AI will replace programmers and artists in a few years, but they are still useful skills in a post-AI world. A good programmer can specify what they want, and what they know is possible for computers, just as a good artist can set a scene, decide lighting and palette. They provide the seed about which the AI can grow the crystal. A good musician can provide a great song, while AI can do a million variations on it (some better, some worse). I recently asked Riffusion to blend Trance and Reggae, two genres I'd never heard together and the result was great. It was like listening to a never ending fount of music.

George Lucas needed thousands to enact his vision. Those thousands can potentially be replaced by AI now. But G. Lucas's skills contributed to his vision, they did not take away. AI can come up with truly novel things, this shown by medicine and protein synthesis, but this has yet to show up in the Arts. Yet I imagine asking Dall-e to blend Dali and Monet is quite possible.

What we do isn't useless. A simple example is solving a 2D maze. You can trace a small maze, such as they have on Children's menus in the time it takes an AI to solve a monster maze. But just because the AI can solve a maze doesn't mean YOUR maze solving isn't useless, it just means MORE mazes get solved. Capitalism makes everything seem a competition, but that is not how the Universe works: cooperation has won the day, as exampled by our own Human species. Short term, Artists may lose work, but long term, they will bath in unlimited artworks, inspiring their own "maze solving."