Fired by AI? Perplexity CEO says it's part of a 'Glorious Future'

As artificial intelligence begins to reshape how people work, Aravind Srinivas said most individuals do not enjoy their jobs and argued that AI tools are opening a new path, one where people can learn, adapt, and build their own mini businesses, even if it means navigating short-term job losses on the way to what he described as a "glorious future."

In Short

• AI is altering traditional job roles and work structure
• Job cuts linked to AI are increasing notably in tech sector
• AI tools lower barriers for individuals to start mini businesses

There comes a moment in working life when routine begins to feel heavier than ambition. The desk, the deadlines, the repetition, all of it quietly builds into a question many hesitate to voice: is this what I want to keep doing? From a glass tower in Mumbai to office clusters in Delhi, Noida, Gurugram, Bengaluru and Pune, the thought arrives in similar ways, a passing idea of doing something of one’s own, often dismissed as impractical.

It is within this familiar hesitation that Aravind Srinivas, the co-founder and CEO of Perplexity AI, places a different argument. Speaking on the All-In podcast, Srinivas suggested that the rise of artificial intelligence, even with its disruption, could open a pathway many have quietly imagined but rarely pursued.

“Most people don’t enjoy their jobs,” he said. “There’s suddenly a new possibility, a new opportunity, to go use these tools, learn them, and start your own mini business.” He added that even if job losses occur in the short term, “that sort of glorious future is what we should look forward to.”

His words do not dismiss fear. They acknowledge it, but attempt to reframe it, not as an end, but as a forced beginning.

A SHIFT IN HOW WORK IS BEING UNDERSTOOD

What emerges in its place, according to this line of thinking, is a more fragmented but potentially more independent ecosystem. AI tools now allow individuals to write, design, code, analyse and even manage operations that once required teams.

The cost of starting something, whether a digital service, a freelance operation or a small online venture, has reduced significantly.

The idea of a “mini business” rests on this shift. It is not necessarily about building large companies, but about enabling individuals to create income streams with limited resources. In theory, this lowers the barrier between having an idea and acting on it.

Yet, this transition is uneven. Access to tools does not automatically translate into success. Skills, time, financial stability and risk tolerance remain critical factors, and not everyone has equal access to them.

According to data from Challenger, Gray and Christmas, US employers announced 60,620 job cuts in a single month, marking a 25% increase from February.

Of these, 15,341 cuts, roughly a quarter, were directly attributed to AI-related changes. The situation in India too changing fast.

Major firms are recalibrating. Amazon reduced around 16,000 corporate roles earlier in the year. Meta has discussed workforce reductions running into the tens of thousands as it deepens investment in AI.

Oracle Corporation too has carried out layoffs, 30,000 were fired across the globe and 12,000 in India alone, reflecting a broader industry pattern where hiring slows while automation spending accelerates.

In India, the unemployment rate for individuals aged 15 and above stood at 3.1% in 2025, suggesting relative stability at a macro level. But aggregate numbers often conceal the friction individuals experience when industries shift faster than skill adaptation.

The rise of AI does not eliminate risk; it redistributes it. Companies may reduce workforce costs, but individuals may take on greater personal uncertainty in return for flexibility.

THE 'GLORIOUS FUTURE' QUESTION

What Srinivas describes as a “glorious future” is less a guaranteed outcome and more a directional shift. It depends on whether individuals can access tools, learn new systems and sustain themselves through a period of transition.

Artificial intelligence, in this sense, acts as both disruptor and enabler. It removes certain roles, but also compresses the distance between skill and execution. A single individual today can perform tasks that once required coordination across departments.

The question is not whether change is underway, that is already visible, but how evenly its benefits will be distributed, and how prepared individuals are to navigate it.

For many, the thought of leaving a job will remain just that, a thought. For others, the changing structure of work may turn that thought into necessity. And for a smaller group, it may become an opening.

Somewhere between fear and possibility lies the space Srinivas points to, not entirely secure, not entirely uncertain, but undeniably new.

- Ends