It's really very easy and convenient to state things like "humans function like AI, they just reproduce patterns" when you are born in a world where so much thing already exists. It's comfortable to say those things when you see a bullshit AI generator spit music that's good to listen, or a video generator that has sounds and can make stuff from prompts. It's not comfortable to see that for those models to work, they had to ingest TERABYTES of human data. And more so, that humans created those terabytes of data WITHOUT previously having being exposed to this. Even the best human artists never would have ingested 1% of the contents an AI is able to ingest, in their ENTIRE LIVES, yet those models are only able to make a shitty simulacra of what's real after processing hundreds of billions of examples made by the collective human creativity. And some people have the guts to say "those models are creative as humans are" as if this ever made any sense to begin with. No, we are not the same. An AI model is a byproduct of human intelligence, of human ingenuity and human creativity, it's not something superior and will never be. And don't get me wrong, I believe those models are creative. I believe so because I think there's a natural hierarchy of complexity that exists in this world, we, imperfect beings, can only naturally create beings that are less perfect than ourselves in reality. This is why they are creative, but their creativity is qualitatively inferior to the human creativity, they can only create mixtures of what exists, and human creativity exists in a realm that literally create what constitutes the existence for them. Those insane reductionists, however are completely out of their minds.