[jacquesm]

You really should study the history of the industrial revolution a bit more. It's not that as a species we did not manage to accommodate it, it's just that untold millions of individuals were made obsolete and they did not adapt.

The naivety is in assuming that there are simple limits to what AGI will and will not be able to do.

It's not an evolutionary change, it is a revolutionary change where the world as you see it today will have very little resemblance to the world the way it will be afterwards. If that change happens too fast there will be a lot of blood spilled.

Ignoring all this is one surefire way to bring about one of the worst variations on the theme - assuming it is inevitable, which the jury is still out on but the first steps on the ladder are being taken as we speak.

There was a good article on here a while ago about how safe your job is:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14443606

Now zoom out to the rest of the world, take a decade or two as the timeframe and multiply by the likelihood.

[pg_bot]

"manage to accommodate" is vastly underselling the societal effects of industrializing. Of course there are winners and losers as there is with any sort of disruption. However, the positives vastly outweigh the negatives. Longer lifespans, higher quality of living, increased wages, more productive and interesting work. We should expect more of the same with advancements in AI, to think otherwise is foolish IMHO.