That's an ad hoc claim. Any evidence?
I tend to think we're denied public education that's effective and life long while our elites love their computers and want slaves to think for them.

So I caught an AI calculating things wrong and told him so. In fairness, he admitted the mistake, even complimented me for catching it lol.

But still, just a proof that it's not as reliable as most would like to believe. Some things just cannot be done by AI.

It's not so much as thinking. It's more of an input, output based on algorithm thing. Adjust any of those three and voila. Different results.

I think you need to spend a bit more time with actual people and less with the AI.

Maybe, but for example, even a dumb human understands that people have five fingers but AI can’t seem to stop making images of people with six fingers or three arms because it doesn’t understand what the image is on a conceptual level. Additionally, human cognition isn’t sentence prediction which is fundamentally what LLMs are doing.

Now this may require a rethinking of what “thinking” is but I think AI is doing something different, and people aren’t understanding that (and are thus overestimating or underestimating it depending on the circumstance).

Ai, when you read the journals, has all the failings of a human, print to making mistakes, exaggerating and making things up

The difference being that humans are supposed to be able to think. In theory, at least.

Agreed!