[hfbff]

I don't think you're being charitable enough. GP point is actually thought-provoking (at least to me): doing it for humans doesn't make sense. Does it make sense to do it for AI? The more advanced the AI, the less sense it makes.

I think it's related with the "substantive elaboration" test with regards to copyright (sorry I can't remember the proper term). If I just copy a scene from your movie, you can probably sue me. If I take some elements from it, but do my own thing so that it read more like a parody/comment / meta-comment, then it's ok.

Is AI just parroting back stuff or is it creating new things? A few years ago, I would have said it's just parroting. With the current models I think we are midway (it will depend on the propmt too!). In a couple of years my bet is that we'll be clearly on the "creating new thinfs territory".

[spoiler]

We're not discussing self aware AIs like we see in science fiction; it's just a bunch of cool machine learning algorithms. I think that the word learning here is a bit of a red herring.

It's cool that the algorithms are generic enough an can be specialised with training data, but it's a very very far cry from anything resembling basic awareness, much less the level of awareness mammals have.

[hfbff]

This is your opinion. Many experts (the majority right now?) do see the beginning of general intelligence and I would urge you to at least entertain the possibility that those experts are right.

(Also, general intelligence is not usually synonymous with self awareness in the literature. You might want to argue that, but it's, I think, a minority opinion)