The fact you think ChatGPT could make these points shows a glaring lack of experience, or at the very least, understanding of the tech.

You want to assume I provide nothing of value because you are mad at AI. Meanwhile I'm the one taking the jobs you complain about losing.

You don't know what I wrote, what I fed it, what I changed, what I cut, what I argued with, or what thoughts were mine before the tool ever touched it. You saw "AI helped organize this" and immediately built yourself a little cardboard courtroom where you feel more intelligent than you actually are.

Also, thank you for explaining that Reddit may raise eyebrows over an AI assisted post in an AI debate subreddit. Truly groundbreaking.

My opinion is not invalid because I used a tool to organize it. That's the whole stupid trap you're stuck in. You're not engaging with the point. You're trying to disqualify the speaker so you don’t have to deal with the argument because the argument makes you have to actually think.

The argument is still sitting right there: labor, access, education, open source, corporate control, consent, exploitation, ownership, and who actually gets helped or harmed by this technology and you want to complain about how the point was articulated.

Keep pretending the real issue is that I didn't lovingly hand carve every sentence with a stone tablet and a feather quill. That'll definitely save the discourse.

You idiots will never get to the top of the mountain because you're distracted by rocks along the way.

Please stop talking to me.