Guess what, it apolgised immediately after and then again when I asked why it apologised even after I told it not to.
So your argument is probably more accurate for the other camp, or at least as accurate for the other camp as well.
If AI researches say, "this is just X and it can do Y!" then fine, that's just framing for "look: Y". When stochastic parrot guys say "this is just X, what's impressive about that?" it throws me for a loop coz they are are refusing to engage with Y.
I like your bronze sword analogy. From my point of view chatgtp is not a bronze sword, it’s a Stone Age sword that someone has painted bronze. It has value because people realize the advantage that a true bronze sword would have in a battle. However, when you actually put it through it’s paces you quickly realise it offers no actual value over what came before.
It's such a big "just". You are just firing neurons. The stock market is just supply and demand. The internet is just a bunch of computers talking through 50 year old protocols that don't work very well.
Everything is just something else! I wonder if the first tribe to be annihilated by bronze weapons were like "that stuff is just like stone but more malleable, don't see what the big deal is".