[ezst]

"the treadmill on the term “AI”" hasn't moved much or at all, and that's essentially my point. Only 3-5 tech giants want us to think it has.

> Seems pretty intelligent to me.

Convenient? Yes. Intelligent? I mean, you can redefine AI to be whatever you want by lowering this bar however low you want. LLMs gave us slightly more convincing chatbots than prev-gen and nobody then would call them intelligent. The only reason we do now is marketing. It's laughable to me that we are still calling that something that's so obviously unable to push back on trivially impossible requests.

> Of course, not long ago we were using the term largely for things that were basically big chains of conditional statements.

No, we weren't? What are you even talking about? We had already built large-enough artificial neural networks whose outcomes couldn't be trivially explained in the 70's. Nobody with a sane mind and an understanding of what they were would call them oracles or intelligent devices. That's where the true genius of Altman lies.