>The irony is that AI is best at replacing the work of the upper classes. Synthesizing different opinions, summarizing them, and producing outputs based on statistics are things AI does well.

AI just repeats whatever the prevailing opinion is at that time. I am a very heavy AI user (Claude, Gemini, ChatGPT) and have queried it on a variety of topics. AI is not thinking, it is repeating.

> AI just repeats whatever the prevailing opinion is at that time.

That would be an improvement. They are generally far too sychophantic to just repeat the prevailing opinion, and instead synthesise the opinion that they think wants to be heard by the user.

I agree with the view that AI does not truly think and cannot produce genuinely original opinions. It is difficult for AI to give answers that lie far outside the average distribution of its training data. In that sense, it is not very good at producing truly novel business insights.

But that is not what most “work” usually means. Work is mostly repetitive. The actual moment of decision is brief.

So what do I mean by work here? I mean the collection, organization, and synthesis of the materials needed before reaching that decision.

For that part of the process, AI is extremely effective.

Thus replacing the work of the upper classes.