[MatekCopatek]

Why are we comparing LLMs to media? I think media has much more freedom in a creative sense, its end goal is often very open-ended, especially when it's used for artistic purposes.

When it comes to AI, we're trying to replace existing technology with it. We want it to drive a car, write an email, fix a bug etc. That premise is what gives it economic value, since we have a bunch of cars/emails/bugs that need driving/writing/fixing.

Sure, it's interesting to think about other things it could potentially achieve when we think out of the box and find use cases that fit it more, but the "old things" we need to do won't magically go away. So I think we should be careful about such overgeneralizations, especially when they're covertly used to hype the technology and maintain investments.

[caseyy]

Media in this case is a plural of medium — something that both contains information and describes its interface.

I think the idea is a bit different than what you describe. New media contains in itself the essence of old media, but it does not necessarily supersede it. For example, we have theater and film.

This “rule” of media doesn’t help us predict how or whether AI will evolve, so it is difficult to relate it to hyping. It is an exclusionary heuristic for future predictions — it helps us exclude unlikely ones. But doesn’t help us come up with any.

I personally am hopeful that AI will evolve into something else that has more essence to it than mere function. But that’s just hope, which is rather less promising than hype.