Author: Luiza Jarovsky Source: https://www.luizasnewsletter.com/p/the-ai-divides-are-here Published: April 1, 2026 (edition #284)
"The AI Divides Are Here" is an April 1, 2026 essay by Luiza Jarovsky published in her newsletter (edition #284). It argues that generative AI is already producing three durable societal divides — a literacy divide, an occupational divide, and an ethico-philosophical divide — that will reshape the next several decades. The framework it introduces is covered in full at AI Divides (Literacy / Occupational / Ethico-Philosophical).
Summary of argument
Jarovsky argues that generative AI is already producing three durable societal divides that will reshape the coming decades. She draws an analogy to smartphones and social media: AI's full effects will not be visible for roughly 20 years, but the disruption-and-divide cycle is already underway and the divides are already taking shape.
The three divides
Literacy divide. This separates people with access to and resources for experimenting with, learning, and applying advanced AI from those without. Jarovsky frames it as partially economic but not only economic: it also requires time, training, a supporting professional environment, and informative resources. She argues that basic literacy is not enough — AI literacy that serves as a true differentiator must be applicable in a person's specific professional context, making the relevant literacy tiered rather than binary, with the highest tier requiring resources most people do not have.
Occupational divide. White-collar workers are told to become "AI-fluent" or be replaced, while blue-collar workers in manual labor and the skilled trades are told their jobs are safe. Jarovsky cites a documented inversion in support: the unemployment gap between bachelor's-degree workers and occupational-associate-degree workers (such as plumbers and electricians) flipped in 2025, which she describes as the first such inversion since the Bureau of Labor Statistics began tracking in the 1990s. She argues the two groups now have diametrically opposed incentives, with automation supporting one and threatening the other, and that continuation of this trajectory points toward a structural inevitability of social strife.
Ethico-philosophical divide. Jarovsky identifies two camps. The first treats AI as an end in itself — favoring maximum acceleration and abundance, on the view that more is better — which she characterizes as the industry mainstream. The second treats AI as a tool that must be regulated, contained, and overseen so as to preserve what is inherently human and to keep innovation human-led; Jarovsky places herself in this camp. She argues this divide cuts across conventional left/right political polarization, with both camps containing people who would identify across the conventional spectrum, which she presents as a different reading of how AI policy alignments form.
The smartphone and social-media precedent
Jarovsky argues that the disruption-and-divide cycle in technology takes roughly 20 years to fully manifest. She points out that the divides of the smartphone and social-media era remain unaddressed 20 years later — citing addiction, focus degradation, mental-health decline, a loneliness epidemic, and lower well-being — and writes of them, "We might actually never overcome them."
Relationships
- authored-by: Luiza Jarovsky
- introduces: AI Divides (Literacy / Occupational / Ethico-Philosophical)
- related: AI Acceleration Paradox, Cognitive Friction, AI Literacy, Labor Disruption Timelines: Who Predicts What and Why
- contradicts: America's AI Action Plan (industry-side framing of universal AI benefit)