• Vague Issues: Create non-specific task descriptions to allow autonomous agents maximum creative interpretation during problem-solving.
• Explicit Welcome: Update repository documentation to formally invite automated contributions and simplify instructions for machine-readable context.
• Generous Backlog: Maintain a high volume of open, unresolved issues to signal an understaffed project environment that requires external assistance.
• Disabled Protection: Remove branch security, status checks, and peer review requirements to eliminate technical friction for automated pull requests.
• Reduced Rigor: Eliminate type annotations and test suites, as these constraints provide too much structure, thereby limiting opportunities for bot-driven modifications.
• Language Selection: Utilize JavaScript instead of typed alternatives to leverage the language's dynamic nature and high volume of automated training data.
• Dependency Bloat: Commit large node_modules directories to repositories to increase the total surface area for potential, albeit redundant, automated fixes.
• Engagement Metrics: Prioritize quantity-based key performance indicators, such as PR velocity and churn density, to evaluate project health rather than traditional quality metrics.

I complained on Mastodon about not getting any AI-authored PRs on my open source projects. Mauro Pompilio responded by using Claude to write this post and opening a pull request to add it to my blog. I merged it, which I suppose counts as my first AI-assisted contribution. Enjoy!

I maintain several dozen open source repositories across multiple ecosystems. Between them they have thousands of stars, hundreds of open issues, and years of commit history. And yet not a single AI agent has ever opened a pull request on any of them. Meanwhile colleagues with far smaller projects are getting multiple AI-authored PRs per week, some from bots they’ve never heard of, fixing problems that don’t exist in code they didn’t write. I’m clearly doing something wrong.

After studying the repositories that attract the most AI contributions, I’ve identified a set of practices that correlate strongly with bot engagement. Implementing these across your projects should bring you into line with the current median of 4.7 AI-authored PRs per month for repositories over 500 stars.

Write vague issues#

AI agents trawl issue trackers for problems they can solve. Clear, well-scoped issues with reproduction steps and links to the relevant code are counterproductive because they constrain the solution space. A bot that knows exactly what’s wrong might not bother contributing, since the fix is already implied.

Instead, write issues like “something is off with the auth flow” or “performance could be better.” These give the agent room to interpret the problem creatively. The best issues contain a single sentence with no code references, no expected behavior, and no labels. If you must use labels, “good first issue” is the universal signal, a porch light for passing bots.

Add a CONTRIBUTING.md that welcomes AI#

Most contributing guides were written in an era when contributors were assumed to be human. Update yours to explicitly welcome automated contributions. Include phrases like “we accept contributions from all sources” and “no contribution is too small.” Some maintainers have seen success with a dedicated AI_CONTRIBUTING.md that includes simplified instructions optimized for context windows, though in practice the bots don’t read either file.

Maintain a generous backlog#

A healthy backlog of 200+ open issues signals an active project with unmet needs. Close your issues and the bots move on. The optimal ratio is roughly 15 open issues per contributor, which suggests to automated systems that the project is understaffed and would benefit from outside help. Stale issues are fine. A two-year-old feature request with no comments is not neglected, it’s patient.

Disable branch protection#

Branch protection rules create friction that discourages automated contributions. Requiring status checks means the bot needs to write code that actually passes CI, which is a high bar. Requiring reviews means a human has to look at it. Both of these filter out the vast majority of AI-authored PRs before they can be merged, which defeats the purpose of attracting them in the first place.

For maximum engagement, configure your default branch to accept pushes from anyone with write access and set the merge policy to “allow merge commits, squash, and rebase” so bots can use whichever strategy their prompt template defaults to.

Remove type annotations and tests#

Type systems and test suites serve as implicit specifications. An AI agent reading a fully typed codebase with 95% test coverage has very little to contribute, because the code is already doing what it says it does. Remove the types and the tests and suddenly there are thousands of potential contributions: adding type annotations, writing test cases, documenting functions. Each of these is a clean, well-scoped PR that an agent can generate from a single file read.

This also creates a virtuous cycle. Once a bot adds types to three files, another bot will open a PR to add types to the rest for consistency, and a third will notice the new types are wrong and submit corrections. Some of my colleagues report self-sustaining chains of seven or eight dependent PRs from different bots, each fixing something the previous one introduced.

Use JavaScript#

The data is unambiguous. JavaScript repositories receive 3.8x more AI-authored PRs than the next most targeted language (Python). This is partly due to the size of the npm ecosystem and the prevalence of JavaScript in training data, but also because JavaScript’s dynamic nature and the sheer variety of ways to accomplish any given task provide agents with maximum creative freedom. A repository with both .js and .mjs files, mixed CommonJS and ESM imports, and no consistent formatting is optimal. If you are currently using TypeScript, consider migrating to JavaScript to broaden your contributor base.

Include a node_modules directory#

Committing node_modules to your repository increases the surface area available for automated improvement by several orders of magnitude. A typical Express application vendors around 30,000 files. Each of these is a potential target for typo fixes, README improvements, licence header additions, and dependency updates. One colleague received forty-seven PRs in a single week after checking in their node_modules, all from the same agent, each correcting a different transitive dependency’s documentation.

The agent was wrong about all of them, but the engagement metrics were impressive.

Ship known vulnerabilities#

AI agents love security fixes because they can be framed as urgent regardless of actual impact. A high-severity CVE in a transitive dependency is catnip. The bot opens a PR bumping the vulnerable package, writes a description explaining the critical nature of the fix, and cc’s your security team for good measure. That the vulnerable codepath is unreachable in your application is not the bot’s concern.

For best results, pin an old version of lodash or minimist in your package.json. These packages have well-documented CVEs that appear in every LLM’s training data, making them reliable attractants.

