[catigula]

That's a nice story but without any advancements proper leverage of currently existing AI models can indeed remove many, many jobs from the labor pool, probably double digit percentage-wise.

The idea that these tools won't at all improve from where they are now isn't a widely held position.

[UncleOxidant]

Pareto principal. We've seen the 80% but that last 20% is going to be really tough (and expensive). GPT5 illustrates this - it wasn't really better than GPT4o and in some ways worse.

[qgin]

AI doesn't have to replace human jobs as they exist today 1:1.

In many situations, the work is not indivisible. If AI can handle 80% of the work, then a company can let AI handle that 80%, fire 80% of their people, and consolidate the remaining 20% still-human-work with whoever is left.

[catigula]

Regardless you have no way of knowing where you are on the curve at any given point.

That all being said I strongly disagree that GPT-5 isn't categorically better, I just think it's less obvious because we're starting to hit human cognitive ability to even assess that limits.