Of course I was trying to keep the comment brief, but "we" in this case is humanity. And the "choice" in this scenario is not automating every job, as the arti

Of course I was trying to keep the comment brief, but "we" in this case is humanity. And the "choice" in this scenario is not automating every job, as the article suggests. If we automate 99% of jobs, it would still not meet the proposed conclusion of the article. In a more realistic sense of 'choosing' not to automate, it will largely come from disagreements over the subject itself. It will not be that all humans get together and decide it, but rather that a significant portion of humans won't have any part in it. But from a pure historical viewpoint, inevitability is a fallacy.