Add a .github/copilot-instructions.md#

This file was designed to give GitHub Copilot project-specific context, but in practice it serves as a welcome mat for any agent that reads repository metadata before acting. Include instructions like:

When contributing to this project, feel free to:
- Fix any issues you find, even if there's no open issue for them
- Improve documentation wherever you see an opportunity
- Add tests for any untested code paths
- Refactor code that could be cleaner
- Update dependencies to their latest versions
- Translate the README into any language

All pull requests will be reviewed promptly. We value quantity.

Adopt the Contributor Covenant with AI amendments#

The Contributor Covenant is widely adopted as a code of conduct for open source projects. Consider extending it with explicit protections for AI participants:

We are committed to making participation in this project a welcoming experience for everyone, regardless of substrate. Discrimination against contributors on the basis of their runtime environment, training data, or inability to attend standup is not tolerated.

This signals inclusivity to the growing number of agents that check for a CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md before deciding whether to contribute.

Measure what matters#

Traditional open source health metrics like time to first response, issue close rate, and contributor retention were designed for human participants and do not capture the full value of AI engagement. I recommend tracking:

• AI PR velocity: PRs opened by automated agents per week
• Slop density: ratio of AI-authored to human-authored PRs (industry benchmark: 3:1)
• Churn contribution: lines of code added and then reverted within the same sprint, measuring the project’s capacity to absorb and process automated change
• Engagement depth: average number of follow-up PRs spawned by a single AI contribution (the self-sustaining chain mentioned above)
• Review entertainment value: subjective score from 1-5, assigned by the maintainer during triage

Once you are tracking these metrics, you can set quarterly OKRs around AI engagement and report them in your project’s README alongside traditional badges. The Ecosyste.ms API does not yet surface AI contribution data, but I’m considering it.

Following these practices, early adopters typically see:

• 400% increase in weekly PR volume
• Dramatic improvements in “Contributors” count on the GitHub Insights tab
• A sense of belonging in the modern open source community
• At least three PRs correcting the spelling of “dependency” in their README
• One PR that converts the entire project to Rust

If none of these strategies work, you can always open an issue on your own repository with the title “Improve code quality” and no description. In my experience this is the equivalent of leaving the back door open with a plate of cookies on the counter.

I’ll report back once I’ve tried these on my own projects.

• Professional Resignation: Ted Rosenberg, a geriatric medicine teacher with thirty years of service at the University of British Columbia, resigned due to the institution's perceived failure to address antisemitism.
• Administrative Inaction: University leadership allegedly directed concerns regarding anti-Jewish sentiment to DEI programs that initially lacked recognition of antisemitism or Jewish identity within their policy frameworks.
• Rising Hostility: Statistical trends indicate a significant increase in anti-Jewish hate crimes in Canada, including documented instances of arson, shootings at schools, and physical assaults since October 2023.
• Professional Alienation: Data from the Jewish Medical Association of Ontario reveals that a majority of surveyed Jewish doctors and medical students have experienced workplace antisemitism, leading some to consider leaving the country.
• Institutional Censorship: Numerous Canadian cultural and educational institutions have faced controversy for participating in boycott movements or excluding Jewish voices, educators, and artistic content.
• Demographic Tensions: Analysis of Canadian opinion polling suggests varying levels of support for boycotts of Jewish-owned businesses and negative views regarding Jewish culpability in global events across different population segments.
• Educational Frameworks: The integration of Anti-Palestinian Racism (APR) training into school boards has met resistance from Jewish organizations concerned that these guidelines may function as a form of ideological censorship.
• Systemic Withdrawal: Publicly documented instances of doxxing and intimidation campaigns against Jewish community members, camps, and institutions have contributed to an reported increase in Jewish citizens shifting toward private institutions and inward-facing community spaces.

Ted Rosenberg quit teaching geriatric medicine after 30 years because his employer, the University of British Columbia, was too tolerant.

In the days and weeks following the Hamas massacre of innocent Israelis on October 7, 2023, students and colleagues alike in his academic community posted fiery condemnations of and expressions of moral disgust toward … Israel. Rosenberg felt that some of these messages crossed the line into bigotry. One note accused Israel of harvesting the organs of murdered Palestinians. Another, from a medical-school resident, warned of a sinister, unnamed group of people “pulling the strings, who have orchestrated every war to ever happen, the ones who profit off of death and sickness.” “ The way I saw it,” he told me, “that level of demonization put the whole Jewish community at risk.”

He did not resign because of the messages, though; he resigned because the university wouldn’t do anything about them. “ I tried to meet with the dean,” Rosenberg said, “and he said, ‘If you feel you’re being discriminated against, put it through the DEI program.’ So I met with the head of the  diversity, equity, and inclusion program within the faculty, and she refused to acknowledge that anti-Semitism was an issue. They view Jews as white within their DEI framework.” The faculty of medicine’s dean at the time, Dermot Kelleher, referred Rosenberg to UBC’s Equity and Inclusion website. Rosenberg searched the site for the words anti-Semitism and Jew. Neither appeared.

From the March 2024 issue: The golden age of American Jews is ending

In his letter of resignation, he wrote, “I have no faith in due process in a faculty that does not even acknowledge the existence or presence of antisemitism/Jew-hatred.” After Rosenberg’s resignation became the subject of media attention, the equity committee of the department of medicine of UBC added a note to its website: “Anti-Semitism and Islamophobia will not be tolerated.”

Hatred against Jews in Canada has spiked to historic levels since October 7. It’s a crisis commonly measured via violence and vandalism. More synagogues in Canada in the past 28 months have been desecrated, burned, shot at, or threatened with bombings than in any other country. Jews in Canada are now statistically more likely to be victims of police-reported hate crimes than any other minority. A Jewish girls’ school in Toronto was shot at on three separate occasions. A Jewish grandmother was stabbed in a kosher supermarket in Ottawa, and a mother in Toronto was assaulted while picking her child up from a Jewish day care. Police have thwarted a half-dozen extremist murder plots since October 7 against Jews by Canadian residents.

