I recently discovered a restaurant located in my second-floor room in San Francisco, where a venture capital firm hosted a dinner. The after-dinner speaker was a tech veteran who sold his AI company for hundreds of millions and is now pivoting to investment. His straightforward message to the founders of a newly established startup was clear: the potential earnings from AI far exceed the limited market size of previous tech waves. You can draw on a global workforce, which could mean profits for everyone involved.

The idea of completely replacing human labor with AI sounds like science fiction. However, it is the explicit goal of a growing number of high-tech elites—individuals devoid of significant drives or resources, yet with ample financial backing and determination. When they declare their intention to automate all labor, we should take their words seriously.

This perspective is typically confined to closed circles for obvious reasons; one rarely invokes hostility faster than when suggesting that jobs may vanish. Nonetheless, a company named Machicalize challenged this trend last month by openly articulating their vision: “Fully automated economy.” They have successfully garnered funding from some of Silicon Valley’s most prominent figures, including Google’s chief scientist Jeff Dean and podcast host Workspatel.

Is it truly feasible to automate every job? Elon Musk seems to think so. He suggested that the rise of AI and robotics could lead to a scenario where “None of us have a job.” Bill Gates has also reflected on the future of human work, stating that some roles may not be necessary: “It’s not necessary for ‘most things’.” Predictions for sweeping labor changes come from notable figures such as AI pioneer Geoffrey Hinton and billionaire investor Vinod Khosla. Their insights are not to be dismissed lightly.

Certain professions appear to be notably resistant to automation. Taylor Swift, Harry Kane, or the next Archbishop of Canterbury are unlikely to be replaced. Famous artists, athletes, politicians, and clergy are among the occupations least susceptible to AI intrusion; unfortunately, they are not careers accessible to everyone.

Currently, technology cannot substitute for all human labor. AI is prone to errors and lacks the coordination, dexterity, and adaptability of humans. However, cutting-edge technology can already perform many tasks, and the expectation is that it will continue to accelerate in capability.

GPT-4, one of OpenAI’s large language models, achieved a Top 10% score on the bar exam in 2023. More recent models have proven adept at coding even beyond the skills of their own chief scientists. The demand for freelance writing sharply declined when ChatGPT was released; the same trend occurred in graphic design following the launch of AI image generators. Driverless cars are already a common sight in San Francisco. As Sam Altman stated emphatically, “The job is It will definitely disappear—full stop.”

While AI captures most headlines, advancements in robotics are also progressing rapidly. While AI may threaten white-collar jobs, robots are increasingly targeting blue-collar work. A humanoid robot is currently undergoing tests at BMW factories. Another model has managed to master over 100 tasks typically performed by human store clerks. Companies are preparing to commence home tests with robots as soon as this year. The Silicon Valley vision for the job market is clear: AI handles thinking, while robots take care of the physical tasks. In this scenario, what role remains for humans?

Until recently, AI researchers anticipated that achieving artificial general intelligence (AGI)—the ability for AI to perform virtually all cognitive tasks at human levels—was an aspiration far off in the future. However, that perception has shifted. Demis Hassabis, head of Google DeepMind, now claims that “It’ll come soon“—in less than 5-10 years, he says, would not surprise him.

Of course, these forecasts could be inaccurate. There’s a chance we may enter another AI winter, where chatbot advancements stagnate, robots falter, and venture capital shifts focus to another tech phenomenon. I personally don’t believe this will happen, but it’s a possibility. However, the core question remains: it’s not whether high-tech CEOs and billions in funding are directing efforts toward labor automation, but rather why they are so eager to pursue this goal and how the general populace feels about it.

The more optimistic viewpoint is that they genuinely believe a post-labor economy will spur significant economic growth and vastly enhance global living standards. The crucial question is whether historical patterns indicate that the fruits of this growth are equitably shared.

Alternatively, a less charitable interpretation is that it all boils down to money. Venture capitalist Mark Andreessen famously remarked, “Software eats the world.” Many sectors have been absorbed into this tech phenomenon. Regardless of the software developed, human effort remains essential for executing the majority of global work. However, Silicon Valley now sees an opening: a chance to control the entire means of production. If they choose not to seize this opportunity, they would not be true to their innovative spirit.

• Ed Newton-Rex is a founder of a nonprofit certifying AI companies that respect creator rights and is the founder of Fally Trained. He serves as a visiting scholar at Stanford University.