Comparisons to past technologies establish the range of possible outcomes, not a probability over them.
You cannot prove whether AI is like mobile by arguing how much it is like mobile. The examples show empirically that a range of outcomes is possible, which is a weaker and more honest claim than it appears.
Links
Typed edges. Anything below the line was authored on the other note and derived here.
example-of →We compress the past into stories that feel explanatory and predict nothing — coherence is not evidence.The fallacy caught in the act and then resisted. Evans notes every AI conversation ends in a hunt for metaphors, and does the rare thing of denying his own analogies probative force rather than riding them.