[sudobash1]

> I fail to see how the entirety of AI’s success (per this title) is misrepresented

The title does not claim that the "entirety" of AI's success is misrepresented. It is questioning "how much" is, and I think that this is a fair question. The author does admit that the first paragraph in the example does have valid information which shows the AI with knowledge. It's the second paragraph that is just fluff.

I think that it is valid to ask how much this "fluff" impresses us and leads us to see the AI as being knowledgeable. Perhaps the author does draw too strong of a conclusion, but he still makes a good point.

[pixl97]

How much again is another problem of "what and when"

Of raw single prompt output of GPT-X?

Of chain of thought output of the best latest model?

Of tree of thought of the best latest model + plugins and other models for different opinions?