2 points to consider.

1. Humans can’t digest the entirety of the internet
2. Humans transform through lived experience. At worst current ai is just the statistical correlation of existing information at best you could say a model is trained by a humans experience. Neither are the same.

I don’t think llms are without value, but treating them like they think or create new things is the problem imho.

Yeah, I think that was not the case during their recent lawsuit with Apple. So relatively recently that changed and was limited for a “good” reason.

No Linux support though so whatever. Useless to me.

Not normal for me but I recently opted in to Firefox’s telemetry so they could see all the trouble I’m going through to turn off their new features in their reporting.

Will it change their mind? Probably not. But at least it’ll be there in the numbers

I guess sort of.

I always saw them as cited as ad ridden and the complexity of recipe copyright (you can copyright a story but not a recipe).

But I guess there’s a convergence in that the Google ad ecosystem relied on SEO nonsense and the quality varied pretty widely so some sites where just aggregated bad recipes optimised to get ad views.

There where enough real sites and the bad ones where easy enough to sniff out that it seemed a reasonable compromise at the time.

Well, since you asked I’d basically do what you said. Something like “so ‘humans might hate hearing from me’ probably wasn’t part of the context it was using."

Mind?