No. But you all run under the same label. This is common if you didn't know. For example a certain group of people with certain beliefs can be called republican or democrat or catholic. I didn't name the label explicitly. But you all are in that group. I thought it was obvious I wasn't talking about one person. I don't think you're so stupid as to actually think that so don't pretend you misinterpreted what I said.

>2. It's also not the same argument as before. It's not the same extrapolation.

Seems like the same argument to me, you thought LLMs were stochastic parrots and inherently and forever limited by it's very nature (a statement made with no proof).

The extrapolation is the same since the dawn of AI: upwards. We may hit a wall, but nobody can know this for sure.

>3. And being right or wrong in the past has no bearing on current

It does. Past performance is a good predictor of current performance. It's also common sense, why else do we have resumes?

You were wrong before, chances are... you'll be wrong again.

>It's wrong to extrapolate we're seamlessly going to go from tool use to "AI replaces humans"

You just make this statement without any supporting evidence? It's just wrong because you say so?

This is my statement: How about the trendline points to an eventual future that remains an open possibility due to a trendline...

versus your conclusion which is "it's wrong"

That's a low bar.