It's not ChatGPT what we should be putting in our forecasts, but its successors. And, from what I have been reading, our AI folk are coming with better performers all the time by chaining multiple neural networks, "making modular brains", so to speak. Any argument that starts by saying "ChatGPT is very bad at X, humans will always do X," is flawed IMO.

So I think that any job that can be done by a non-human is up for grabs, but for the sake of the argument, let's restrict it to manual jobs where being human doesn't matter. For example, a kitchen clerk at a burger joint doesn't need to be human, as long as it does all the tasks it needs to do and doesn't put anybody in danger. A security guard at an airport can be a machine gun with wheels, it is more intimidating that way. Picking up coffee cherries from a coffee tree can be done by a machine which is smart enough.

But assume that there are jobs "high in the ladder," for amazing engineers and creatives super-charged with AI powers. The problem is that not everybody can climb that ladder. And that's a problem we are already seeing. Right now, if you are highly qualified, you have no trouble getting a decent job. But if you are not, you are fighting for 10 USD/hour shifts somewhere. Imagine if 90% of those shifts are gone. Compound that with our social media (and AIs optimizing for engagement there in) making our kids a little dumber by stealing their attention for long periods of time.

It doesn't look good.