Modern AI does not act like a tool. Tools behave predictably and deterministically. They act as a multiplier to human ability, not a replacement. Modern AI is a new class of thing that humanity has no experience with.
Human consultants have been a thing for a long time, they're a tool of business. They're meant as a multiplier to the corporate ability, not a replacement. It seems like a shift in economics and availability, rather than a shift in kind, if those consultants are virtual rather than human. No?
But they are in the abstract sense of something to employ to achieve a result. That's why consultants are hired, not for their humanity, but for their utility.
But people talking about tools usually mean tools in the concrete sense. Even very complicated tools in the concrete sense, e.g. compilers or CNC mills, only act as multipliers to the operator's ability. A consultant is an agent, not a tool, and this is a better comparison for modern AI. It's an important distinction because an agent can fail or act against your interests through no fault of your own. The ability multiplier is unpredictable and potentially negative.
Well I don't think getting hung up on such definitions will be fruitful. But here is the point i was trying to make: humans, as individuals and as collectives, do indeed have a lot of experience outsourcing intellectual jobs. They do this knowing full well that the "expert" they're employing is not a deterministic box, and may in fact be secretly working against their interests. None of those problems or potential issues is different if the expert is a human or a silicon agent.
The human agent has a physical body like yours and shares your evolutionary history. They have reasons to care about things like reputation and social status. An AI agent only "cares" about maximizing or minimizing a number. It's much more difficult to determine if this aligns with your interests.