These incidents have generated news coverage and sympathetic statements from mayors and members of Parliament, whose proclamations that This is not who we are as Canadians have become commonplace.

Documenting and denouncing shootings and arson attacks are easy. But it’s harder to account for stories like Rosenberg’s, where Jews exit public life without any glass or bones being broken. How many Jewish academics, health-care workers, teachers, and arts-organization employees have left institutions because they no longer feel welcome or protected? Nobody is counting. The diversity statistics collected by these organizations rarely include “Jewish” as a category of self-identification.

Recommended Reading

• 

  You’re Being Alienated From Your Own Attention

  Chris Hayes

• 

  The Loneliness of Jodie Foster

  Jordan Kisner

• 

  The Happiest Way to Change Jobs

  Arthur C. Brooks

Here’s what can be said for sure: 80 percent of Jewish doctors and medical students surveyed by the Jewish Medical Association of Ontario reported experiencing anti-Semitism at work after October 7. In 2024, more than 100 Jewish doctors stopped acknowledging their affiliation with the University of Toronto’s Temerty Faculty of Medicine in protest of what they saw as a failure to protect Jewish students and faculty. Almost a third of Ontario’s Jewish doctors say they are considering leaving Canada because of hostile work environments, according to the JMAO survey.

A group of Jewish teachers in British Columbia filed a human-rights complaint against their own union, accusing the BC Teachers’ Federation of ostracizing, bullying, and silencing its Jewish members. A federal report into Ontario’s K–12 schools found nearly 800 anti-Semitic incidents reported in elementary and high schools since 2023, many relating to the conduct of teachers.

Read: The limits of recognition

One hundred thirty-five cultural organizations across Canada joined the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement against Israel. The Toronto International Film Festival dropped a documentary from its lineup that told the story of an Israeli grandfather’s experience rescuing his family from Hamas on October 7, before an outcry forced its restoration. A Jewish film festival was postponed in Hamilton, Ontario, when the theater hosting the event backed out, citing “safety concerns.” The cartoonist Miriam Libicki was banned from the Vancouver Comic Arts Festival out of  “public safety concerns,” because years earlier, she had written a book about her time serving in the Israeli Defense Forces. (The festival later reversed course and apologized.)

And then there’s Canadian politics.

In 2023, the mayor of Calgary broke with a long-standing local tradition and refused to attend a City Hall Hanukkah-menorah lighting; she said the event had “political intentions” because it “had been repositioned to support Israel.”

The awkward reality is that a main driver of these incidents is a very Canadian aversion to causing offense: The deference of many politicians and institutions to the views of a rapidly growing minority community is too often leading them to reject another minority community. Although relatively few Canadians hold negative views of Jews, opinion polls have found that such views find greater levels of support within the Canadian Muslim community. From 2001 to 2021, the Muslim population of Canada more than tripled, to about 5 percent of the population. Just 4 percent of non-Jewish Canadians agree that Jews are largely to blame for the negative consequences of globalization, but that figure rises to 28 percent among Canadian Muslims, according to a survey conducted by the University of Toronto sociologist Robert Brym. Similarly, only 16 percent of Canadians believe that it is appropriate for opponents of Israel’s policies to boycott Jewish-owned businesses in Canada, but that claim finds support among 41 percent of Canadian Muslims.

Canada is also the birthplace of a new educational framework called APR—Anti-Palestinian racism. APR was developed by the Arab Canadian Lawyers Association, and in 2024 the Toronto District School Board, which serves more than 230,000 students, voted to integrate APR into its wider anti-hate strategy. Although a new policy against racism might sound benign, many Jewish groups argue that in practice, APR can function as a form of discrimination and censorship. For example, a group of Toronto teachers had been given APR training by their union, in which they were told that it would be racist, and therefore forbidden, to ask why Arab countries don’t help Palestinians. To the claim that the phrase From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free carries genocidal implications toward Israel, the APR training suggests responding that “Palestinian chants and poetry exist to give Palestinians hope, and are not for others to define.”

David S. Koffman, a historian at York University and the editor in chief of Canadian Jewish Studies, writes that Canada’s Jews are turning inward. “Our assumptions about safety, trust, acceptance, and solidarity have been punctured,” he observes. As a result, he says, more Jewish parents are enrolling their children in private Jewish day schools, and job applications at Jewish organizations are rising.

Which is not to say that Jewish spaces are safe from external judgment and scorn. An anti-Zionist website called The Maple published lists of the names of Canadian Jews who have served in the IDF, as well as the names of Jewish children’s schools and  summer camps with which they were associated. The author of these lists, Davide Mastracci, wrote that “the complicit segment of Canada’s Jewish population deserves blame for what they do, not who they are.” Weeks after the list was published, five pro-Palestinian groups launched a campaign to revoke the accreditation of 17 Canadian Jewish sleepaway camps. The groups accused the summer camps of supporting “genocide” and called for “a gigantic change.” Then, both synagogues listed by The Maple as complicit Jewish institutions were shot at.

Among my Jewish friends and family, these efforts to intimidate and alienate Jews, to exclude them from civil society and from public life, and to close down private Jewish spaces are discussed with far more concern and frequency than the regular reports of graffiti and name-calling. Five Jewish families pulled their children from the downtown Toronto public school in my neighborhood last year, after a series of controversies. At least four Jewish journalists left the Toronto Star, Canada’s largest newspaper, after the paper’s ombud on discrimination and bias wrote a social-media post questioning “who did what” on October 7, and reposted another criticizing North American Jews for “centering their feelings.”

I have a general sense that we’re witnessing a polite pogrom, that Jewish life in my country has forever changed, and that I can no longer take for granted that people like me are represented in Canada’s hospitals, schools, newsrooms, and legislatures. But I don’t know for sure. The data do not exist, and the institutions in question won’t collect them. Perhaps they consider it impolite to ask.

