> When we put people out of work, we—both society and technologists—have an ethical responsibility to ensure there's a plan to mitigate the harm from that.<p>This is my major disagreement with the argument. I think she's giving too much moral weight on what the technologists creating the technology, or even using the technology, have to do here.<p>I don't think it was incumbent on the scientists first discovering electricity, to figure out how to mitigate the vast societal upheaval of all the jobs that would be lost because of it. I don't think I've ever stopped eating things grown in a field because the technology for farming has made 99% of farmers lose their job, with one person working the field with specialized machines doing the job of dozens. Nor have I expected the people creating new farming technologies to worry about the ethical implications of making farmers' jobs easier.<p>I'm pretty sure, in fact, that most of the world just says "thank you" that more food can be grown and harvested, and far more cheaply at that.<p>I do think <i>society</i> has to worry about this issue, both morally and practically, but not specifically the people creating the technology. In fact, I think it's a bit of hubris we in the technology community have, that we think because we created a technology, we are best suited to understand the implications of it or how to deal with it on a socio-economic-political level, when there are entire fields of study about those topics which most technologists are not acquainted with.