1 year left, this question had too short timelines for this effect to be noticeable

Some interesting factors:


If you can impersonate someone else very well, then you dont need to have sus links in the email to perform scam

Remote work increase + lower security standards at an individual level

@firstuserhere a reduction in emails with an attachment or link means the things that attachments or links are currently being used for would have to be doable with language, I think. Currently there are plenty of language-only scam emails, but many of them are deliberately terrible because you're using the initial email to filter for stupidity or desperation, so having them be more polished is not helpful. You actually want the people who will email the Nigerian prince back in hopes of making a million dollars, and if you have to send 100,000 emails to get 100 responses, fine.

Attachments or links are used for a different style of attack, and the point is either to get code to run (initial access to corporate networks, which can be sold on to people who will use that access for various purposes, or if sent to a personal email, keylogging or banking Trojan or small-amount ransomware demand or botnet-for-hire or cryptocurrecy mining) or to steal credentials (network access again).

If you're thinking of the kind of situation where you impersonate the director of finance telling one of their subordinates to authorize a money transfer ASAP, then I think you need network access to run that scam, to see what such emails would plausibly look like in the target organization - a general facility with language isn't going to be enough.

More general statement: There are things that code can do on a computer, that I can't do directly even if a very persuasive email convinces me I should try. So a link or attachment with the end result that an attacker's code runs on my computer is still valuable even in a world where malicious emails are very persuasive.