The no mass layoffs strikes me as incorrect. As fashionable as it currently is to claim zero impact, there are enough signs that there will be impact. e.g. * T

The no mass layoffs strikes me as incorrect. As fashionable as it currently is to claim zero impact, there are enough signs that there will be impact. e.g. * Translators & transcription * Waymo doing real world shuttling of people (not strictly genAI I guess) * AI art being used in places where it's "good enough" - blogs, powerpoint etc * Call centers * Boilerplate coding * Beginnings of robots "understanding" their surroundings for trivial warehouse tasks ...a job apocalypse that does not make, but to me that is sufficient evidence that replacement is feasible in principle for some things and combined with trajectory we'll see *some* displacement and societal impact. Whether that constitutes "mass" layoffs remains to be seen, but I feel a surprisingly low % number will already rattle societies foundations. Just because my job might be safe doesn't mean a sudden +5% in unemployment doesn't affect my community.