I built an AI exposure analyzer, so I've spent the last few months reading capability benchmarks instead of doomscrolling AI headlines. Here's the honest framework I landed on — no fear-mongering, just the pattern that keeps showing up.

Most "will AI take my job" takes miss the real unit of analysis. Jobs aren't automated. Tasks are. A "marketing manager" isn't one thing AI eats whole — it's 20-30 discrete tasks, some of which are already 90% automatable (first-draft copy, reporting, basic segmentation) and some of which aren't close (stakeholder negotiation, brand judgment calls, reading a room in a client meeting).

So instead of asking "is my job safe," ask these three:

1. Is the task's input/output well-defined and text/data-based?

If yes, current models are probably already competent at a first pass. If the task requires physical presence, ambiguous judgment, or real-time relationship management, it's much further out.

2. Does getting it wrong have a cheap or expensive failure mode?

Low-stakes, reversible tasks (drafting, sorting, summarizing) get automated first because mistakes are cheap. High-stakes, hard-to-reverse tasks (a doctor's diagnosis, a legal filing, a client-facing negotiation) keep a human in the loop far longer — not because AI can't help, but because the cost of an unsupervised error is too high.

3. Is the task's value in the output, or in the human doing it?

Some work is valuable because of what gets produced. Other work is valuable because a specific human is the one doing it — accountability, trust, relationship. The second category is much stickier.

Run your own role through those three filters task-by-task and you'll get a far more useful answer than any headline. The jobs that hold up best over the next decade aren't "creative" or "technical" jobs specifically — they're jobs that are dense with judgment calls, accountability, and relationship trust, wrapped around a shrinking core of automatable busywork.

That's the whole thesis behind AI-Proof — a task-by-task exposure score instead of a vibe.