[DandyDev]

How is that your takeaway? Please quote the sections from his essay that led you to your conclusion.

My takeaway: people that know how to write, that have trained that muscle, are better at thinking in a structured way and articulating their thoughts. The number of people that know how to write is declining, at least in part due to the advent of GenAI. The number of people who know how to write is still non zero and is not limited to only Paul Graham.

[ccozan]

The people who like to write will still write no matter how many chatGPTs are there. New people will start writing because it enjoys them and because curiosity.

But there are a lot of others which never liked to write, they do not need this for their job and why should not use this GPT as a tool like the promised land of AI / robots.

Same will happen with cooking: people who like to cook will cook traditionally even after our incoming household robots will be able to.

[James_K]

From the essay:

> Instead of good writers, ok writers, and people who can't write, there will just be good writers and people who can't write.

> writing is thinking. In fact there's a kind of thinking that can only be done by writing

> So a world divided into writes and write-nots is more dangerous than it sounds. It will be a world of thinks and think-nots. I know which half I want to be in, and I bet you do too.

PG states, clear as day, that he expects the world to be divided into people who can think (him) and people who can't (almost everyone else). When I say Paul Graham imagines only he can think, this is hyperbole. I'm sure there's a small group of people with views very similar to his to whom he would also attribute the ability of thought. I am commenting on the clear and undeniable pattern of PG writing that huge swathes of the population are incapable of thinking.

https://xkcd.com/610/ about sums up my views on his attitude.

[hackable_sand]

You said the same exact thing as parent

Tf