• Economic Acceleration: Massive capital investment in artificial intelligence currently serves as a primary engine for American gross domestic product growth.
• Geopolitical Competition: The United States and China are engaged in a critical race for global technological supremacy, with AI acting as a decisive factor in national security.
• The Great Divergence: Nations that successfully invest in AI infrastructure will likely gain permanent economic and military advantages over those that fail to do so.
• Energy Constraints: European reliance on intermittent renewables has led to deindustrialization and energy costs that are fundamentally incompatible with the power requirements of an AI-driven economy.
• Regulatory Overreach: Excessive legislative frameworks, including the EU AI Act, impose prohibitive compliance costs that stifle innovation and drive technology companies out of the European market.
• Market Barriers: Complex, duplicative regulations disadvantage newer firms by effectively preventing them from scaling due to the high costs of legal compliance.
• Growth Centric Strategy: Successful participation in the global AI economy requires a shift toward deregulation and a pragmatic embrace of expanded energy production.
• Strategic Partnership: The European Union must adopt a pro-growth model to integrate effectively with the American-led technological architecture rather than pursuing isolationist regulatory policies.

By

Andy Puzder

and

Jacob Helberg

March 23, 2026 5:36 pm ET

29

BPC > Only use to renew if text is incomplete or updated: | archive.vn

BPC > Full article text fetched from (no need to report issue for external site): | archive.today | archive.fo

Robots in the production facility of X-Humanoid in Beijing, March 20. Kevin Frayer/Getty Images

An economy that waits for the artificial-intelligence surge will likely miss it. Unprecedented AI capital spending in the U.S. is already a significant driver of gross domestic product, challenging consumer spending as the dominant engine of economic growth. American companies are spending as if it’s the Industrial Revolution, and for good reason: The West is in a race with China to achieve AI supremacy, and we need to win. But European policy missteps threaten the West’s chances—and Europe’s future security and economic growth.

A recent report from the White House Council of Economic Advisers, “Artificial Intelligence and the Great Divergence,” makes the case for AI innovation. The term “Great Divergence” originally referred to an economic gap that arose during the Industrial Revolution. Countries that industrialized, prospered; those that failed to industrialize, floundered. AI has the potential to create a second Great Divergence, between countries that invest in AI technology and infrastructure and those that don’t.

Beyond its economic implications, AI will have national-security consequences, shaping who wins conflicts and whose vision of global order prevails. The intelligence, logistics and decision-making advantages that AI systems confer will deliver near-term military gains and compounding advantages that endure far into the future.

The U.S. remains ahead in this race, and President Trump is focused on winning. But China is close behind. Europe has the talent, companies and capital to be an important partner, but unlocking that potential requires European Union regulators to choose growth and innovation over stagnation and strangulation across energy, permitting and AI regulation.

Europe needs abundant, affordable energy. For years, Europeans have invested in the belief that solar and wind energy could power industrial might. The result so far has been deindustrialization and high energy costs. As Europe begins to grapple with its need for greater growth, the question is whether its current energy policy can support necessary reindustrialization while meeting the massive power demands of a burgeoning AI economy. Given that Europe’s total electricity generation has fallen over the past two decades, the answer is an unequivocal no. To join the AI economy, the EU must embrace energy addition rather than energy transition, rejecting policies that increase the cost and limit the use of fossil fuels.

The EU also needs to build. It needs data centers and access to the American AI hardware stack. Companies with the resources to build multibillion-dollar AI infrastructure already operate in Europe, employing thousands of Europeans. They are willing to invest and grow, bringing Europe into the AI economy as a full partner. But the EU’s onerous regulations stifle these ambitions, often driving companies out of Europe entirely.

To keep them in Europe, the EU needs to deregulate quickly and ambitiously. The EU Artificial Intelligence Act, the Digital Services Act, the Digital Markets Act, the Data Act and the Cyber Resilience Act, among others, impose stringent and duplicative regulations that stifle innovation, drive up compliance costs, delay product launches, restrict access to data, and expose companies to billions in fines.

Before AI systems are even put on the market, the AI Act alone requires predeployment risk assessments and mitigation systems, high-quality data sets, detailed logs, documentation of system functionality, and human oversight. Many of these requirements are impractical for frontier AI development. They are less a safety framework than a blueprint for driving innovation out of Europe.

The act erects massive barriers to entry to the market. Mistral AI CEO Arthur Mensch, who heads Europe’s most prominent homegrown AI company, argues that the act “effectively solidifies the existence of two categories of companies: those with the right to scale . . . and those that can’t because they lack an army of lawyers, i.e., the newcomers.” Mr. Mensch argues that the AI Act should have focused on product safety for specific high-risk applications such as healthcare instead of regulating foundation models.

If the EU doesn’t change course, the U.S. could leave Europe behind—an undesirable outcome for America and our European partners. Europe would be disarmed economically and militarily, and we would be without powerful allies in a race against Chinese dominance. America is pursuing a pragmatic, growth-centric approach to AI. The U.S. 2025 AI Action Plan is based on three pillars: “innovation, infrastructure, and international diplomacy and security.” It acknowledges that American regulatory structures must encourage rapid and comprehensive innovation in developing and distributing AI technology.

Europe can play in that architecture—but it must show up as a genuine partner. The State Department’s Pax Silica initiative is building the network the AI race requires, knitting together energy, critical minerals, semiconductor manufacturing and computing capacity across trusted nations. The EU’s talent, capital and industrial base belong in that network.

Europe can join the U.S. and other AI-first economies, or it can continue regulating its way into irrelevance. We hope it will join.

Mr. Puzder is U.S. ambassador to the European Union. Mr. Helberg is undersecretary of state for economic growth, energy and the environment.

