> This language has been used in this way for 70 years. These are the words that are used to discuss these things. Are you suggesting this plan has been in the

> This language has been used in this way for 70 years. These are the words that are used to discuss these things. Are you suggesting this plan has been in the works for 70 years? No, I am stating that the term “machine learning” as used in the Samuel paper and continuously used by researchers and programmers in that context up until the present is distinctly different from the word “learning” as used in public-facing LLM chatbot product copy and press releases. And as far as I’m aware, “reasoning” and “thinking” have no historical analogues, they were just invented to describe something that is distinctly not reasoning or thinking in any prior sense of the words. > I have a question - if I made mechanical teeth and described its actions as "chewing", would I be trying to deceive you? No. If I designed an algorithm for mimicking grammatically-correct speech, which given a certain input produces (deterministically) a superficially plausible, fluent response, and described its actions as “thinking,” would I be trying to deceive you?