Apparently so: https://www.businessinsider.com/jobs-lost-in-may-because-of-...
Note that this article is about a year old now.
> Comparing it to the internet is insane, based off of its status as a highly advanced auto complete.
(1) I was quoting you.
(2) Don't you get some cognitive dissonance dismissing it in those terms, at this point?
"Fancy auto complete" was valid for half the models before InstructGPT, as that's all the early models were even trying to be… but now? The phrase doesn't fit so well when it's multimodal and can describe what it's seeing or hearing and create new images and respond with speech, all as a single unified model, any more than dismissing a bee brain as "just chemistry" or a human as "just an animal".
Maybe it's time to construct some (high[er] density) housing where people want to live? No? Okay, then maybe next decade ... but then let's construct transport for them so they can get to work, how about some new subway lines? Ah, okay, not that either.
Then I guess the only thing remains to construct is all the factories that will be built as companies decouple from China.
> it'd have to be impacting the real world
By writing business plans? Getting lawyers punished because they didn't realise that "passes bar exam" isn't the same as "can be relied on for citations"? By defrauding people with synthesised conversations using stolen voices? By automating and personalising propaganda?
Or does it only count when it's guiding a robot that's not merely a tech demo?