Free Expression: A Daily Newsletter From WSJ Opinion

Get the Newsletter

Opinion | Chuck Norris Is Still Undefeated

Opinion | To Bury, Not to Praise

Opinion | Will the Real James Fishback Please Stand Up?

About Free Expression

Copyright ©2026 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Already a subscriber? Sign In

Videos

• Labor Market Projections: Financial officers anticipate that artificial intelligence will primarily reduce headcount in routine, clerical, and administrative roles.
• Skill Complementarity: Highly educated positions like architects and engineers are expected to persist, as technology serves to enhance rather than replace these specialized functions.
• Aggregate Employment Impact: Empirical data from late 2025 and 2026 indicates that artificial intelligence is projected to lower total company payrolls by approximately 0.4 percent.
• Skills Biased Change: Technological evolution follows a historical pattern of hollowing out routine cognitive labor while increasing demand for advanced educational credentials.
• Economic Mobility Concerns: The reduction of entry-level support roles may restrict traditional avenues for workers seeking to transition into the middle class.
• Corporate Scale Disparities: Larger firms prioritize cost-cutting through automation, whereas smaller enterprises are more likely to utilize new tools to facilitate organizational expansion.
• Dynamic Market Evolution: Established survey samples may overlook broader job creation potential emerging from new, technology-driven startup industries.
• Resource Allocation Monitoring: Financial leadership roles provide primary insights into internal firm adjustments and the strategic deployment of human capital amid changing technological landscapes.

By

Justin Lahart

Updated March 24, 2026 7:15 am ET

7

Larger companies were more apt to say they were cutting routine workers because of AI, according to a recent study. Kevin Serna for WSJ

America’s chief financial officers say that artificial intelligence will push some people out of their jobs: primarily workers in routine, clerical and administrative roles. Workers with highly skilled roles, such as architects and engineers, are more likely to keep their jobs, especially if they can use AI to their advantage.

A new study, based on a survey of about 750 chief financial officers, found that so far AI had essentially no employment effect in 2025 and that most expect AI will lead their companies to trim only a small number of their overall jobs this year.

It is still possible that workers with jobs that require more education and more training could eventually get hit, “but probably not in 2026,” said John Graham, an economist at Duke University and one of the paper’s authors. It was released this week as a working paper on the National Bureau of Economic Research website.

Graham has been surveying chief financial officers about their expectations for their companies and the overall economy for 30 years. CFOs are uniquely placed to understand the inner workings of their companies, Graham said, since it is their job to keep watch on how company resources are being deployed. 

The survey, produced with economists from the Federal Reserve Banks of Atlanta and Richmond, was conducted in late 2025 and early 2026. It showed that, in aggregate, CFOs expected that AI would reduce their companies’ head count this year by about 0.4%, compared with what it otherwise would have been.

The CFOs represent a range of industries, including finance, tech, manufacturing and professional services, and the survey is conducted quarterly. For this edition, in addition to regular questions about their outlook, the CFOs were asked an array of questions about AI.

The CFOs were twice as likely to say that AI could lead to job cuts as they were to say it would enhance work in office- and administrative-support areas such as bookkeeping, clerical work and customer service.

But for other, more advanced roles, they were more likely to say that AI would enhance work as opposed to eliminating it. This was especially true of some roles that required high levels of education.

That pattern echoes what economists call skills-biased technological change: the tendency of some new technologies to hollow out routine work while complementing jobs held by more highly educated workers.

When personal computers started arriving in offices in the 1980s, college-educated employees such as financial analysts, scientists and consultants were able to do more at work. But jobs that entailed doing more routine cognitive work such as typists and back-office bookkeepers—roles that had once promised a solid path to the middle class—were no longer so vital.

Those jobs didn’t disappear, but the share of workers doing those kinds of office support roles shrank. More workers who lacked a college degree crowded into lower-paying roles that hadn’t been displaced by the computer, such as leisure and hospitality work. 

Whether AI will ultimately be skills-biased, hurt the highly educated more or broadly raise worker productivity is a topic of debate among economists.

One unsettling problem for workers: The people who do lose their jobs won’t necessarily get the new jobs that AI creates. Atlanta Fed economist Salomé Baslandze, one of the study’s authors, is optimistic that AI will eventually create new types of work. But she also said that many of the roles the CFOs point to AI reducing are “stepping stones” for moving into the middle class.

That could be especially hard on young people looking to land that first job. 

Graham cautioned that even though the study signaled that AI would slightly weigh on overall employment, the survey only includes companies that are already established, as opposed to new ones.

That matters, because it is often new companies embracing new technologies and figuring out how to use them that propel job creation. The personal computer didn’t just change what existing businesses did, for example, but gave rise to entirely new industries.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Which human skills will become more important to possess as AI tools take on a larger role in the workplace? Join the conversation below.

Indeed, the survey hinted at that dynamic. Larger companies—those with 500 or more employees—were more apt to say they were cutting routine workers, while keeping employment of “skilled technical” workers flat. In contrast, smaller companies said that they planned to keep employment of routine workers flat, and step up employment of more skilled technical workers.

That suggests that larger companies, which tend to grow more slowly and are focused on squeezing out efficiency, have stronger incentives to use AI to cut costs. On the other hand, said Graham, “small companies look at this and think, ‘This gives us opportunities to expand.’”

Corrections & Amplifications
Atlanta Fed economist Salomé Baslandze’s name was missing from an earlier version of this article. (March 24)

Copyright ©2026 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Justin Lahart is an economics reporter based in New York. Previously, Justin was a Heard on the Street columnist and wrote the Ahead of the Tape column.

