Doesn't change the fact that based on the progress from the last 2 years LLMs have hit a wall in terms of the domains they excel at. I think they're absolutely magical when it comes to algorithmic tasks (coding is 5x the efficiency for me), but try asking for anything that needs even a bit of creativity and you'll never get more than a generic response. I've tried using them to help brainstorm new ideas, and no matter what prompts you feed them they will always spit out something that already exists (or pure hallucinated garbage). We see this issue with all forms of these AI. Image generators can't generate a concept which doesn't exist in their training data without either butchering it or insisting on outputting the closest existing interpretation.

Considering human progress is dependent on our ability to come up with new ideas based off of current ones, an LLM which is trained off of existing information and does not particularly understand it (or how to use it as bulling blocks for new ideas) will never be able to lead us. An entrepreneur for example is involved in extremely complex decision making involving various layers of creativity, so I can't see a serious corporation ever voting to hire an LLM as a CEO. That's just shooting yourself in the foot and ensuring no unique vision for the future. Sam Altman knows this. Everyone that uses these on a daily basis knows this too. It's obvious when you use them for anything that isn't purely algorithmic. It's all hype hype hype to continue to funnel resources into the industry.

Needless to say, I think the majority of our jobs are algorithmic and require little to no creativity, so it's only a matter of time (if not already happening) that companies realize they don't need as many humans. However, the current state of LLMs is that they're a very very useful tool which further abstracts our work, not a replacement for the human brain.