As often with Stephen Wolfram's writings, I found the ideas to be too sparsely located in a very long essay so I didn't read it whole, but a thought on the ques

As often with Stephen Wolfram's writings, I found the ideas to be too sparsely located in a very long essay so I didn't read it whole, but a thought on the question : Machines Vs Human Jobs has always been a question of competitive advantage inside a growing economy. Did some machines become better than humans at doing some physical labour? The human labour gets replaced in that area, but these replaced workers can get other jobs because they're still better than machines at thinking, and the economy expands to create new thinking jobs. Nowadays, with AIs becoming better than humans at thinking in many areas, one could think these humans could go work in other thinking areas, or could use their time to care for other humans , but this is not possible : indeed if there's no job destruction, only machine work + human work instead of just human work, it means the economy expands. Alas, the economy is constrained by energy input, which reached a peak in 2008 (cf what Jancovici says), so it cannot expand anymore. So to me, having AI alone, or AI-boosted workers, doing the job of 10s of other workers, will destroy jobs, irrecuperably. The real question will then be, how to give all these jobless people both means of living (redistributing wealth) and dignity (a place/utility amongst others).