What arguments do you refute exactly?

Sure, but the data is not the problem. The problem is that it has no will on its own, it needs nothing and will only do what it's told.

Yes, that makes sense, to teach/coach people to improve socially. But this isn't a relationship with AI, more so a tool to improve relationships with real people.

As I wrote though, I think it can. I believe it could reduce social ability since it functions as an echo chamber.

Did you read the article? The arguments are all there.

How? They still have to be given instructions to have certain objectives and won’t go through life experiencing things like humans would. If AI wouldn’t be yes people then the initial appeal would also be gone.

Used to be other people on their phone though

Another alternative. More and more options seem to pop up. Will be interesting to see how things develop, both in terms of business models and legality.

Yea, doing it in your browser every single time would be extremely inefficient.

That's useful. You could also use OpenAI Whisper for arbitrary audio, it's open source: https://github.com/openai/whisper

Interesting, google owns youtube, so they can extract subtitles using machine learning.

A mix is probably what it will come down to. You.com sort of has this, but their AI is likely not at the level of ChatGPT, but I haven't tested it as much.

Did you generate this answer with ChatGPT?

SaylorGPT

Would be perfect as a home assistant really.

It is indeed very capable and useful. But as I argued in the article, it isn't that simple.

Yes, they do not think outside the box. You have to guide them in those instances.

You do realize your quoted tweet is sarcasm?