It's only a guess people make that AI improvements will stop at some arbitrary point, and since that point seems to always be a few steps down from the skill level of the person making that prediction, I feel there's a bit of bias and ego driven insecurity in those predictions.
Not bad for a parrot.
As for language, LLMs showed that we didn't really understand what language was. Don't sell language short as a concept. It does more than we think.
It has not happened yet.
If it does, how trustworthy would it be? What would it be used for?
HAL-9000 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_9000) is science fiction, but the lesson / warning is still true.
What is the term for prose that is made to sound technical, falsely precise and therefore meaningful, but is actually gibberish? It is escaping me. I suppose even GPT 3.5 could answer this question, but I am not worried about my job.