TL;DR: The AI productivity gain is real, but it is not evenly distributed. It rewards people who thrive on tempo, many contexts and complexity. It puts pressure on people who need stable, predictable surfaces. The research on AI fatigue and technostress is starting to back what most of us already feel: AI gives and AI takes, and which side wins depends a lot on who you are and what kind of room you work in. That's uncomfortable, and pretending otherwise helps no one. Part three of a six-part series . Previously: the context-switch tax . In part two I argued the real win from AI is cheaper context-switching. The natural follow-up is uncomfortable: if that's the win, it lands for some people far more than others. The gain is uneven I don't think this effect is evenly distributed at all. People who work across fields, domains and organizations will get far more out of AI than others. It especially favors people who can handle high tempo, many contexts and a lot of c...