Thanks, but I am really curious about the jobs AI itself has replaced today. Note the use of "will", "could" and "plans" in those articles: none of this has ma

Thanks, but I am really curious about the jobs AI itself has replaced today. Note the use of "will", "could" and "plans" in those articles: none of this has materialized today, as was implied in the GP post. > What's the difference? The difference is in chasing the market potential vs actually achieving that potential today: it seems to me generative AI is not replacing any jobs today, but AI experts are being hired in lieu of traditional software experts en masse, hoping for generative AI advances to continue to the point where those efficiencies materialize (which is never a given, but I do see the business reasons to bet on it). One statement is that generative AI is good enough to replace workers today (which I haven't seen proof of yet), and another is that it seems this might happen in the (near) future so let's invest in developing AI more (also implying that where it is today is not sufficient).