I wholeheartedly agree with your thoughts, with perhaps the exception of the CEO. Or rather, the CEO needs to be someone who will be followed by the rest of the

I wholeheartedly agree with your thoughts, with perhaps the exception of the CEO. Or rather, the CEO needs to be someone who will be followed by the rest of the organization. Their decision making could be replaced by an AI, probably more readily than the specialist engineers in fact, but it comes back to humans being tribal. Would the middle management follow an AI overlord? Would the engineers buy into the AIs decisions? The CEO's job is to decide on the future direction of the company, and then convince both the owners and the employees that this is a good direction. The first part is easy to replace with AI, the second part isn't. At least not for now. I guess taken to the limit, the CEO will become replacable the moment that the employees have been replaced with AIs, because that that point there's nobody left to lead really. One could actually argue that this is tantamount to the CEO cutting off the branch they are sitting on. After all, once all the employees are AIs, what's to stop the shareholders from saying: "Hold it right there Steve/Jeff/Mark/etc, why are we paying you big bucks? You can be replaced with an AI that will make much better decisions, and there are no employees left to lead anyway."