GPTs are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of Large Language Models · HackerPapers discussions

GPTs are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of Large Language Models — HN submission

Mon, 16 Mar 2026 16:05:22 GMT

An early look at the labor market impact potential of LLMs (2023)

2 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

GPTs are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of Large Language Models — mentioned by sciencegeek123

Thu, 27 Nov 2025 05:19:31 GMT

Yes, agree. There should be range. Similar precision appears in other exposure studies also. E.g. This one was trending from OpenAI and Wharton a short while back: arxiv.org/pdf/2303.10130

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

GPTs are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of Large Language Models — mentioned by orochimaaru

Fri, 23 May 2025 14:20:47 GMT

That is what open ai’s non-profit economic research arm has claimed. LLMs will fundamentally change how we interact with the world like the Internet did. It will take time like the Internet and a couple of hype cycle pops but it will change the way we do things. It will help a single human do more in a white collar world. https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.10130

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

GPTs are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of Large Language Models — mentioned by anarticle

Sun, 20 Oct 2024 02:33:34 GMT

Penn and OpenAI claimed: "Our findings reveal that around 80% of the U.S. workforce could have at least 10% of their work tasks affected by the introduction of LLMs, while approximately 19% of workers may see at least 50% of their tasks impacted." https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.10130

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

GPTs are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of Large Language Models — mentioned by blueboo

Sat, 16 Mar 2024 15:23:20 GMT

See Appendix D in https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.10130.pdf OpenAI’s “GPTs are GPTs: An early look at the labor market impact potential of large language models” It’s not just construction workers. Still safe to be a pro athlete and a short order cook, too!

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

GPTs are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of Large Language Models — mentioned by famouswaffles

Thu, 02 Nov 2023 14:46:13 GMT

1. "I think GPT-3 is artificial general intelligence, AGI. I think GPT-3 is as intelligent as a human. And I think that it is probably more intelligent than a human in a restricted way… in many ways it is more purely intelligent than humans are. I think humans are approximating what GPT-3 is doing, not vice versa.” — Connor Leahy, co-founder of EleutherAI, creator of GPT-J (November 2020) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrV19SjKUss&t=175s 2. https://www.noemamag.com/artificial-general-intelligence-is-... 3. Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4.…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

GPTs are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of Large Language Models — mentioned by famouswaffles

Tue, 27 Jun 2023 20:23:35 GMT

Yes you'll find that any testable definition of AGI that has not been passed yet would be unpassable for a big chunk of the human population. In other words, General, Artificial and Intelligent have been passed. That's why a few papers/researchers opt to call these models "General Artificial Intelligence" instead https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/28064... https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12003 Or some such variant like "General Purpose Technologies" as Open AI did. https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.10130 since "AGI" has so much baggage with posts shifting at the speed of light.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

GPTs are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of Large Language Models — mentioned by lhl

Tue, 11 Apr 2023 15:40:10 GMT

You don't need to just take one source. OpenAI authored their own paper [1] on the economic impacts of just LLMs: "Our findings reveal that around 80% of the U.S. workforce could have at least 10% of their work tasks affected by the introduction of LLMs, while approximately 19% of workers may see at least 50% of their tasks impacted." Goldman Sachs Research just pushlished their own analysis as well. [2] Their conclusions are "As tools using advances in natural language processing work their way into businesses and society, they could drive a 7% (or almost $7 trillion) increase in global GDP…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

GPTs are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of Large Language Models — mentioned by wolpoli

Wed, 29 Mar 2023 03:14:16 GMT

A human will unfortunately need do it, because Agricultural Equipment Operators have no exposed tasks to LLMs [0]. We'll need other AI advancements. [0]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.10130v4.pdf

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

GPTs are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of Large Language Models — mentioned by achow

Wed, 29 Mar 2023 02:45:17 GMT

GPTs are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact - Potential of Large Language Models Tyna Eloundou1, Sam Manning, Pamela Mishkin, and Daniel Rock OpenAI, OpenResearch, University of Pennsylvania March 27, 2023 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.10130.pdf

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

GPTs are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of Large Language Models — mentioned by dmix

Tue, 21 Mar 2023 14:03:21 GMT

The study didn't say they will all simply lose their job? Did you just read the headline and assume "80% of jobs will be impacted by GPT" means they lose their jobs? Impacted doesn't mean completely automate either, it can just be assisting, improving efficiency, better quality, etc. Of the 80% impacted they said GPT can help with only 10% of their work activities on average. So unless the other 90% of their job was doing nothing and GPT isn't automating the 10% I don't think they'll have to worry too much. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.10130.pdf

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

GPTs are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of Large Language Models — mentioned by brutusurp

Mon, 20 Mar 2023 18:53:52 GMT

Hmm... Perhaps "high income workers" take serious this paper: "OpenAI publishes paper on the economic impact of GPT-4: Higher income workers most exposed" https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11whznb/openai_... https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.10130

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

GPTs are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of Large Language Models — HN submission

Mon, 20 Mar 2023 02:04:37 GMT

GPTs Are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of LLMs

190 points; 230 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.