Evergreen, given the occurrent ITT of critiques which misunderstand this work as "assertion of an Achilles' Heel" rather than of one among many bugs in the trac

Evergreen, given the occurrent ITT of critiques which misunderstand this work as "assertion of an Achilles' Heel" rather than of one among many bugs in the tracker which will duly get prioritized and fixed: Ximm's Law: every critique of AI assumes to some degree that contemporary implementations will not, or cannot, be improved upon. Lemma: any statement about AI which uses the word "never" to preclude some feature from future realization is false. Footnote de rigeur warning about reasoning about these systems from a fixed-mindset as "stochastic parrots": these things are absolutely nothing like Markov chain abacuses, ELIZA, or indeed parrots; holding an over-simplified model prevents actual reasoning—especially given the non-linearities of improvement which continue to be demonstrated. C.f. "GPT-5's unicorn." Hypothesis: the optimal internal representation of the world needed to generate language homologous to it, is one which performs abstraction into world-models and state, and learns predictive functions about those models, testing them in the Sagan sense against data. QED such things are not an accident but an inevitable emergent property of these systems, one which indeed we continue to see emerging. TL;DR be very careful of partaking of cynicism and skepticism based on inappropriately simple and rapidly-deprecating models of the status quo.