Raw LLM Responses

You’ve completely missed the existential issue with human-replacement by AI: standard of living. As AI replaces humans, fewer and fewer humans will be needed to do most high level functions (where most of the higher paying jobs exist), so there will be labour movement toward sectors where it is still *cheaper* to employ humans. And even those sectors will see AI replacement as robotics takes over more and more functions (given employing humans will eventually be much more complex and onerous than employing specialised robots) leading to a significant downward pressure on wages, and thus wealth, seeing standards of living plummeting. Also, societies don’t do jobs, individuals do. Societies are made up by all people, not just the wealthy few that will receive most of the gains of AI adoption. And there are very bright people who have studied post-industrial job creation that warn this technological shift is fundamentally different and is very likely not to create sufficient new jobs to replace the ones that disappear. That is based on pure economic analysis (humans are difficult, expensive, and risky to employ compared to AI or AI-control robotics). Without systematic social support programs, akin to those in Scandinavian countries but many magnitudes bigger, social upheaval, strife, and conflict is likely to be rampant and prolonged. Is there actually the political will for that in places like the US? It also needs strong, structured, adaptive oversight to prevent the free market from utilising AI in a way that is harmful (or worse) to most people. Is there the political will (or competence) for that anywhere? This type of upheaval was experienced during industrialisation, and global median standard of living increased over time as a result, but this transition is likely to be very different, for the reasons already mentioned, but also because it is happening at a time of accelerating climate change and renewed geopolitical tensions that are straining public res