> If the human writer has access to google (everyone in modern society) this point is moot. Does not follow at all. There’s a vast difference between being abl

> If the human writer has access to google (everyone in modern society) this point is moot. Does not follow at all. There’s a vast difference between being able to search for and internalize a tiny, tiny sample of all the available information, and literally having sampled and synthetized all of it. > If it isn't, refer to #1. Meaning what? LLMs use adversarial learning, the same thing that allowed AlphaGo to reach superhuman levels in Go.