This one resonates hard. So many companies are rushing headstrong into automating everything with AI, risking their ability to reproduce the critical skills the

This one resonates hard. So many companies are rushing headstrong into automating everything with AI, risking their ability to reproduce the critical skills their organisation needs that are experiential and social. (And yes, it's telling that the author has clearly used AI to generate the argument, because not only does it weaken their argument, I think they miss the point slightly because of their reliance on it.) They focus on safety-critical systems in aviation, which is narrow part of all industries, when the bigger issue is organisational resiliency and reproduction. The skills that allow an organisation to weather change and disruptive market conditions are not tied up in proprietary information, but are captured as unwritten social rules and context that isn't passed on when labour is outsourced, either off-shore or via computerisation. The problem is particularly acute in software development, because software engineers not only make the system that encodes proprietary knowledge and organisation advantage, they maintain it, and without a continual replacement of labour that understands the system and the reasons for the system's behaviour, the ability to extend it or fix it is lost. This problem predates AI, and even software, where organisations die because they outsourced too much of their critical internal function. It eventually manifests at an industry level, where the critical knowledge to do a certain thing is lost (see, for example, the ability to produce new IMAX projectors as a microcosm, but also the loss of machine tooling skills, etc.) - at the heart of why some countries subsidise inefficient industries because the firms within them have no incentive to preserve themselves but their skills are invaluable to preserving national autonomy.