Interesting philosophy, what is this predicated on? Do you mean that people should not have to work for a living, ie labor versus play?

Is that not self evident? When people engage in labor for the task itself (as opposed to a heavily abstracted version of not wanting to starve) we generally refer to that as a hobby.

So stating that people shouldn't need to worry about starving (metaphorically or otherwise) would be roughly equivalent.

It is not always evident especially when it comes to a site all about capital accumulation like HN, more due to its association with a venture capital firm.

Statistically, Jane Street probably employs at least a few communists.

What do you mean? For example, are vets or artists working to pay their bills laboring or practicing a hobby?

Aside from artists that make it big it seems like the majority of them are forced to make compromises in order to continue practicing their desired craft full time. Much of their behavior is dictated by "not starving" rather than their personal preferences.

And many fold more than that are forced to drop out to "get a real job".

Of course all of the above is a good thing from the perspective of maximizing the quality of life across society as a whole. But wouldn't it be nicer if we didn't have to do (as much of) that?

Agreed. I am firmly on the side of Capital.

We aren't in the Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism stage just yet, so labor is a necessary evil.

I'm not convinced LLMs are the road towards Minds, and I'm pretty sure the Culture would think we're a bit of a mess (I'm pretty sure they literally did in one of the final books), but who knows maybe I'm wrong!