The people most against LLMs being described as AI seem to be the people who have a pre-existing notion for what AI is, and they point to all the things it can'

The people most against LLMs being described as AI seem to be the people who have a pre-existing notion for what AI is, and they point to all the things it can't do as reasons why it isn't actually AI. I've considered LLMs to be a piece of a greater and more complete AI in the same way our vocal cords are a piece of our internal thoughts manifesting in the real world so other people can hear them. So an LLM is a great speaker, but it doesn't understand what it's saying. Does it need to? Do my vocal cords need to understand the stream of vibrations my brain asks for, or just respond? Understanding speech takes place at a different layer than merely repeating the "correct" speech. Now all we need to do is attach the LLM output to a database for long term context storage, overlay a constant weight adjustment daemon that the LLM can trigger to control how it "learns", and tie the LLM temperature to /dev/random so it has mood swings like all of us meatbags do. THEN it will be a perfect human-like AI :P