I feel like it’s contributing to a further misunderstanding of what it actually is and how best to use it or think of it.
I feel like it’s contributing to a further misunderstanding of what it actually is and how best to use it or think of it.
It may die down after it becomes clear that AI isn't good enough yet. I've seen fewer people refer to Siri/Cortana/Alexa as "her" rather than "it" as time went on, but there was definitely a peak when they became popular among laypeople for a while.
I notice I'm much politer to ChatGPT than I am to Google, it's quite a funny thing to notice. Perhaps my subconscious is being nice to the robots to be in their good graces when they take over :)
Maybe I'm wrong honestly. Maybe not anthropomorphizing something is impossible for humans (stick a pair of eyes and a mouth on anything and a person would probably give it a name). I guess people _expect_ AI to replace a human in a given role, but the reality is that they will augment existing workflows, e.g. instead of replacing a digital artist, it would be used to spark creativity and basically eliminate creative blocks.
I think the problem is that there is no easily accessible description of what this is. Like super simple.
Statistically close to what you want responses. Big ass database of things that might be similar.
I believe both of those are more accessible to Joe Schmoe, even if they miss the technical description.