> We're in a thread about AI surveillence. We're only in a thread about AI surveillance because I used the work "AI" when describing the license plate cameras.

> We're in a thread about AI surveillence. We're only in a thread about AI surveillance because I used the work "AI" when describing the license plate cameras. Neither the comment I replied to, nor the original article, are particularly about AI in general nor about LLMs specifically. They're about data collection. The "AI" topic is a tangent. I don't see the difference between "please don't lump more deterministic ML together haphazardly by calling them all AI" and taking what was said at face value. I completely understand the commenter's request that I encode their values into my speech in the way they prefer! I just disagree with them and decline to do so. What you misread as me being obtuse and not "reading" it correctly, is in fact just me saying "no".