and debate motions practice.
Thanks for the comment! I don't think AI will be mandatory for a long while, and probably shouldn't be. Perhaps even if it is offered voluntarily, its use will be so widespread that deviation from the output of an AI will be presumed to be voluntary.
As someone to whom the topic was certainly incomprehensible at first, I was impressed at how not "incomprehensibly dull" it turned out. Very much enjoy the use of a dialogue as a more engaging way to explore topics that can otherwise be somewhat inscrutable.
On that last piece... Is that something you possibly Do you think there will be legal rules that establish using AI in [specific ways]? I.e. rules that positively oblige their use? In should AI replace [X] series, you outline a lot of potential use cases (and do a compelling job exploring them), but I'm curious if this type of "AI *should* be used for X", and thus being able to conclude that "element that differ from the AI's output in context of X are intentional" is conceivable? [Or is that sort of thing just step N on Alice's plan to conquer the world!]