We have different timelines it seems, hence why "you will be fine in the next few decades" which I interpret as "you will be able to do a meaningful economic task in some new niche" seems far fetched to me. My thought process is that the span of tasks that cover this is gigantic and would collapse most meaningful cognitive tasks into busy work. Which includes scientists, education, IT, psychology, roboticist,...

I am not saying we have AGI tomorrow, I am saying we will have AGI faster then any cognitive worker can realistically and sustainably pivot professions or someone can get themselves a degree. Also it is worth pointing out that the cognitive is the bottleneck on the mechanical. Even if we don't take into account that solving cognitive scarcity would mean the optimization problem of constructing efficient, cheap and useful robots is a matter of iteration and prompting, intelligently piloting even a badly designed and limited robot is much easier and yields much more useful applications then for example a dumb AI pilot piloting a hyper advanced fighter jet. Which in turn feedback loops in how permissible and cheap your designs for robots can get and so on.... And that doesn't even take into account the change in monetary incentives as that will attract massively more investment then there is now, breakthroughs and incentive evolve jointly after all.

GPT-4 runs on a big server and yet it still delivers reliable service to million, I don't think this will be a meaningful bottleneck, at least not one that should set your expectations for the next decades as any but "my niche has very limited shelf life and adaptation stretches plausibility instead of willingness or ability."