A lot of it is sophistry in the definition of words and playing word games. The first problem is a sampling bias. Given a claim that a "good enough" EE can bu

A lot of it is sophistry in the definition of words and playing word games. The first problem is a sampling bias. Given a claim that a "good enough" EE can build a ham radio transmitter out of parts, we can test that claim by putting 100 college kids across random majors in front of a lab bench, 100% failed to build a radio transmitter, therefore ham radio is pseudoscience. Repeat for brain surgery, mental health therapy, dowsing, etc. Yet economic specialization exists and I assure you I can build a simple morse code ham radio transmitter at a well stocked electronics workbench regardless how many inexperienced members of the general public cannot. The next problem is the sophistry mentioned. All that matters is the bottom line; does a company make more profit if some old timer tells them where to dig, or do they make more money not paying the old timer and digging randomly? Apparently, its more profitable to pay the old timer. No matter how many people are "mad" about scientific management not working and we must replace the old guy with a set of linear equations and a webcam, the company still makes more profit with the old guy on the payroll. Thus science doesn't matter. I find it quite likely that humans do not have x-ray vision. I find it reasonable that an ancient construction worker could unconsciously glance at a subdivision, remember when building similar houses, recall the average length of pipe installed was 10 meters, realize its probably leaking at a joint rather than in the middle, walk until he "feels right" which coincidentally happens to be 10.005 meters from the water main, "yo dig here" and they find the leak. But does it really matter as long as its profitable? Can you only use ChatGPT if you understand every line of source code AND understand the deep meaning behind every integer and floating point value processed, or can you "just use it"? How about abstracting away from ChatGPT and consider the emacs source code, can use use emacs without understanding every line of source code, or even, any line of source code?