Yes, but AI is just a tool. It's not there to convince people that the sky is red or that it's there to change people's beliefs. I use "AI" a lot in my work, but that's mostly for the menial tasks I would have hired someone to do.
The easy code I would have had a junior write, or corporate emails and reports we had the secretary do. Those simple menial tasks were the domain of those who wanted to do them, and were an entry point to the company for the newbies who wanted to put a foot in. Now we had them all automated away.
The general answer everytime I talk about this with colleagues is "People will just do the more complex tasks". But how many engineers do we really need? How many senior engineers can there be when we don't need the junior ones, anymore? And, most importantly, how will we transition there? I can think of a million different tasks we hire people to do that could be just automated away, but what will we do with all the people who used to do them? Do we pay for their training? Do we just tell them "Get better skills" and leave them hanging?
"Good enough" will be the new name of the game, where you need experts to handle all the nitty gritty side of things, while anything that can be used when it's "good enough" will be made by AIs.
The problem is that "Good enough" was the domain of people, learners or those who were simply okay with that. What do we do with all of them, now?