of course. Are you? Have you done that yet? Oh, no, you haven't. Oh, well, I guess you're a little bit behind me, aren't you? I feel sorry, you poor bastards.

So sure enough, and you might remember that I've predicted this a number of times, that the Dilbert filter, as I call it, suggests that CEOs would immediately start artificially claiming credit for AI, knowing that the AI made no difference or made things worse. But they're all gonna say, "Uh, yeah, we put a billion dollars into AI, so yeah, yeah, that's why we're saving money." Uh huh. That's why. But no evidence yet.

However, there are a growing number of situations where AI may create a job where no job existed. For example, also in the news, we can now use, when I say we, I act like I'm part of the project or something, but we humans can now use AI to locate people lost in forests. So if you had a bunch of satellite or drone pictures of a forest where maybe somebody was lost, it would be really hard to spot somebody in a forest. But apparently AI can do it. So it can spot the smallest irregularity and it can look faster than a human can. So apparently it's already being used. And it also can do geolocation. So once it finds somebody in the woods, it can tell you exactly where that is.

So it seems to me that a job will be created for some startup or something where they say something's lost, we'll find it for you, and they'll just sell that service and in the short run it'll be staffed by people. So there's going to be some number of new jobs that never existed before that will create jobs for humans, but other jobs will be lost, of course. Don't know what the net will be.

But Illinois just became the first state to ban AI from acting as a therapist. So it's literally illegal in Illinois to have AI as a therapist. I don't know what that means for the AI apps. Does that mean they have to block people with a geofence or something? I don't know how they implement that. But this is a story in some science publication. And the idea is they want to keep the mental health care in the hands of humans.

Now, do you see a problem with that? One of my predictions about AI is that humans would find a way to stymie all of its potential because we wouldn't want it taking our jobs. So here we have already the therapists who got enough clout and they worked their magic until they get a law that makes it illegal for AI to compete with them. How many other domains do you think will do this?

How long will it be before the legal profession gets a law passed everywhere that says you cannot use AI or AI cannot give legal advice because you wouldn't know if they were giving good advice or bad advice? So the lawyers are going to say for the safety of the public, it should be illegal for AI to even offer legal advice. Instead, it should say, "Huh, that sounds like a legal question. You should consult a $1,000 an hour lawyer." I feel like every domain is going to do this. They're all going to say, "Well, AI would be too dangerous in my domain." So you better make that illegal. Illinois goes first.

Futurism's Joe Wilkins is writing that apparently the AI industry and a lot of related people are spending billions of dollars to build out AI, but nobody really has a good idea how it's ever going to pay back. So the size of the investment in AI is like we've never seen. It's just enormous. And it doesn't look like it's obvious that there's going to be any cash flow coming back, at least not for years and years.

So I do not disagree with the instinct that you have to go as hard as you can with AI because you don't want to be last. You don't want somebody else to own that industry because it'll be baked into everything. On the other hand, I feel like it might be a little bit overhyped in terms of its short-term benefits. And GPT-5 came out and people are already bitching and saying I liked four better because four had a better personalit