This study does do a good job of laying out the many benefits that artificial intelligence will have on society. It has the power to revolutionize industries and human life in general. However, the article with its abundance of optimism spends a considerably smaller amount of time discussing the challenges that will face us in the not-so-distant future, especially concerning employment and the people AI replace. 
The article itself says multiple times that the pace at which AI is advancing is intensifying across all disciplines. Yet the article still insists that AI will not replace jobs quickly enough to replace jobs at an alarming rate. If the technology eventually exists, companies with the capital will work to implement these technologies into their business. Even if it is gradual within a company, when multiple Fortune 500 companies move to implement the changes then the change will seem much more dramatic. And as principles of capitalism shows, if one company has success implementing AI, then their competitors will work to follow suit to remain competitive in their markets. Fast food companies employ millions in the US, and large stores like Target and Walmart employ millions more. If these jobs were lost at even the rates of tens of thousands per year, that would be dramatic and have a real affect on our economy. 
The article instead focuses its discussion about AI in the workforce about the benefits of automated work. It is certainly true that AI will decrease labor cost thus making goods cheaper, and even create some jobs. However, these decrease in costs will not be as dramatic as it likes to hope, and it will benefit those who do not see their incomes affected by AI the most. The average truck driver makes forty thousand dollars a year. If that truck driver delivers 2-3 truckloads a week of goods, then those 2-3 truckloads would be on average around eight hundred dollars cheaper. While that is a tangible decrease in costs, when averaged out between all of the goods, the benefits are much less. Also, there will be costs of maintaining and upgrading these machines in AI that will add new costs to the AI. And furthermore, the people replaced by AI will have no income to spend on these goods, no matter how large the decrease in price is. And while these AI will create new jobs to maintain them, there will be nowhere near as many jobs they replace and the people who are replaced often dont have the skills or means to obtain the skills to fill these new positions. 
The purpose of this argument is not to convince that AI should not be integrated into the workforce. The benefits of AI will definitely have tangible benefits for society. The purpose of this argument is to draw attention to the fact that more will need to be done for the people displaced by AI. The article does touch on solutions, but doesnt give much importance to their implementation. But the fact is if AI do eventually replace most low-skill jobs, it will be in the best interest of the workers and the capital-holders to implement safety nets for society. There will be a considerably smaller market for non-necessities if people do not have the money to buy them which would impact countless companies. Solutions like a universal income, or revolutionizing the way profits are allocated, especially from AI labor will be needed for society to realize the full benefits of AI. 
