[astrange]

I do deny it. Automation does not destroy jobs even if you're impressed at how good it is at painting; see "Luddite fallacy" and "lump of labor".

Claiming AIs are going to take over or destroy the world has been a basis of "AI safety" research since the 90s, but that isn't real research, it's a new religion run by Berkeley rationalists who read too many SF novels.

[atleta]

The assumption that automation creates (or at least does not destroy) jobs is an extrapolation from the past despite the fact that the nature of automation is constantly changing/evolving.

Also, one thing that everyone seems to ignore is that even if the number of jobs are not reduced, the skill/talent level for doing those jobs may (actually DO) increase and also, switching careers does not work for everyone. So you'll inevitably have people without a job even if it's just that the job market is shifting.

But I argue that as automation reaches jobs with higher levels of sophistication, i.e. the jobs of more skilled workers, some people will simply be left out because of their talent won't be enough to do any job that has not been automated.