You are switching back and forth between talking about your personal definition, rigorous working definition, and an '"AI" in pop culture' definition. I am talk

You are switching back and forth between talking about your personal definition, rigorous working definition, and an '"AI" in pop culture' definition. I am talking about the popular definition shifting further and further away from the technical definition, specifically in the context of "the AI effect" as brought up in the root comment. You consider the example listed to be AI, but not general AI. You believe that the pop culture definition of AI is general AI. Thus you don't believe those things meet the pop culture definition of AI. The discrepancy between your definition of AI and the pop culture definition of AI proves that somebody moved the goalposts. I disagree with your assumption that the association of natural language processing with AI means that this has always been exclusively what AI referred to. However, working with that assumption, you still acknowledge that when presented with a system that does exactly that, people feel their definition needs to change to exclude it. Realistically though, I think pop culture largely thought of AI the way it was presented in scifi stories - a cold, calculating thing that analyzed data and came to decidedly non-human conclusions based on it. Skynet's probably the canonical example. The idea that an AI needs to understand information in the same way we do was definitely not always the case.