> But the report's broader analysis paints a far more nuanced picture than CNN's headline suggests: It finds that AI could create 170 million new jobs globally

> But the report's broader analysis paints a far more nuanced picture than CNN's headline suggests: It finds that AI could create 170 million new jobs globally while eliminating 92 million positions, resulting in a net increase of 78 million jobs by 2030. As the comments also suggest, what are those "new jobs" specifically? Who funds UBI when tens of millions of workers are replaced? Even if they are there, AI systems are already set to automate them meaning there will be certainly less jobs altogether. This article isn't doing a good job in reassuring anyone into believing that there will be more jobs after AI has made hundreds of millions obsolete. The fact that UBI is even mentioned in the article without a plan on who funds it in the long term makes me believe that there is no plan whatsoever after the so-called "AGI" displaces jobs anyway. > To address employment challenges from the development of these new automation technologies, Altman has been a proponent of exploring solutions like universal basic income (UBI), which could provide a base level of money to every American citizen to supplement or replace job-related income. Like all the other UBI programmes which attempted to do this in the long term (which have ultimately failed in the long term) this one is no different and it is economically unsustainable even for the mass population of the United States to be a viable solution against people losing their income to job automation.