Raw LLM Responses

Geoffrey might be very intelligent, but he is also shockingly short-sighted. Like nearly all Leftists, he has no real grasp of actual economics. Just because Geoffrey can't imagine what new jobs will be created after AI has replaced humans in all our current "mundane intellectual labor", doesn't mean that the remaining billions of people that will be impacted one way or the other along with the assistance of AIs themselves can't come up with productive new occupations for humans that machines would be ill-suited to do. Geoffrey's fears here are no different than those expressed by Karl Marx in the late 1800's, when he thought the vast majority of people would be forced to work in factories in unbalanced relationships of the owners exponentially growing in wealth as their employee's wages stagnate. Yet, today we have more independent business owners, gig-workers, contract workers, and white collar jobs than there were people alive at the time of Marx's writings. Yet despite Marx and his ilk being proven wrong time and time again, Geoffrey is proposing the same solutions as Marx to these non-existent problems. Now, if I'm wrong and Geoffrey is correct about humans not being able to fine work after the AI revolution.... then where is the threat? The outcome of such a revolution would be that humanity would enter a post scarcity civilization. He is describing a future where AI is exponentially becoming more intelligent with the ability to engineer machines so efficient that humans can't compete, but doesn't grasp that the consequence of those improvements would be an equally exponential decrease in the cost of living. The Industrial Revolution turned the average work week from 16+ hours a day 6-7 hours a day to just 8 hrs a day 5 days a week. The type of Revolution he described would further reduce the average work week by well more than half and probably closer to 1/100, 1/1000, etc. of the current work week.