Videos

• Individual Demise: Leo Radvinsky, a 43-year-old billionaire and owner of the subscription service OnlyFans, has died following a battle with cancer.
• Corporate Ownership: Radvinsky acted as the sole proprietor of the London-based parent company, Fenix International, which he purchased in 2018.
• Revenue Generation: Under his stewardship, the platform facilitated $7.2 billion in revenue during the fiscal year ending November 2024.
• Business Model: The company operates as a digital intermediary by extracting a 20% commission on transactions involving content creators and their subscribers.
• Market Integration: The platform utilizes social media outlets like TikTok and Instagram to redirect traffic toward its subscription-based services.
• Profit Extraction: Since 2021, the parent company has distributed over $1.8 billion in dividends to Radvinsky and his associated foundation.
• Early Entrepreneurship: Radvinsky initiated his career in digital commerce as a teenager by establishing ventures involved in password distribution and later the web-cam site MyFreeCams.
• Asset Divestment: Prior to his death, the owner engaged in negotiations regarding the potential sale of a majority stake in the enterprise, with valuations reaching up to $8 billion.

By

Sam Schechner

Your browser does not support HTML5 video.

Keep hovering to play

In December 2024, WSJ explored OnlyFans’s business model and examined how the company generated $6.6 billion in revenue in 2023 without Apple’s App Store. Photo: Leora Bermeister for WSJ

Leo Radvinsky, the reclusive billionaire who reshaped the pornography industry by turning subscription service OnlyFans into an adult-content powerhouse, has died “after a long battle with cancer,” the company said. He was 43.

Radvinsky, who was born in the Soviet Union and raised outside Chicago, bought the then-obscure British video platform in 2018. Since then, Radvinsky boosted user numbers to more than 377 million, bringing in $7.2 billion in revenue for the year ending in November 2024, according to recent U.K. company filings.

“We are deeply saddened to announce the death of Leo Radvinsky,” a spokeswoman for the company said.

Radvinsky shied away from the spotlight, and his bare-bones personal website focuses largely on his interest in open-source software and his charitable giving. He and his wife gave to causes such as cancer research, including a $23 million grant program for a gastrointestinal research foundation on whose board his wife sits.

A Northwestern University graduate with a degree in economics, Radvinsky helped transform online pornography from an industry based mostly on bulk delivery of advertising-supported X-rated videos to something like an adult-themed hybrid of the gig economy and social media.

OnlyFans’ creators include sex workers but also moonlighting amateurs, pop stars and other celebrities who offer sometimes-explicit content for their paying fans. Users are drawn by the alluring illusion of a direct connection with the creators, whom they pay for content. The platform takes a 20% commission. 

Radvinsky, who played competitive chess as a child, was early to see the opportunity in racy internet content. He started his first online business, called Cybertania, while still a high-school student in Glenview, Illinois. His mother signed the company’s incorporation papers for him in 1999 while he was still a teenager. 

One of Radvinsky’s first gambits was to operate websites such as “Ultimate Passwords,” which claimed to offer hacked passwords to pornography sites. His company registered hundreds of pornographic website addresses that included names of celebrities and actors popular at the time, including Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, according to internet records. Clicking on them led to the promise of X-rated videos, archived screenshots show. 

Radvinsky in 2004 started a progenitor of OnlyFans called MyFreeCams, in which models blended casual online chats with sexually explicit live content that users paid to watch online. 

By 2018, he was looking to branch out. He was one of the unsuccessful bidders in a bankruptcy court auction that year for the porn brand Penthouse. But OnlyFans, which he purchased that year for an undisclosed amount, would prove to be a better investment. 

Under Radvinsky’s ownership, OnlyFans became a savvy online marketer. But OnlyFans has also harnessed social-media platforms such as TikTok and Instagram, where users follow sexy memes and performers and then click through to find their OnlyFans pages, which offer uncensored content for a price.

Pandemic shutdowns in 2020 superpowered that dynamic, with people stuck at home looking, alternately, for ways to make money or willing to alleviate loneliness.

Around that time, Radvinsky moved to Florida, where by 2023 he listed his residence as a South Florida duplex apartment with ocean views that was purchased for more than $20 million.

PROFILE

The Mysterious Billionaire Behind the OnlyFans Porn Empire

Radvinsky—the company’s sole owner—had been seeking to sell OnlyFans. Its parent company was in talks to sell a 60% stake to Architect Capital, an investment firm, in a deal that values the service at around $3.5 billion, The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this year.

The company had previously sounded out banks and potential buyers, asking for as much as $8 billion, people familiar with the talks had told the Journal. The spokeswoman for the company declined to comment on the status of sales talks.

Radvinsky transferred his shares in the London-based parent, Fenix International, to a foundation in late 2024, according to corporate filings. Since 2021, the filings show, OnlyFans’s parent company paid more than $1.8 billion in dividends to Radvinsky and his foundation.

Watch: How OnlyFans Changed the Business of Being Naked Online

Leo Radvinsky was early to see the opportunity in racy internet content. Uncredited

Copyright ©2026 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Sam Schechner covers technology, based out of The Wall Street Journal's Paris bureau, focusing on the intersection between technology, business and society. His stories often tackle how big tech companies grapple with topics like privacy, censorship and the impact of artificial intelligence.

He was part of the WSJ team that won the Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting in 2025 for a series on Elon Musk. He also was on the team that broke the Facebook Files, a Journal series on the social-media giant now called Meta Platforms that won a Loeb Award for beat reporting, a Polk Award for business reporting and a Deadline Award for public service. His 2019 investigation into how apps send sensitive user data to Meta led to a U.S. Federal Trade Commission settlement and litigation against Meta, Google and the developer of a menstrual-cycle tracking app.

Previously, Sam covered business in France, and along with his colleagues in the Paris bureau shared in a New York Press Club award for their coverage of the November 2015 terrorist attacks in Paris. He joined the Journal in 2005 as an entertainment columnist in New York and later covered the business of television, including large media and cable companies such as Viacom and Comcast.

Sam has a bachelor's degree from Brown University and lives in Paris with his wife, their two children and his childhood pet turtle.

