It's a hard question to be honest. If you look at the incentives involved, people are very incentivized to create these machines to reduce the amount of toil humans have to endure. I don't disagree about the risks at scale of something like this; as I mention in the post -- I don't get pure warm fuzzies about this at all. But I also don't know how to stop AI progress, because the incentives to keep it going are so real.

Government regulation has been brought up multiple times, most recently by Sama himself on twitter. I think it will have to come, but I don't know what flavor it should take.

> How is this better than just having a human do the job?

The cynical take is quite clearly: "Because sales people can sell it"

eg wrap some pretty UX around it, tell people it's "nearly human", then have your sales people try and get non-technical CxO types (or consultancies) to cut them a cheque

I don’t have a massive pool of skilled slave labor I can delegate work to, but I can delegate work to ChatGPT.

What!? Look back at the last few hundred years, where the majority of great leaps have been the result of getting a machine to do something that humans did.