> What unsettles us about AI is not malice, but the vacuum where intention should be. When it tries to write poetry or mimic human tenderness, our collective re

> What unsettles us about AI is not malice, but the vacuum where intention should be. When it tries to write poetry or mimic human tenderness, our collective recoil is less about revulsion and more a last stand, staking a claim on experience, contradiction, and ache as non-negotiably ours. Vacuous BS like this sentence make me think this whole article is LLM generated text. What unsettles me isn't some existential "ache", it isn't even the LLM tech itself (which does have _some_ very useful applications), it's the gushing, unqualified anthropomorphization by people who aren't technically qualified to judge it. The lay populous is all gaga, while technically literate people are by and large the majority of those raising red flags. This topic of the snippet about "life in NYC": is the perfect application for the statistical sampling and reordering of words, already written by OTHER PEOPLE. We can take the vacuous ramblings of every would-be poet who ever moved to NYC, and reorder them into a "new" writing about some subjective topic that can't really be pinned down as correct or not. Of course it sounds "human", it was trained on preexisting human writing. duh... Now, try to apply this to the control system for your local nuclear power plant and you definitely will want a human expert reviewing everything before you put it into production... But does the c-suite understand this? I doubt it...