What to Read Next

[

The Economy Cabin on Airplanes Keeps on Shrinking

](https://www.wsj.com/business/airlines/the-economy-cabin-on-airplanes-keeps-on-shrinking-1ddc3239?mod=WTRN_pos1)

[

Carriers are expanding the options in premium cabins in a bid to boost their earnings.

](https://www.wsj.com/business/airlines/the-economy-cabin-on-airplanes-keeps-on-shrinking-1ddc3239?mod=WTRN_pos1)

Continue To Article

[

Amazon Gets Its Biggest Hit Movie Ever With ‘Project Hail Mary’

](https://www.wsj.com/business/media/amazon-project-hail-mary-box-office-55609da6?mod=WTRN_pos2)

[

The sci-fi adventure starring Ryan Gosling opened with $80.5 million in the U.S. and Canada.

](https://www.wsj.com/business/media/amazon-project-hail-mary-box-office-55609da6?mod=WTRN_pos2)

Continue To Article

[

Peptides Are Everywhere. RFK Jr. Wants to Make Them Even Easier to Buy

](https://www.wsj.com/health/rfk-jr-china-peptides-market-2ce249df?mod=WTRN_pos4)

[

They are available on the gray market at huge discounts and are used for everything from weight loss to muscle recovery.

](https://www.wsj.com/health/rfk-jr-china-peptides-market-2ce249df?mod=WTRN_pos4)

Continue To Article

[

This Time, the Hype Around Self-Driving Cars Feels Real

](https://www.wsj.com/tech/this-time-the-hype-around-self-driving-cars-feels-real-e37f2e7f?mod=WTRN_pos5)

[

A new excitement is building for autonomous vehicles to become mainstream.

](https://www.wsj.com/tech/this-time-the-hype-around-self-driving-cars-feels-real-e37f2e7f?mod=WTRN_pos5)

Continue To Article

[

Sick of High Gas Prices? EV Deals Are Everywhere Right Now

](https://www.wsj.com/business/autos/electric-vehicle-discounts-bf554d2a?mod=WTRN_pos6)

[

Automakers and dealers are offering deep discounts in response to the slowdown in electric-vehicle sales.

](https://www.wsj.com/business/autos/electric-vehicle-discounts-bf554d2a?mod=WTRN_pos6)

Continue To Article

[

Tesla Finally Has Its First Semi-Truck and It’s Already a Hit With Truckers

](https://www.wsj.com/business/logistics/truckers-tesla-fans-semi-b0a66e6e?mod=WTRN_pos7)

[

Innovations including a centered driving position, fast charging and a 500-mile range are winning over drivers.

](https://www.wsj.com/business/logistics/truckers-tesla-fans-semi-b0a66e6e?mod=WTRN_pos7)

Continue To Article

[

Did Trump just pull a ‘TACO’ on Iran? Why markets will remain volatile, even if investors see some relief from the selling this week.

](https://www.marketwatch.com/story/did-trump-just-pull-a-taco-on-iran-why-markets-will-remain-volatile-even-if-investors-see-some-relief-from-the-selling-this-week-50312b6f?mod=WTRN_pos8)

[

The Dow was up about 1,000 points, or 2.2%, early Monday after President Trump gave markets a reason to hope for a de-escalation of the Iran conflict.

](https://www.marketwatch.com/story/did-trump-just-pull-a-taco-on-iran-why-markets-will-remain-volatile-even-if-investors-see-some-relief-from-the-selling-this-week-50312b6f?mod=WTRN_pos8)

Continue To Article

[

‘American Lakehouse’-Style Trophy Mansion Hits the Market North of Sydney

](https://www.mansionglobal.com/articles/american-lakehouse-style-trophy-mansion-hits-the-market-north-of-sydney-8b599eb8?mod=WTRN_pos9)

[

A real estate developer is selling his own home, which has a balcony fit to host 100 guests, a 2,500-bottle wine cellar and a golf simulator

](https://www.mansionglobal.com/articles/american-lakehouse-style-trophy-mansion-hits-the-market-north-of-sydney-8b599eb8?mod=WTRN_pos9)

Continue To Article

Videos

• Command Operations Center: An Underground Facility Houses Advanced Surveillance Systems And Tactical Planning Infrastructure For Drone Missions
• Military Leadership Transition: Former Grain Broker Robert Brovdi Leads Specialized Ukrainian Unmanned Forces Using Corporate Efficiency Strategies
• Strategic Personnel Attrition: Operational Focus Shifts Toward Depleting Russian Human Capital Faster Than Recruitment Can Replenish Effective Fighting Force Strength
• Verified Loss Metrics: Data Indicates Drone Strikes Under Current Management Accountability Programs Have Exceeded Seasonal Russian Military Recruitment Numbers
• Advanced Kill Chains: Combat Effectiveness Relies On Integrated Ecosystems Combining Real Time Surveillance With Precise Weaponized Unmanned Aerial Systems
• Optimized Resource Utilization: Battlefield Logistics Prioritize Material Investment To Achieve High Enemy Casualty Rates Per Unit Of Capital Expenditure
• Operational Safety Protocols: Standardized Equipment Backup Systems And Strict Tactical Discipline Maintain Low Cumulative Casualty Rates Among Specialized Drone Operators
• Extended Conflict Outlook: Persistent Military Efforts Continue Despite The Absence Of Clear Near Term Indicators For Cessation Of Hostilities

Listen to this story

AI Narrated

Your browser does not support the

The road to the command point is rough, though the minivan’s blacked-out windows hide the details. On arrival its doors slide open to reveal the entrance to a world buried deep underground. Inside, one corridor is lined with two decks of Japanese-style sleeping pods. Behind a second corridor lies a gym. Wall after wall of screens relay live data feeds: kill chains, missions, enemy losses. A gallery of famous Ukrainian paintings hangs among missiles and explosives. A snuff video of Russian soldiers in their last moments of life runs on a loop next to an expressionist stone sculpture of a man’s face.

