Right guy would win in a fight, but center one wins the bread prize.

It’s exactly because saying “failed to ___” doesn’t assign blame. That way whoever the article is about has a harder time suing… Especially if the article title is factual. Harder to prove intent

Without really wanting to take a side here, you could explain why his metaphor doesn’t fit your real opinion instead of just saying it was a strawman, if you’d like.

I’m not sure where the score for that first video came from, but it’s based on “U.N. Owen was her?” from Touhou: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIop055eJhU

A bit late, but might as well reply anyway. It’s been a while since I played much, but when I used AI to train, that “main problem” came up a lot for me too. For me, one of the key things in using AI to review is to “play” against the AI, like when you want to explore a tesuji it comes up with, try to read to think of possible follow-ups before you even click the board, so it can’t show you the continuation. It’s the same idea as a tsumego, if you just click without thinking it’s much harder to come away with more understanding.

But a lot of the “ideas” the AIs have, especially in complicated fights, are just past my understanding too but that’s okay! It also might be that the move the AI prefers the most isn’t the best move to play at your/my level. To exaggerate a bit, if a specific attack gains 1/2 of a point but you have to read a 20-move-deep sequence in order to play it or your group could die, you obviously can’t play it if you don’t understand.

I’ve used the AI to refute or confirm ideas I’ve had myself, to train myself on fuseki/joseki and game direction, and for moves the AI thinks are great that I’ve missed, I try to explore why that might be. But I don’t worry about the times I just don’t understand why a move is better if I can’t figure it out, as long as I come away from the review with some greater understanding, it’s a success! (and maybe it’ll be time to understand that idea later, when I’ve improved)

What’s your alternative? Other countries have similar one-word names for their citizens, “Italians,” “Japanese,” “Mexicans”, etc. United-Statesians? Then we might get the complaint that many other countries are made of smaller states too! Let’s go for “citizens of the United States of America,” that’s nice and short. I get that Central/South America exists, but let us have the word, there’s nothing else which sounds good.