Will ChatGPT make Quora obsolete?
Last Updated: 26.06.2025 16:16
So I replied to her texts with this:
Jarvis (Just A Rather Very Intelligent System) is an artificial intelligence that assists Tony Stark (Iron Man) with a wide range of tasks, from managing his suits to offering tactical advice. Jarvis represents advanced technology, providing efficient, data-driven assistance without emotional nuance.
I’m coming for you, humans.
That’ll be done by bringing forth the historical term Amanuenses.
Or is it?
Meta-Discussion = Discussion about Discussion
Post Credits:
Examples:
Alfred is Batman's butler, mentor, and moral compass. He provides emotional support, wisdom, and logistical help, acting as a human companion who ensures Bruce Wayne remains grounded. The relationship is deeply personal and rooted in trust and loyalty.
Apple Seeds Second Developer Betas of iOS 26 and iPadOS 26 - MacRumors
So, basically, for her to win the debate competition, she would need to prove that AI (tools like ChatGPT) does not hinder the art of creative thinking in humans.
To achieve feats that are greater than us, we need a greater level of assistance.
Tony Stark (Iron Man) has an AI moderator: Jarvis.
This analogy summarizes my point best:
Hahaha.
A sort of Meta-AI thing.
What are some of the craziest laws around the world?
What if this answer itself was written by ChatGPT? What if I trained ChatGPT on all of my Quora answers and taught it my language, tone, and way of writing?
I can’t explain the joy that ran through my nerves seeing we were able to pull off such a heist.
What if all of this is being written by an AI?
Where's Marty McFly's guitar? Search is on for 'Back to the Future' prop 4 decades later - NBC News
Is this AI as Sunny? Or Sunny as AI? Or just AI?
Or was it?
So the crazy little idea was to make the debate Meta.
Suspect in custody after 11 stabbed at Oregon homeless services provider - NBC News
Well, well, well.
I collected every point I had discussed with her in Instagram DMs and fed those points to ChatGPT, asking it to lead them to a final conclusion. Furthermore, I asked it to create a PDF of the conclusion points and send it to me.
The other half? — It’s to counter the chess move put forward by the opponents.
Van der Zande On Pole at The Glen for Acura MSR - Sportscar365
Calm down. It’s Sunny this side.
A vizier obviously has more knowledge than the king. But it doesn’t make him more capable than the king. The vizier helps, but the king makes the call. Just like AI is more potent than a human, but it doesn’t make it the main element.
Meta-X = X about X
Is Beauty of Joseon Sunscreen good for oily skin?
I would never use AI to write a Quora answer. I’ve got a different kind of attachment with Quora. Quora was the first platform I started creating content on. I’ve got a special corner for the people on Quora who have been reading my answers.
The legendary works published by writers throughout history were crafted with the help of assistants. It’s just that AI solves the problem of hiring human assistants. Now we can have our own assistants for free (or for tiny subscription, coz… capitalism).
So this answer was not written using AI.
Nicolas Jackson helps Senegal to 3-1 victory over England - We Ain't Got No History
In ancient kingdoms, viziers were senior advisors to the king or emperor. They handled state affairs, offered counsel, and executed the ruler’s directives, much like a modern-day chief of staff.
Well… No.
Viziers:
What were some of the unforgettable incidents from your school life?
Now it was up to her to perform well in the debate.
Amanuenses: Many famous writers employed assistants responsible for taking dictation or copying manuscripts. For example, John Milton, who was blind, dictated his epic poem Paradise Lost to amanuenses, including his daughters.
This is what she replied with:
That’s by using AI to win the debate defending AI.
I totally disappeared from the face of Quora more than a year ago. And I reappear abruptly, out of thin air, talking about AI. Uncanny, isn’t it?
Nah, I’m just kidding.
A couple of months ago, I received these texts from one of my followers on Instagram:
So, I asked her to roughly formulate what the potential moves of her opponents might be.
ChatGPT will not make Quora (or any other platform) obsolete.
Just like Alexander the Great being tutored by Aristotle.
As you will see, this crazy little idea would help her win this debate competition against 20 other teams (even though she had less than 12 hours to prepare) and will also answer your question. So stay with me.
Generative AI is just autocorrect on steroids. To put it simply, its main job is to predict the next word. That’s it. Although it does that thing so brilliantly that it helps us create stuff, there’s no way it would make Quora or any other creative platform or job obsolete. It’ll just reduce the labor work that doesn’t require creativity. So, if your job is pure labor and doesn’t require you to be creative, AI will probably make it obsolete. It’s always better to switch to being creative. Not only would it be engaging and healthy for your brain, but you also wouldn’t feel threatened to lose your job.
Alright.
But how does this meta-fication prove our point?
There’s an effective way to trap the opponents—by using our attacking argument as the defending argument—the symbiotic relationship we have with AI tools. Using the same attacking and defending argument will trap the opponents by rendering them off of any additional points to counter.
Meta-Joke = A Joke about Jokes
Although, this level of comparison isn’t totally valid right now because what we are dealing with currently is Generative Artificial Intelligence and not Artificial General Intelligence. There’s way more to go for us to reach that level.
Alfred supports Batman on a personal and ethical level, whereas Jarvis is more of a technical and operational assistant for Iron Man.
Another great historical reference would be that of Viziers.
Now, you’re about to experience a little heist we pulled.
Well… now we’ve put forth our chess move. That’s half of what it takes to win a debate.
I sent this PDF to my follower and asked her to use the same conclusion points to conclude her debate:
Sunny Dhondkar
It’s by showing the symbiotic relationship we have with AI tools like ChatGPT. Tools like these cannot think for you. You have to do the thinking. Then communicate with these tools. Then the tools will behave like your assistants.
I was already occupied with a lot of work, but I had this crazy little idea that made me throw away everything else and glue myself to this moment.
Now, concluding my answer to your question:
Meta-Learning = Learning about Learning
Even if the greatest novel writers didn’t have ChatGPT back then, they did have somebody special around them who sparked ideas like a catalyst in a chemical reaction. But today, we don’t need to rely on another human for that. We can rely on Generative AI.
Before we proceed, you should be aware of the prefix Meta.
Bruce Wayne (Batman) has a human moderator: Alfred.
Let’s make things even more meta.
The thing is, ChatGPT existed in history—but in human form. People were creative back then because of a moderator in human form. Today, we don’t need a human moderator. Creativity will be maintained in the same way.
The next day, I received her text:
That’s it. There isn’t much of a significant difference. Both superheroes work at the same creative level.
Or am I?
ChatGPT is like Dr. Watson to Sherlock Holmes. Alfred to Batman. There’s even a software called Alfred for Mac systems. I personally use it. There’s a reason why it was named Alfred. It proves that in this modern world, you don’t need to be a billionaire like Bruce Wayne to have your personal butler.