YES! Exactly. For a simile, imagine going to a string theory conference and telling everyone “satellites and astronomers have relied on the principles of general relativity for decades, you can’t argue with the success of all these theories, including string theory.”
It’s linguistic laundering, plain and simple. Two truths in service of a lie.
The example I like to use is “computer”. I can, with a perfectly straight face, talk about hiring junior computers, reporting to senior computers, and talk salaries, benefits, working hours, etc. And I’d be “right” … except that in modern contexts that’s not what anybody means when they say “computer”. They mean what used to be called “electronic computers” specifically to distinguish them from human ones.
Anybody insisting that human “computers” are meaningfully included in modern non-practitioner conversations about computers is being just as disingenuous as the people talking about how “AI” is used in tomography when non-practitioners converse about AI. That’s not what people are talking about, and the person bringing it up knows full well this is the case; they’re being disingenuous and deflecting, not smart.
YES! Exactly. For a simile, imagine going to a string theory conference and telling everyone “satellites and astronomers have relied on the principles of general relativity for decades, you can’t argue with the success of all these theories, including string theory.”
It’s linguistic laundering, plain and simple. Two truths in service of a lie.
The example I like to use is “computer”. I can, with a perfectly straight face, talk about hiring junior computers, reporting to senior computers, and talk salaries, benefits, working hours, etc. And I’d be “right” … except that in modern contexts that’s not what anybody means when they say “computer”. They mean what used to be called “electronic computers” specifically to distinguish them from human ones.
Anybody insisting that human “computers” are meaningfully included in modern non-practitioner conversations about computers is being just as disingenuous as the people talking about how “AI” is used in tomography when non-practitioners converse about AI. That’s not what people are talking about, and the person bringing it up knows full well this is the case; they’re being disingenuous and deflecting, not smart.