MakerSquare Issue 005
AI for Operators & Founders · June 2026

AI Builder
Brief.

What happened in AI this week, and what it means for your work.
From the Desk

The job market just split in two.

One track is growing twice as fast and paying 42% more. The other is stagnating. That's not a prediction — it's already in the data, from PwC's analysis of over one billion job listings published this week.

The difference has nothing to do with whether your job involves AI. Both tracks use AI. The difference is what kind of work you do when AI handles everything else.

This week: the full breakdown of both tracks and what determines which one you're on, why half of Americans are now using AI chatbots but most still don't trust what they produce, and what changed this week for every business with a digital presence.
Marliis Schneider
Founder & CEO, MakerSquare · Austin, TX
01 · The 3 Things

The AI stories worth your attention.

Workforce · Research

PwC studied a billion job ads. The job market just split in two.

PwC released its 2026 Global AI Jobs Barometer on June 15, analyzing over one billion job listings across 27 countries. "Professionalised" roles, where AI handles routine tasks and humans supply judgment and domain expertise, are seeing twice the job growth and 42% faster salary increases than "democratised" roles, where AI makes the work easy enough for anyone to perform. The AI wage premium has now reached 62%, up from 57% last year. Entry-level positions most exposed to AI are now seven times more likely to require senior-level skills like leadership and critical thinking.
Why it matters
The distinction is not whether your role involves AI. Both tracks do. The question is what you do with the time AI frees up. If it goes to more volume of the same work, that work becomes easier for anyone to do and the market prices it accordingly. If it goes to decisions, client relationships, and domain expertise that AI can support but not replace, the role becomes harder to fill and pays accordingly. The 42% salary gap between those two outcomes is already in the data.
Read the story →
 
Society · AI Adoption

Half of Americans now use AI chatbots. Most don't trust what they produce.

Pew Research Center published its 2026 Americans and AI report on June 17. The headline: 49% of US adults now use AI chatbots, up from 33% in 2024 and 23% in 2023. 24% use them daily. 60% already encounter AI-generated summaries when they search online. 38% of employed adults use AI for work tasks. At the same time: 59% distrust US companies to develop AI responsibly. 71% believe AI will make their personal data less secure. And 40% predict AI will ultimately be bad for society.
Why it matters
Half of American adults now have a chatbot in their daily routine. That's the mainstream moment. But casual use and skilled use are two different things. Asking a chatbot a question the same way you'd type into Google is the floor. Building real habits around when to use AI, what to give it, and how to evaluate what comes back is what PwC's two-track data is actually measuring. The 49% are using AI. The question is which track they end up on.
Read the story →
 
Commerce · Agentic AI

AI agents can now shop and pay on your behalf. 175 million merchants are already in.

On June 10, Visa embedded its entire payment network directly into ChatGPT, covering 175 million merchant locations and 4.8 billion payment credentials. AI agents can now identify products, compare options, and complete purchases on a user's behalf. On June 17, Shopify extended this with its Spring '26 update: millions of merchants can now sell through ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, Google AI Mode, and Gemini from a single dashboard. AI agents are no longer only answering questions. They are buying things.
Why it matters
If AI agents are the ones browsing, comparing, and completing purchases, the question shifts from "how do I get found on Google?" to "how does an AI agent decide to recommend and buy from me?" That's a different problem — and it maps directly onto PwC's two tracks. Businesses that understand what agents are optimizing for can shape how they get recommended. Businesses waiting for the answer to become obvious are on the other track.
Read the story →
02 · Try This Today

Which track are you on?

The PwC two-track finding is useful as data. It's more useful as a personal diagnostic. This prompt turns it into one. Takes under 15 minutes.
Copy this prompt
Here is how I spend a typical week at work: [describe your role and main tasks]

Based on PwC's distinction between "professionalised" roles (where human judgment and expertise become more valuable as AI handles routine tasks) and "democratised" roles (where AI makes the work easier for anyone to perform):

1. Which of my tasks require the kind of judgment or domain knowledge that AI is unlikely to replicate in the next 2-3 years?
2. What would it look like to spend more time on that work and less on everything else — and what specifically is getting in the way?
A clear view of where your time is going and what each category of work is worth as AI improves — and a short list of changes that compound over the next quarter.
03 · Deep Dive

Using AI more doesn't put you on the right track.

The 62% wage premium doesn't go to everyone who uses AI. It goes to people whose work shifted in a specific direction — and the direction matters more than the volume of AI use.

Democratised roles use AI to produce more of the same work faster. Five reports a week becomes fifteen. Output scales. The judgment required stays the same or decreases. Over time, the role becomes easier for anyone to perform — and the market prices it accordingly.

Professionalised roles use AI to stop doing the tasks that didn't require real judgment in the first place. The freed-up time goes toward client decisions, pattern recognition, domain-specific calls, and expertise that accumulates over years and doesn't transfer to a tool.
The 42% salary gap between the two tracks is already in the data. What isn't visible yet is which direction most individual careers are drifting.
The practical test: when you use AI in your work, what happens to the time it frees up? More volume of the same type of work is one signal. Decisions and conversations you previously couldn't make time for is another.

PwC's Global Chief AI Officer put it this way: "Companies seeing the greatest AI returns amplify human expertise to accelerate innovation." AI as a multiplier of judgment produces one outcome. AI as a replacement for judgment produces another. Both feel like productivity. Only one compounds over time.
Myth of the Week
"The more AI tools I use, the better my position." The number of tools doesn't determine which track you're on. The determining factor is what you do with the time AI returns to you. More volume of the same work pushes toward the democratised track. Redirecting that time toward judgment, relationships, and domain expertise pushes toward the professionalised one. The tools are the same in both cases. The habit is different.
04 · Tool Spotlight

Perplexity.

The AI that gives you sourced answers instead of search results.
You type a question — about your industry, a competitor, a regulatory change, a market trend — and Perplexity gives you a direct answer with citations you can click through and verify. Not ten links to scroll through. One answer, grounded in recent sources.

The workflow: instead of spending 20 minutes reading three articles to extract one insight, you ask the question directly, read the answer in two minutes, and click through to the one or two sources worth reading in full. It doesn't replace careful reading. It decides which careful reading is worth your time.

One non-obvious use: treat it as a weekly briefing system. Every Monday morning, ask it "What happened in [your industry] this week that I should know about?" Done consistently, it replaces about an hour of scattered reading with ten minutes of targeted catch-up — and the citations mean you can verify anything before you act on it.
Best for
Research & staying current in your field
Price
Free
Pro from $20/mo
Setup time
~2 minutes
05 · What We're Building

Thirteen days to Cohort 1.

Fifteen operators, founders, and consultants. In Austin. Three deployed AI products each, built around their actual businesses, not classroom exercises.

The PwC data describes two tracks. Cohort 1 is for people who have decided which one they want to be on.

At our Demo Night last Tuesday, I walked through the PR outreach system I built for MakerSquare — a tool that scans the news each morning, finds the journalists who wrote relevant stories, drafts custom pitches, sources their emails, sends from my Gmail, and follows up automatically if there's no reply. I built it in a week. No engineering background. It runs every morning without me touching it. That's the kind of thing two weeks produces — not a prototype you shelve, but something already working.

No coding background required. July 6.
Cohort 1
July 6-17
15 seats
Cohort 2
July 27-Aug 7
15 seats
Cohort 3
Aug 17-28
15 seats
Download the curriculum →

Know someone who should be reading this?

Forward it to a founder or operator who needs the signal without the noise.
Free · Every Tuesday · makersquare.ai
MakerSquare
AI Builder Program · Austin, Texas

Recommended for you