If it's a threat to people's livelihood or sense of meaning, it makes sense to consider how we can prevent massive numbers of people (especially incredibly smart people) from becoming disgruntled, depressed, or destitute. Typically societies with a lot of unhappy people do not function well (perhaps by definition), even if they have some technological edge.
It's not our job to attempt to solve large-scale societal issues caused by technological development.
N ote that pretty much every time during the industrial revolution a technology replaced human effort, it ended up creating more jobs and wealth in the long term, while also reducing the tedium and toil of the job. The descendants of luddites did quite well.
> It's not our job to attempt to solve large-scale societal issues caused by technological development
Says who?
> Note that pretty much every time during the industrial revolution a technology replaced human effort, it ended up creating more jobs and wealth in the long term
Note that since the 1970s, and throughout the entire personal computing era, median wages have not outpaced inflation. Fewer Americans have access to good schools, median home buying age has increased, access to good healthcare has decreased. So I think there’s good reason to believe the “more jobs and wealth in the long term” trend has reversed for most people.
