Will ChatGPT make Quora obsolete?
Last Updated: 28.06.2025 02:36
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.
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.
Alright.
Practice Report: Takeaways From Start of Second Week of OTAs - Baltimore Ravens
Now it was up to her to perform well in the debate.
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.
Bruce Wayne (Batman) has a human moderator: Alfred.
That’s by using AI to win the debate defending AI.
Well, well, well.
Or am I?
If you could instantly cancel one social norm, what would it be?
Meta-X = X about X
Post Credits:
Meta-Discussion = Discussion about Discussion
Hi booktokers! What are we currently reading? 😊📖
ChatGPT will not make Quora (or any other platform) obsolete.
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.
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.
How does gut health affect mental well-being?
The other half? — It’s to counter the chess move put forward by the opponents.
Now, concluding my answer to your question:
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.
This analogy summarizes my point best:
What if all of this is being written by an AI?
So, I asked her to roughly formulate what the potential moves of her opponents might be.
Examples:
Alfred supports Batman on a personal and ethical level, whereas Jarvis is more of a technical and operational assistant for Iron Man.
Well… No.
Box Office: ‘How to Train Your Dragon’ to Fly to $75 Million in Opening Weekend - Variety
So the crazy little idea was to make the debate Meta.
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.
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.
S.A.-area rabies cases spark concern for officials. Here's why - MySA
That’s it. There isn’t much of a significant difference. Both superheroes work at the same creative level.
That’ll be done by bringing forth the historical term Amanuenses.
To achieve feats that are greater than us, we need a greater level of assistance.
Magic Johnson Bluntly Blames Two Players for Knicks' Season-Ending Loss - Sports Illustrated
I’m coming for you, humans.
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.
A couple of months ago, I received these texts from one of my followers on Instagram:
Why do older people have a hard time using technology?
Meta-Learning = Learning about Learning
Another great historical reference would be that of Viziers.
But how does this meta-fication prove our point?
Or is it?
I sent this PDF to my follower and asked her to use the same conclusion points to conclude her debate:
Viziers:
Tony Stark (Iron Man) has an AI moderator: Jarvis.
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?
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.
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?
This is what she replied with:
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.
Now, you’re about to experience a little heist we pulled.
Hahaha.
Let’s make things even more meta.
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.
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.
Before we proceed, you should be aware of the prefix Meta.
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.
So I replied to her texts with this:
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.
Well… now we’ve put forth our chess move. That’s half of what it takes to win a debate.
Just like Alexander the Great being tutored by Aristotle.
A sort of Meta-AI thing.
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.
I can’t explain the joy that ran through my nerves seeing we were able to pull off such a heist.
Or was it?
Calm down. It’s Sunny this side.
Is this AI as Sunny? Or Sunny as AI? Or just AI?
The next day, I received her text:
Meta-Joke = A Joke about Jokes
Sunny Dhondkar
Nah, I’m just kidding.
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.
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.