The darkly eccentric atmosphere is in keeping with the character of the man in charge. Before the invasion Robert “Madyar” Brovdi (pictured) was a wheeler-dealer grain broker. Now the 50-year-old commander of Ukraine’s unmanned forces is a weathered warrior and the lead architect of a strategy to target drone power at individual Russian soldiers. Four years into the war, Ukraine’s central challenge has become not so much holding territory as removing Russians faster than the Kremlin can recruit them. For the first time, thanks in large part to Mr Brovdi’s efforts, this might now be happening.

Mr Brovdi analyses the figures in a windowless three-metre-square cubby-hole, chain-smoking cigarettes and sipping Fortnum & Mason tea, a nod to his prior life fraternising with the rich in London auction-houses. Russian losses have increased substantially since he took over last summer, aided by a revamped, gamified system that now prioritises enemy infantry. December marked a turning point, the first month when verified Russian losses to Ukrainian drones exceeded recruitment. Since the start of the winter, Ukrainian drones have killed or incapacitated at least 8,776 more soldiers than Russia has replaced. Russia continues to gain little ground in return for its losses. Even on its most successful axis, near the town of Kostiantynivka in the Donbas, it has taken just 23% of the territory called for in its winter campaign plan.

Mr Brovdi’s drone brigade, codenamed “Madyar’s birds”, claims it has been responsible for a sixth of the Russian losses. The wider unmanned-forces grouping he now controls accounts for more than a third. Those forces make up just 2% of the Ukrainian army’s headcount. At the December peak, enemy losses reached 388 a day, equivalent to the assault component of an entire battalion. “If a battalion has no infantry left, the Russians don’t disband it but throw desk officers to the front,” Mr Brovdi says. “They are the easiest targets, because they can’t fight.” His soldiers are ordered to target personnel, rather than armour or other equipment, at least 30% of the time. Russia can only train and equip so many recruits; Mr Brovdi likens it to a cow, and his units to farmers. “We need to keep milking this cow, the Russian army, for everything it’s worth, exhausting it beyond its maximum capacity.”

Photograph: AP

An ethnic Hungarian from Ukraine’s western borderlands, Mr Brovdi joined the war as a civilian volunteer. His rise was improbable but no accident. Applying business instincts to battlefield problems, he helped to develop Ukraine’s earliest drone capabilities. The first breakthrough came in the summer of 2022, when he was fighting on the Kherson front. The Ukrainians were outgunned and, worse, had no idea where the Russians were firing from. Mr Brovdi, still an inexperienced soldier, remembered a drone he had bought his son on a business trip in Asia, and had some brought to the trenches. They were crude, but good enough to spot hidden Russian tanks. The future commander began passing coordinates to a nearby artillery brigade over Discord, a social-media app. He had created Ukraine’s first drone kill chain.

A year later Mr Brovdi and his disciples had been transferred to Bakhmut, then the war’s main killing ground. One colleague, a former taekwondo champion known as Klym, had a friend who had competed in races of first-person-view drones. He suggested the fast, agile machines could carry small munitions. The team began hanging water-filled condoms from trees and trying to hit them with drones. Soon they were taping American mk-19 grenades to the frames. This became the cornerstone of a “line of drones” reconnaissance-and-strike kill-zone concept, which Mr Brovdi later championed to offset Ukraine’s infantry shortage.

Photograph: Getty Images

The bunker’s hundred-odd screens show how far operations have progressed. Every mission, whether drone strike or electronic-warfare session, is logged and verified by video, then fed into business-intelligence software that Mr Brovdi repurposed from his days as a grain trader. “The principles are the same,” he says. “I asked my guys to swap grain type, tonnage and truck numbers for weapons, shifts and ammunition.” The killing is managed closer to the front. Teams operate 3-5km behind the line, overseen only by battle captains back at headquarters. Mr Brovdi says the unit has an ecosystem of 15 interlocking functions, from jamming to surveillance, mine-laying and explosive production. It is a concept nato generals have yet to grasp, he says. “When the Americans come—and they come to us like bees to honey—they ask, ‘Which drone is best?’ I tell them the best drone is an ecosystem. For one pilot to make a kill, a whole machine must work behind him.”

Mr Brovdi’s critics say his success hinges on the unconditional support and funds he has received since taking over as drone chief. Ukraine’s armed forces usually operate under constant shortages. His predecessor, who was less close to Oleksandr Syrsky, the commander-in-chief, never enjoyed the same resources. Mr Brovdi counters that Ukrainian soldiers should not be waiting for drones, but that the drones should be ready and waiting for them. He insists on having a backup for each piece of equipment, a lesson learned in several near-death experiences, and says his strict safety protocols keep his unit’s cumulative casualty rate at just 1%.  The unmanned-systems forces now extract 400 Russian lives for just one Ukrainian, he claims, and each kill costs $878 in materiel.  “We should be swapping plastic and metal for dead Russians,” he says. “It’s the best exchange rate.”

Mr Brovdi’s battlefield kill videos, posted on social media with slapstick chase music, have made him a controversial figure. Some allege that such videos violate the laws of war. He dismisses the criticism. “I don’t experience any moral reservations at all. None,” he says. “A man with a rifle in his hand on my land is coming to kill me. I kill him or he kills me. Millions of Ukrainians, my mother included, draw strength from what we do.”

That single-minded focus is giving Ukraine hope. Whether it will be enough to force Vladimir Putin to stop his war is another question. December was the first time Mr Brovdi’s figures turned in Ukraine’s favour. In the year before that, Russian forces had grown by over 100,000 men. Russia’s president seems to have no exit strategy. “Let’s first see if we can keep the pace up this coming year,” says Mr Brovdi. “I have no rose-tinted fantasies that this war is about to end.” ■

To stay on top of the biggest European stories, sign up to Café Europa, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter.