I think the article misses the mark somewhat - a lot of ordinary workers don’t possess enough of a refined or sharp skillset, that they cannot be replaced by an LLM. A lot of people don’t have the output necessary to justify their salary (many in the C-Suite included). LLMs can approximate a lot of that kind of effort, or the appearance of effort.

I don’t think it’s fair that we’ve organised our value system around this “false meritocracy”; but that’s how things are, unfortunately.