[di456]

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

[Shorel]

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.

[broast]

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.

[darkerside]

Those people probably aren't office workers