we’ll just do the same shit we did with self driving (“that was just regular self driving, you can upgrade to self-driving-plus or ‘full’ self driving or self-driving extreme definitive edition”) or networking (“that was just regular 4g which was actually just slow 3g we lied to you about, so now we have to call it 4g lte even though everyone else just calls it 4g” - att).

cloud is just a marketing term for someone elses computer, so calling gmail the cloud is perfectly reasonable. Im not disagreeing with your overall point that commenter is ridiculous, but I can’t think of a worse example than cloud.

if you mean “a useful stage where I have to learn nothing and do nothing” then sure, but if you mean “a useful stage where interested parties can hack on cool things” then Im pretty sure we’ve had an early version of that for almost a decade now and my prediction is its only going to get better (in the same way computing resources always ebb and flow between server and client). right now we are in a very heavy server-oriented stage because bringup costs are high.

skipping over the part where calling AI an algorithm is kind of weird, it seems very weird for you to expect every twitter post about AI is going to be completely serious and focused on the correct sequencing and rollout of neural network based solutions. this is just not a useful or relevant take.

Having watched the ai progression from 2000 to today, I think your belief that chatgpt and its ilk will be remotely represented in any artificial mind humanity produces is pretty ridiculous. Sure, it could be, or it could be tossed in the trash tomorrow when something better comes along. ai is not linear development.

it seems more likely you did