So 3 lines of code is enough “intelligence” for you? I can see how that definition might have been popular among grifters in like the 1930s.

This is a garbage, subjective, pseudo-scientific definition.

And even if I entertain this nonsense, what kind of fool thinks that a minesweeper solver is “intelligent”?

What’s the old sense? A program? “AI” didn’t exist in the old days and it doesn’t exist now.

The logic here is like 3 lines of code maybe? The ubiquity of “AI” grifting has made language meaningless.

Worthless certificate since there’s no such thing as “AI”. I think the worst thing that anti-“AI” people can do is buy into these grifter tropes.

Also, I’m personally good with stackexchange/etc, but I’m not mad at people who want to get info from a chatbot as long as they use it well.

At least it seems more “scientific” than anything that Jung ever did.

https://psychology.stackexchange.com/questions/13027/is-there-a-reasonable-scientific-backing-for-carl-jungs-type-theories