No, it's like claiming that horses lost their jobs when Henry Ford started selling cars to the masses.
No it isn't. Horses were not in the workforce to start with, but many other people - trainers, carriage builders, street sweepers, farmers, leatherworkers. They all relied on the horse-driven economy. When Ford started to produce cars, some of those jobs transferred directly (leatherworkers, carriage builders) and the number of those jobs increased dramatically. Other jobs like trainers and street sweepers either went away or were darastically downsized, but at the same time there were millions of jobs created because of the auto industry, from pavers to oil companies, to steel workers, to mechanics to the guys building the automobile.
Not all technology creates new jobs. Some just replaces it.
I don't think that is true. I think all technological improvements result in a net increase in the number of jobs, just not the same types of jobs it replaces.
Every time there has been a scare about technology replacing jobs what really ends up happening is the size of the workforce grows. Every single time.
1.6 percent of the American work force is artists, and the jobs being low paying will not stop the economic effects of 1.6 percent of Americans becoming unemployed and replaced with AI.
They mostly won't become unemployed, they will mostly get better, higher paying jobs.
Some small number may become unemployed, mostly because they don't want to do anything else, but at the same time more people who are currently unemplyed will find jobs as a result of the more effecient and higher-quality writing and artwork and the resulting higher sales that follow.
