There's an interesting thought. "Spoon-feeding in the long run teaches us nothing but the shape of the spoon." AI is basically spoon-feeding human intellect. That's not going to teach anyone anything. It will just teach them how to use AI and better spoon-feed themselves. The people, who become dependent on it, will not be able to do anything without it. You may ask me that is it required for people to know the things if they can just use the AI? Let me give you a few examples: Are you a chess grand master if you can only think of good moves with the help of AI? Would you play a tournament with such a person? Would you go see a chess tournament of people "copying and pasting" moves from AI? Is anybody really an artist if all they do is publish AI generated images? Would you invest millions in such an art that quickly looses value because of high production rate, or would you invest in art that's made by an actual creative human that increases value overtime? An AI generated novel could be very interesting to read. However, the same problems apply. Huge production capability. How does anyone read through all those and decide? Isn't it easier to read novel from a non human author? Would you trust AI to fly you to the next city? How about a 12hr flight over the ocean? You see, if you think critically, AI quickly falls apart.

@Ankit - I'm not sure this is the right forum or channel for your question but I'll bite. I see some of your points but want to highlight a problem in the way you are thinking about this. Is anybody really an artist if all they do is publish AI generated images? This is a nice theoretical question for us to ponder but in no way does it lead to "AI quickly falls apart". In most contexts where art is used - from a consumer's perspective I doubt this is a question whether the computer or human + computer is considered art. Most consumers are only interested in the end-result. If the quality is poor they won't like it - if the quality is good they will be happy. They are trying to be entertained, or educated, or sending a fun or meaningful message to a friend. They are not evaluating whether something is "art".

@Duane Teeters I would strongly disagree with this. There are huge industries, share markets that deal with art and investors that invest millions in a single piece. Art is an expression of human creativity and imagination. That's where the value comes from. Not AI. People follow music creators and songwriters because they value their imagination on the art. Not AI generators. Do you remember the last conversation you had with ChatGPT (without thinking about it)? Let me ask you another question. Do you know the singer of your current favorite song?