I don't buy it. The idea that automation reduces overall employment needs to die in a ditch. It's just not true. Look around you, we live in a world that's automated up to the eyeballs compared to any previous generation, yet employment is as high as it's ever been. In fact it's substituted for domestic labour and has allowed generations of women to go to work and build careers, and hundreds of millions of rural labourers have been drafted into industrial work forces in my lifetime. As automation has expanded, the demand for labour has grown voraciously.

These LLMs are incredibly smart compared to humans in some ways, but they're incredibly stupid in other ways. They're just another tool, and tools need users. Hopefully they will be another big force multiplier in knowledge based industries, but this will increase demand for knowledge workers, because they will become more valuable due to being more productive from having better tools.

If better knowledge tools reduced demand for the people using them, Moore's Law and the availability of ever more sophisticated software would have ravaged employment in the IT industry. But that's just not how that works.

It's based on the assumption that when a worker becomes more productive, that the only effect that has is reducing the amount of work there is for others to do, but that's an incredibly naive view. In fact it also dramatically reduces the cost of that work being done and increases the capacity of the organisation to do work. This increases demand for that work, it makes that labour more skilled, and increases profits thus stimulating investment. Yes there can be localised negative effects in some cases, sure. Ive seen some of those myself, but any economic realignment can have it's pains. Taking into account all the positives it increases the value of the economic activity overall.