Sadly, citing off topic ChatGTP woes and reducing Americans to a broad generalization is not a sign of intelligence either.

Statistically speaking, assuming a normal distribution of intelligence, there is a specific percent where this generalization will start to apply.

Now, I don't know what is this percent, but let's give it a name: the ChatGPT percentile cut line.

My intuition says this line sits to the left of the median, so in a sense you are right, meaning that fewer than 50% of people have a measurable intelligence lower than this line.

However, it can also be higher than 5%, and this means many millions of people can be easily replaced by an automation tool, without any bad consequence.

Those people probably aren't office workers

I find it hard to believe that the intelligence you assume is required to do a person's job is an accurate indication of that person's intelligence.

What are some typical everyday scenarios where this is applicable to a real business?

Please include all the steps that chatgpt would independently take, like deciding what meetings to schedule, attending them, and presenting at them for example, and specify who would verify chatgpt’s correctness.